Said Henry Kissinger, quoted in The Financial Times, which picks out a different quote for the title, "Henry Kissinger: ‘We are in a very, very grave period.'"
The FT editor talking to Kissinger is Edward Luce, and he sets the scene:
By now we are on to the coffee. Mine is a double espresso. Kissinger has mint tea. ...He paraphrases his own questions, then gives a verbatim quote from Kissinger:
You are worried about the future. However, you believe there is a non-trivial chance that Trump could accidentally scare us into reinventing the rules-based order that we used to take for granted. Is that a fair summary?Is it a very, very grave period because of Trump or is Trump the hope of getting out of the grave circumstance?
“I think we are in a very, very grave period for the world,” Kissinger replies. “I have conducted innumerable summit meetings, so they didn’t learn this one [Helsinki] from me.”
It is clear he will not elaborate further.
I ask him which period he would liken to today. Kissinger talks about his experience as a freshly minted citizen in US uniform serving in the second world war....I just have to say that if I were editing this article, I'd never allow the phrase "freshly minted citizen" to appear so close to "mint tea." "Mint" is a word at the unusualness level where you can't reuse it to refer to something else. The mint tea was real, so that's the "mint" that should stay. The "mint" in "freshly minted citizen" is a metaphor, comparing a human being to a coin and evoking an image of stamping that person into a new form. I wouldn't write that even if Kissinger had sipped camomile tea.
Posts
125 comments:
Clearly, that’s not what the man mint.
Heh.
JOB
“I think we are in a very, very grave period for the world,” Kissinger replies.
Trump's voters took that seriously, if not literally.
I wish Chris Hitchens were alive to discuss Kissinger and Trump. I believe he was unequivocal that Kissinger was evil. He also hated the old-fashioned revealed religions, Christianity and Islam in particular. If Kissinger stood for always doing what is good for the U.S., you have little to no obligation to anyone else, then we may be back there again.
I again write this: Trump is an instrument of political hygiene.
“Men make their own History, but they do not make it as they please; they do not make it under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.”
Kissinger talks about his experience as a freshly-brewed citizen . . .
The unicorn ate it gravely.
I'm convinced we're living through a pretty significant transformational period in history. Various cultural forces are competing to determine the future. Trump is unintentionally a key figure in this, but there are other big factors such as the rise of social media and other technologies. Upheavals like this happen periodically, but this one is the most significant we've had perhaps in a long time, since at least the 1960s. This particular could end up being even more significant than the events of the 1960s, it's far too early to tell though.
I just read that a while ago. The guy who interviewed him was an anti-Trumper, naturally. Kissinger had to be on guard given the bias of Edward Luce, apparently.
I think we are in a very, very grave period for the world
Would that be this world?
Trump is trying to end the cold war according to Steve Bannon in a CNBC interview.
"I'd never allow the phrase "freshly minted citizen" to appear so close to "mint tea.""
If we can still worry about mint, the period must not be that grave.
On the there hand, if we still worry about mint, it may mean that a revolution really is near.
Kissinger is right. We are turning a big corner. I believe Trump sees around it and the NeverTrumpers see only what’s behind. I could be wrong to place my faith in Trump but I know I’m right that the NeverTrump crowd sees nothing of the future.
Re: Nonapod:
I'm convinced we're living through a pretty significant transformational period in history. Various cultural forces are competing to determine the future. Trump is unintentionally a key figure in this, but there are other big factors such as the rise of social media and other technologies. Upheavals like this happen periodically, but this one is the most significant we've had perhaps in a long time, since at least the 1960s. This particular could end up being even more significant than the events of the 1960s, it's far too early to tell though.
It's similar to the 1960's (or 1970's) in that we're living through a crisis of authority, in which the educated classes -- the "best and the brightest," as it were -- have been discredited, and the old institutional relationships are, of a necessity, breaking down. The crisis is still dawning on them (us), as -- with increasing desperation -- graduates of the elite schools and representatives of the elite institutions in business and media and government continue to refer back to their credentials and pedigree as a reason why people ought to trust them. And the revolt against the elites hasn't been nearly as violent as it was back in the 60's -- we haven't yet seen the kind of vicious nihilism we saw with the Weathermen or the Symbionese Liberation Army, although the Antifa blackshirts are getting there. But I think this is just the beginning.
The gradual decline of Russia, while attempting to retain/regain their previous level of influence by creating mischief; destabilization in the Mideast (some good, such as the Israel-Saudi rapprochement, and the unrest in Iran, some bad, such as Syria, Turkey); China on the rise; Europe falling apart - but with conservative (relatively speaking) factions trying to reverse that; destabilization in Mexico/Central/South America, which is impacting us via refugees (yet to-be-seen how things will work with the new Mexican leadership); US economy on the upswing, finally; dangerous cracks appearing in the structure of the Democratic Party; Republican establishment at odds with the Republican voters; first serious pushback against the U.S. government bureaucracy; "Deep State" bias, and it's impact on the US, fully exposed for the first time; decline of poverty across the world.
Very very significant period. Kissinger was obviously being guardedly optimistic about the Trump presidency, but Luce (and the headline writer) did all they could to disabuse everyone of that thought.
I thought Kissinger was dead. I prefer him to the other foreign policy experts. He is a realist. Baker was mostly as well. The rest are corrupt idealists. Arrogant fools
Here is the CNBC interview of Steve Bannon. It looks like it's going be Trump, not Obama who is the transformative president.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/19/watch-cnbcs-full-interview-with-steve-bannon-at-delivering-alpha.html
Yes, we are on the cusp of pivotal change. I think what most people don't get is that from here on out we are always going to be on that cusp. The logramithic curve of the rate of technological advancement makes it impossible for stable social changes to keep up. Humans are just too slow. The singularity is here. GNR. AI. Embrace the horror.
Trump's problem is that despite the bombast and show biz on his part is that as a president he is rather modest in foreign policy. He refuses to play the part of Leader Of The Free World Alliance Inc managing the world. Rather he prefers to just be President Of The United States.
Well, well, well. The FT editor spent the entire interview trying to put his words and Trump hate in Kissinger's mouth. Boring. I mean, when has a FT editor had an interesting thought? And he cannot write either:
Though he is 95, and moves very slowly, the grand consigliere of American diplomacy is keen to talk. He hops on and off planes to see the likes of Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping with as much zeal as when he played the global chess game as Richard Nixon’s diplomatic maestro.
I'm sure he hops very slowly, not like a rabbit.
Trump is obviously a "great man", in historical terms.
One whose exceptional abilities are strategically placed to affect large structures critical weaknesses. Not a lot of peoples personal abilities, or positions, are ever of a sort that can make such a difference, to turn the world.
This is not a judgement as to whether he is a good thing, or otherwise. There will obviously be strong opinions on Trump among historians. When the present academic generation dies, or preferably when their culture is swept away, an objective view will be possible.
Kissinger offers up the grand sweep of World Historical Forces, with a hint of mint.
Buwaya, good point. The historians were so busy propping up Obama they are useless. Swept away is an apt fate. In fairness to Obama (and W), they were transformative. They gave us Trump. They lit the fuse. It’s why the Left and the Never Trump right are so hysterical. It’s overwhelming guilt.
Nothing to see, move along The Saudis are Israel's allies. The Norks are our allies The EU is collapsing. The international child trafficking rings are being arrested. And the apparatchiks in the CIA's Industrial Complex are resigning or dying in "accidents" And Russia is a Christian country.
Nothing happening at all.And old man Trump he just keeps rolling along.
I've read a couple of Kissinger's books. Don't let the accent fool you. His writings are not Teutonic and densely hedged with subordinate clauses leading nowhere. His writing style is lucid and direct. His book Diplomacy makes the maneuvers and stratagems of the grandmaster chess players like Bismarck comprehensible......Sometime back I read A World Restored. It was about the Congress of Vienna and the restoration of the balance of power at the end of the Napoleonic wars. This Congress was criticized by thinking people as being a triumph for the reactionary, and Kissinger's praise for its architects, Castlereagh and Metternich, was denounced as cynical and borderline evil. Still, the Congress of Vienna gave Europe one hundred years of peace, and its success should be compared to the fine mess that the idealistic Wilson helped fabricate at Versailles.
How about, Rolling With Trump. RWT . New slogan borrowed from another genius for winning by attacking where no one else sees the enemy's vulnerability. The only thing that cour stop Trump's Army is taking away his gasoline which is why the FED is blowing up interest rates for no reason except stopping Trump's victory.
"though he is 95, and moves very slowly, the grand consigliere of American diplomacy is keen to talk. He hops on and off planes to see the likes of Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping with as much zeal as when he played the global chess game as Richard Nixon’s diplomatic maestro."
He had a quadruple heart bypass in his late fifties and ignored his personal Dr's advice to lose some weight but he's still around, still involved. Good genes, his brother is still living too and is in his early nineties.
He means he's like Franz Joseph?
That's what I loved about those Kissinger-era new citizens. The minty flavor. No one enjoys a jalapeño julep, or a tequila-based Long Island iced tea.
I like how Rush Limbaugh does an impression of Kissinger's pronunciation when he uses the term "foreign policy".
The verisimilitude may coming with election. The hysteria has been putting a lot of pressure on weak sisters, like Scott and Rubio. Now Politico has a piece on the Establisment trying to get White House people to resign.
It will get really ugly this fall.
The autocorrect got me on that comment.
That was crisis with the election.
Just wait until the Fed purposely causes a recession.
It is coming. It will happen.
People don’t know what nasty is yet.
We are on track for a global civil war.
Global war all because the Clinton Crime Machine, and the entire money-grubbing cabal of insiders didn't win.
Hey, I've got a great idea: Since Montenegro means nothing to us, let's just hand it over to the Russians now and they can have their deepwater Mediterranean port -- there's nothing to worry about since Trump and Putin have such a great relationship.
"to force it to give up its old pretences."
Let's see.
1. That the elite and the deep state have the country's best interests at heart.
2. That the best and the brightest are the best and the brightest.
3. That deplorables give a damn about being deplorable.
4. That China will play fair if given a chance.
5. That the mullahs will play fair if given a chance.
6. That Muslims will be nice if given a chance.
7. That the U.S. must and will protect the "rule-based order."
8. That world order is rule-based.
9. That the U.S. will continue to be a benign hegemon, letting others ride free.
10. That the U.S. will defend Europe if it is attacked.
The Class of ‘68’s ideological raison d etre pretty much cratered with the collapse of European Communism, so they decided to plunder what they could, for as long as they could. Which explains why they’re so irredeemably shitty at governing. They never had any intention of being good at it. Trump is a threat to their looting spree. Of course they’re going apeshit.
Did I use forms of “shit” too close together?
I am not the only one amazed at Kissinger's still being around- and as lucid as ever- at age 95. We should rename him Ol' Man River. When Henry Kissinger became a household name, the mother of a former girlfriend located Henry Kissinger in her high school yearbook.
Amb Wilson drank too much mint tea with his yellow cake.
Grave period--is there any other kind of period? -- Col Jessup
I don't see how they go back to before. The lights have been turned on in the kitchen at 3:00 AM, now that people have seen it, things will have to change.
Hey, I've got a great idea: Since Montenegro means nothing to us, let's just hand it over to the Russians now and they can have their deepwater Mediterranean port
Didn't Obama and Hillary just hand him Syria? Why yes they did.
I found the use of "newly minted" a bit cute by half.
Cracker Emcee
Kissinger should have been executed in 1969. He has no relevance in the 21st Century.
For what? Working to extricate us from the mess that Kennedy got us into, against Eisenhower's sage advice. And the mess that Johnson made worse? We should have executed Kissinger before he extricated us from Viet Nam? That's silly.
In the movie I'm watching the only grave thing happening is the present day equivalent of the type of people Kissinger was hanging out with in the seventies at Studio 54 can't keep their collective shit together.
It could also be grave because Kissinger still attracts the quantity of pussy he attracted in the seventies but is unable to do much with it.
Agree with buwaya: Trump is, to borrow a phrase from the Marxists, a world-historical figure. So is Kissinger, albeit to a lesser degree. Both are giants in the context of their impact on our times.
Reminds me of one of my favorite Bible passages:
"There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown."
I'm not saying they are Nephilim. But mighty men, yes.
Did I use forms of “shit” too close together?
No, you're good.
“Why should my son go to Montenegro to defend it from attack?” Carlson asked in the interview, which was recorded Monday after Trump’s summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki.
“I understand what you’re saying; I’ve asked the same question,” Trump responded. “You know, Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people. . . . They are very aggressive people. They may get aggressive, and congratulations, you’re in World War III. But that’s the way it was set up. Don’t forget, I just got here a little more than a year and a half ago.”
You have to read that pretty dishonestly to see it as an abandonment of a NATO ally. But the Democrats are now all cheerleaders for WWIII so see any reluctance to get into a total shooting war with Russia as intolerable weakness.
OK Beclown yourselves. Laughing stock of the world, and major companies. Consider the number of deaths when PATCO and Thatcher’s miners refused to work, as they attempted to extort the government and found themselves redundant in all ways, because they were. Including our agencies and worse when you can buy the same services from around the world. Nations and even our corporations. No relief from SCOTUS. Who warned T he was being spied on? Did they have a copy of the FISA warrant on their desk? Want to end Gangs and drugs? Put the Navy in charge, use the UCMJ, a captain’s mast every day, a brig and a short plank. But?? what about xyz? Don’t like it, election is tomorrow, what are you campaigning on you elites? T Only needs an Obama like order to give him the elbow room to prove the truth of this buy a big 8 like audit, observation and grading of work product and publishing it for the world to see. But it's secret, you leak like a sieve, give me a break. Which offices and infrastructure won’t be missed? “We will call if we need you. The rest of you best of the best can return to more productive work. But don’t expect it. “Your fired.”
Reply
Share
This is hardly an "I will have more flexibility after the rubes have voted" moment. Poland and the Czech Republic were not all that happy when Obama canceled the missile defense base, which, BTW, could have defended Europe from incoming missiles from Iran. But Putin was chuffed.
Re: Roughcoat:
Isnt' that Hegel, not Marx?
Re: tim in vermont:
Didn't Obama and Hillary just hand him Syria? Why yes they did.
And didn't the Russians build a Mediterranean naval base in Syria? Why yes they did (although it actually dates from the Cold War, and while it has undergone some expansion in recent years, it's still not large enough to accommodate their largest ships).
"You have to read that pretty dishonestly to see it as an abandonment of a NATO ally."
As if that's the only clue.
"Trump is trying to end the cold war according to Steve Bannon in a CNBC interview."
The Cold War ended decades ago with the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The recent demonization of Putin/Russia is not the old Cold War,though it's purpose is the same as was the Cold War: to provide justification for our pouring trillions into our military and for placing our military bases in areas around the world--not to "protect" those areas--but to be better placed for enforcing our dominance.
This is not surprising. The Left has been intent on destroying our old systems.
New systems will arise.
They foolishly assume (like apocalypse preppers) that they will be in charge.
I don't think that very likely but what I've learned from the sea change model of history is that the losing side gets purged.
Trump as an egotistical, grandstanding, adulterous charismatic leader...
Like Caesar?
Like Henry the Eighth?
Like Peter the Great?
Like Domitian?
Like Lenin?
The Left can keep cutting those trees of law. One way or another, a Great Wind is coming.
Is Edward Luce related to Henry Luce of the Time-Life fallen empire?
Didn't Obama and Hillary just hand him Syria? Why yes they did.
You're defending Trump by likening him to stupid, callow people?
Don't eat the urinal mints.
@tim in vermont:
Didn't Obama and Hillary just hand him Syria? Why yes they did.
What does "hand him Syria" even mean? Iran and Syria have been close for decades, and Russia's main interest in Syria was its naval facility in Tartus, which it has since 1971. The facility is important because it allows Russian ships operating in the Mediterranean to receive maintenance and repair services without having to travel through the Turkish straits all the way to the Black Sea.
And speaking of Syria, why are US troops in that country?
written by the lefties at wiki:
Kissinger underwent basic training at Camp Croft in Spartanburg, South Carolina. On June 19, 1943, while stationed in South Carolina, at the age of 20 years, he became a naturalized U.S. citizen. The army sent him to study engineering at Lafayette College, Pennsylvania, but the program was canceled, and Kissinger was reassigned to the 84th Infantry Division. There, he made the acquaintance of Fritz Kraemer, a fellow Jewish immigrant from Germany who noted Kissinger's fluency in German and his intellect, and arranged for him to be assigned to the military intelligence section of the division. Kissinger saw combat with the division, and volunteered for hazardous intelligence duties during the Battle of the Bulge.
During the American advance into Germany, Kissinger, only a private, was put in charge of the administration of the city of Krefeld, owing to a lack of German speakers on the division's intelligence staff. Within eight days he had established a civilian administration. Kissinger was then reassigned to the Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC), where he became a CIC Special Agent holding the enlisted rank of sergeant. He was given charge of a team in Hanover assigned to tracking down Gestapo officers and other saboteurs, for which he was awarded the Bronze Star. In June 1945, Kissinger was made commandant of the Bensheim metro CIC detachment, Bergstrasse district of Hesse, with responsibility for de-Nazification of the district. Although he possessed absolute authority and powers of arrest, Kissinger took care to avoid abuses against the local population by his command.
Balfegor: "Re: Roughcoat: Isnt' that Hegel, not Marx?"
Yes, you are correct. Good catch. But the Marxists appropriated it, as they did with everything by Hegel. The Marxist student leaders I knew in college used the term promiscuously, like a bludgeon, in their arguments.
Its difficult for contemporaries of great men (or world-historical figures) to realize what they are seeing, their time, is something that will be retrospectively defined that way.
This is a significant time, these years, more so than any since 1991.
And every person associated with Trump is already immortal.
In so far as they only challenged the Syrians with a tiny proxy contingent although much of the 500 million went elsewhere,
Good intentions and charisma must surely be sufficient to reset relations with Russia -- after all, orange is the new black.
If Montenegro (Nero Wolfe's native country) gets invaded, there is something much bigger than Montenegro going on.
Anyway, Montenegro is not the Article 5 problem they are trying to dodge; Turkey is, and Turkey is not a small nation.
I have never for the life of me understood why anyone pays attention to anything Henry Kissenger says. As Charles Clover wrote in Dreams of the Eurasian Heartland: "Few modern ideologies are as whimsically all-encompassing, as romantically obscure, as intellectually sloppy, and as likely to start a third world war as the theory of 'geopolitics.'"
Earnest Prole said...
Didn't Obama and Hillary just hand him Syria? Why yes they did.
You're defending Trump by likening him to stupid, callow people?
Trump is right about NATO.
If NATO countries, including Montenegro, refuse to pay their fair share and live up to the terms of the treaty they signed it is not up to the US to defend them.
NATO was meant to be a MUTUAL defense pact.
Now it is the US protecting a bunch of fatuous welfare states.
We should give Poland and Hungary and Estonia nukes and be done with it.
Germany in particular is not our ally. It is reasonable to question if they ever have been our ally.
We should admit we are occupying Germany because we don't trust them and it is cheaper to keep a base there than to deal with the third world war they cause.
Considering the mess the so-called 'Smart Set' has gotten us into during the last 50 years or so, Trump is a breath of fresh air.
He ain't perfect, but I think he's just what this country needed at this time in history.
If I remember correctly, Kissinger was one of the many who while fighting the cold war, thought of it just as a delaying action. Eventually, the Red Tide would take over the world. It was the inevitable March of History.
A lot of our elite believe that. And some, Bernie Sanders, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, still do.
Geopolitics is not a bit obscure.
Its perfectly visible, if you understand what you are looking at. For instance look into any busy harbor.
Why are those, such huge, fat, unmaneuverable, defenseless, ships, loaded with immensely valuable cargoes, there at all? Why aren't they intercepted and looted at will by every despot they pass en route, to which their cargoes are not intended? Why aren't they "taxed", at least, on the high seas? This was always the pattern through human history. Anyone with a trade route passing nearby tried to grab it, or at least make money off it, or did what he could to keep his enemies from making use of it.
Nor are there periodic wars where great powers make depradations on each others trade or that of neutrals.
Its not as if all these people are better, somehow, than their ancestors. Where they can get away with it, in their own countries or in the territories of those that they make war on, they do what they can.
The evidence of geopolitics, or of a hegemony of power is evident in the negative. Rare is the bad actor willing to risk a terrible sanction for interfering with this system. It has taken world wars to constrain world trade.
There's a great article on Trump and Helsinki here:
https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/trump-in-helsinki-ii-a-long-view/
Quote: "Five days after the Helsinki summit I am inclined to believe that President Donald Trump either knows exactly what he is doing—that there is uncanny finesse and foresight behind his bluster—or else that he is guided by an almost unfailing intuition, with similar results."
@buwaya:
Nothing you just wrote has anything to do with "geopolitics," which is about the influence of geography on international relations.
Germany has always been the true enemy. Russia did more for the security of the United States by the massive losses in World War 2 than anything Germany has ever done for us. Of course Russia didn't do it for us. They did it for their own interests. Which coincided with ours. In destroying Germany. Now once again Russia and the United States Interests coincide.
What does Russia want? A port on the Med? To take over Turkey to get it? That works for me. Turkey has ceased being our ally a long time ago. They are a Muslim time bomb. They refused access to our forces during the Iraq war. They are not a reliable ally in any way. We need to throw them out of NATO and throw them to the wolves as an object lesson.
A new alliance with countries that will actually fight must be made. Eliminate Germany, Spain, Italy and all the rest. Stick with Poland, Hungry, Romania and the Baltic States.
OK, but what period in the past, at least since the Russians developed nukes hasn't been a grave time.
I also notice that every election is the most important one of our lifetime.
I feel the seriousness evoked in both of these claims, but reason tells me that it probably isn't true no matter how it seems to be. Then again, with Zombie Hitler in the White House recreating the Holocaust, 9/11, and Pearl Harbor on a daily basis the end is certainly nigh. Just possibility of Woopie and Joy Behar acquiring assault weapons keeps me awake at night.
"Nothing you just wrote has anything to do with "geopolitics," which is about the influence of geography on international relations."
It has everything to do with it. Who controls the oceans? Who holds the positions from which to exert power, overwhelming any local challenger?
I assume you have read Mahan.
"Quote: "Five days after the Helsinki summit I am inclined to believe that President Donald Trump either knows exactly what he is doing—that there is uncanny finesse and foresight behind his bluster—or else that he is guided by an almost unfailing intuition, with similar results."
My dumb theory is that he is setting up the media/state for a precipitous plunge after they can't help but go off the deep end on these Russia relations. Other than play meet cute in public, what has he done for Putin? Cancel pipelines? Ban fracking? Not expel diplomats?
"OK, but what period in the past, at least since the Russians developed nukes hasn't been a grave time."
The Cold War reached a series of very stable conditions, with just a couple of periods of near crisis. Behind the military walls the institutions of the US and the world operated almost unconcerned.
1992-2001 - A fat season of stability for most of the world. What was degenerating was doing so, as usual, gradually.
Since then there have been two crises that have passed and changed a great deal, one was 9/11 and its fallout, and the other was the financial collapse of 2008-2009. But all US and global institutions survived these, at least their facades did.
@Farmer: You dismissed Kissinger with this quote: "Few modern ideologies are as whimsically all-encompassing, as romantically obscure, as intellectually sloppy, and as likely to start a third world war as the theory of 'geopolitics.'"
Then you dismissed buwaya with this quote: "Nothing you just wrote has anything to do with "geopolitics," which is about the influence of geography on international relations."
But, leaving aside that Kissinger never developed an "ideology" in the traditional sense, his "theory of geopolitics" does not mainly refer to the "influence of geography on international relations." I
I am surprised you are so hostile: it would seem that Kissinger's brand of realism is quite compatible with the national-interest realism you espouse.
""I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era and to force it to give up its old pretences.""
It's an odd but interesting perspective for HK to talk about Trump as if we were all looking back on a period that has passed, trying to figure out its larger significance and fit it into some grand historical narrative. Trump seems too unpredictable for that treatment; we really have to wait for the show to end. You never know with him what tomorrow will bring, as he makes America great again.
"Other than play meet cute in public, what has he done for Putin?"
Given him a reason to think that there is a way out of his troubles.
Putin is isolated, and is playing a bad hand.
"we really have to wait for the show to end."
Absolutely. It is however a great show.
""I think Trump may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era and to force it to give up its old pretences.""
Obama thought he was that guy, or at least that's what he told us.
Virtually every veteran of the Second World War is now dead, so who’s to say whether benign neglect of Europe is a good or bad thing?
@Sebastian:
I am surprised you are so hostile: it would seem that Kissinger's brand of realism is quite compatible with the national-interest realism you espouse.
I am much more of a George Kennan realist than a Kissinger realist.
And my apologies to buwaya. In haste, I did in fact misread his first paragraph.
>>Obama thought he was that guy, or at least that's what he told us.
Wait.. are you saying the oceans *didn't* stop rising when he was nominated?
I assumed he was the only reason my house in Florida isn't under water right now...
If Montenegro (Nero Wolfe's native country) gets invaded, there is something much bigger than Montenegro going on.
It won't go down as an invasion; it will go down as a coup.
Just possibility of Woopie and Joy Behar acquiring assault weapons keeps me awake at night.
7/20/18, 1:31 PM
Don't fret about that; they would be dangerous only to their own feet.
"a George Kennan realist "
Kennan's first problem was that he dismissed Asia, especially East Asia.
The second error was a general case, the cause of the first error, in that he did not see the world as dynamic, but static.
I’m enjoying reading the exchanges on Kissinger and Kennan. Two guys who lived to be very old with their faculties intact.
@buwaya:
Kennan's first problem was that he dismissed Asia, especially East Asia.
The second error was a general case, the cause of the first error, in that he did not see the world as dynamic, but static.
I think "dismissed Asia" is a bit of a stretch as is evidenced by the collection of Kennan's letters in American Diplomacy, particularly Chapter 3, "American and the Orient."
I am still concerned about the hysteria. If the election goes badly, the left will be able to hold hostage everyone who wants to solve problems.
If you haven' t seen it, I recommend Bannon' s interview on Euronews.
Seeing the entirety of the US establishment getting behind an adversarial Russophobic orientation is depressing. It is also pretty laughable hearing the same elites complaining about Russian "interference" as if it was anything more than run-of-the-mill nation-state skulduggery. The US interferes in other countries' politics all the time and to a much greater extent than Russia. US and Russian interests are far more convergent than they are divergent, and there is no reason why the US and Russia cannot maintain a productive, cooperative relationship.
America's attempt to maintain a hegemonic position since the fall of the Soviet Union has led us down one destructive, counterproductive path after another. America would do much better to accommodate regional powers rather than trying to contain them, which inevitably leads to such powers' push back.
A coup would be an "internal affair" not subject to Article 5, so Tucker's son would not have to go to war and die for that.
Re: J. Farmer:
America's attempt to maintain a hegemonic position since the fall of the Soviet Union has led us down one destructive, counterproductive path after another. America would do much better to accommodate regional powers rather than trying to contain them, which inevitably leads to such powers' push back.
I don't generally agree with you on the small stuff, but I think you're right here. And it points to what I worry is the big miscalculation in Trump's diplomatic efforts -- I think he overestimates the leverage the US has today. He seems to think the US can renegotiate its international relations, particularly on trade, more advantageously today than it could in the immediate aftermath of World War II, when we were the only industrial economy left standing (and were something like 50% of world GDP), or after the fall of the Soviet Union, when we were the "hyper-power" as some people (Vedrine?) described us. We're still important, economically -- at least 20% of world GDP -- but every element of our global dominance has declined markedly, with the exception of our military power. I think there's a lot of downside risk in renegotiating deals we entered into when we were strong at a time when we are a lot weaker.
America's attempt to maintain a hegemonic position since the fall of the Soviet Union has led us down one destructive, counterproductive path after another. America would do much better to accommodate regional powers rather than trying to contain them, which inevitably leads to such powers' push back.
Mr. Obama could not have stated it more eloquently.
Re: Earnest Prole:
Mr. Obama could not have stated it more eloquently.
But Obama's administration actually engaged in some of the most aggressive pushback against Russian influence, when we supported a coup d'etat in the Ukraine to move it into the Western/EU orbit, back in 2014. I'm not saying that Russia was right to retaliate by taking the Crimea and creating a separatist buffer zone in Eastern Ukraine, but it was predictable that they would find that threatening, like when the Baltic states became NATO members in 2004. Unlike in 2004, though, Russia had means and opportunity to push back, and Putin judged (correctly) that Obama wouldn't resist forcefully if Russia slapped back.
"He seems to think the US can renegotiate its international relations, particularly on trade, more advantageously today than it could in the immediate aftermath of World War II, when we were the only industrial economy left standing (and were something like 50% of world GDP), or after the fall of the Soviet Union, when we were the "hyper-power" as some people (Vedrine?) described us."
You look at it from the wrong angle. The US, from 1945-2000+, did not exploit its political power to improve its terms of trade, but did the opposite - it used the potential of access to its market as an incentive to go along with its global political-military strategy. The US was trading away its economic dominance for the sake of global hegemony. The US started early in sacrificing domestic industries to improve the position of its major allies, one after another. You can track this in the histories of multiple US industries.
One can say that this was a huge factor in winning the Cold War. If your nation is miserable, play ball with the US and maybe you can get rich selling them stuff. This was more important in European recovery than the Marshall Plan. It restored European prosperity, it made the East Asian "Tigers", it turned China capitalist and made great masses of poor people reasonably prosperous. It made the modern global economy. It may be the the greatest humanitarian gift ever.
It may no longer be necessary.
Various US administrations tried to reverse this, partly, with mixed success, since Reagan started pressuring Japan and Germany. Trump is being much more serious than his predecessors.
One problem is that after all this time a lot of US players have developed interests in the established terms of trade, and don't like changes any more than the foreigners.
@Farmer: "Seeing the entirety of the US establishment getting behind an adversarial Russophobic orientation is depressing." I agree with this, but don't take it all that seriously, since it is purely instrumental and temporary on the part of the Democrats.
"It is also pretty laughable hearing the same elites complaining about Russian "interference" as if it was anything more than run-of-the-mill nation-state skulduggery." True, and and in the case of Russia, we don't even know what the skulduggery amounted to.
"US and Russian interests are far more convergent than they are divergent, and there is no reason why the US and Russia cannot maintain a productive, cooperative relationship." Correct, but it requires Russia to make concessions--yes, you can have Crimea, but don't threaten Poland and the Baltic states. For the time being, when their problems spill over, they end up on our plate.
"America's attempt to maintain a hegemonic position since the fall of the Soviet Union has led us down one destructive, counterproductive path after another." But we have in fact been half-hearted about using our hegemony, even wth regard to Russia in the 90s. Our hegemony has also given us tremendous benefits, no war, high standard of living.
"America would do much better to accommodate regional powers." But the question is whether those "regional powers" will act responsibly, in a way that does not make problems spill over to our "region." Given Russia and China's conduct, and African and Latin American incompetence, a sorta-kinda hegemony is a good second best.
"no war" Iraq excepted, of course.
Two more things about Kennan vs. Kissinger: I don't think the differences are all that great, on the spectrum of theories of international relations, and even if we decide to accommodate "regional powers," the balance of power will remain a key issue--Kissinger's traditional and main point.
And speaking of Syria, why are US troops in that country?
You will have to ask Hillary and John Kerry, who spoke of the US "long range interests" in Syria. I thought we had an election about overthrowing nasty foreign dictators like Saddam and Assad, an election that swept the Democrats to filibuster proof majorities, which Obama then promptly ignored.
It's a bit much right now to ask Trump to pull the rug out from whatever stability there is there now. And the Democrats have made negotiations with Putin all but impossible.
Re: buwaya:
One problem is that after all this time a lot of US players have developed interests in the established terms of trade, and don't like changes any more than the foreigners..
I think that's true to an extent. But my sense is also that -- consciously or unconsciously -- many of the policymakers in both the Republican and Democratic parties have been looking forward with trepidation to the day when China and perhaps India and other developing economies surpass the US, and have shaped their negotiating posture on that basis: that as a declining power, the safest approach for us is to set up a set of facially fair or neutral rules of international engagement, and then get sufficient buy-in from other countries that, even after we are eclipsed, we can remain part of a huge bloc of countries who are all committed to the existing system, and can serve as a counterweight to any attempt by China (or whoever) to rewrite the rules in their favour.
Honestly, that's pretty close to my view, so I may be reading in a particular pessimism that actual policy-makers don't feel. I don't actually think Trump can make America great again, you see. Unless the rest of the world gets bombed to smithereens again, our importance will continue to shrink, inexorably.
You dismissed Kissinger with this quote: "Few modern ideologies are as whimsically all-encompassing, as romantically obscure, as intellectually sloppy, and as likely to start a third world war as the theory of 'geopolitics.'"
Then you dismissed buwaya with this quote:...
This is why discussions with Farmer are mostly pointless. He makes no effort to understand any point of view of which he is not already unalterably convinced. That doesn't mean I don't read his posts, they are interesting, but dialog is pointless. He is far to literal and constrained. He seems "trained" the way to "train" a vine, to follow a precise course and not wander outside of the box, which I always thought was the point of these low stakes blog comment discussions.
The US interferes in other countries' politics all the time and to a much greater extent than Russia...
Right. It makes no sense at all. The only interpretation that makes any sense at all is that they are mad that Hillary lost.
Speaking of famous people from the past who are (or were) still alive, I missed this from two weeks ago:
"Shoko Asahara, founder of the doomsday cult Aum Shinrikyo and mastermind behind the deadly 1995 nerve gas attack in the Tokyo subway system — and a number of other horrific crimes in the 1980s and ’90s — was executed on Friday, Justice Minister Yoko Kamikawa confirmed.
She also confirmed that six other condemned Aum members — Tomomasa Nakagawa, 55, Kiyohide Hayakawa, 68, Yoshihiro Inoue, 48, Masami Tsuchiya, 53, Seiichi Endo, 58, and Tomomitsu Niimi, 54 — were also executed."
The wheels of Japanese justice grind slowly and then they hang you. I bet the nooses were neatly wound.
"the safest approach for us is to set up a set of facially fair or neutral rules of international engagement, and then get sufficient buy-in from other countries that, even after we are eclipsed, we can remain part of a huge bloc of countries who are all committed to the existing system"
That is a very naive idea. The powerful will do as they will. No herd of sheep will constrain the wolf.
The stars are dead. The animals will not look.
We are left alone with our day, and the time is short, and
History to the defeated
May say Alas but cannot help nor pardon.
Spain, 1937 - Auden
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attacked President Trump for not “defending a diplomat” who “has spent his career standing up for America”
LOL. You Democrats have a ridiculousness problem.
My mom is still alive. She told me the story on Mothers Day, well it was a couple of days before, the anniversary of the invasion of Holland by the Nazis, that the first time she ever heard her father swear was when the kids ran in to tell him that there were a bunch of planes in the sky. He said something that probably roughly translates as "Fucking Hitler!"
The second time she heard him swear is when she told him she was marrying my father.
Rabel:
I'm mildly surprised to learn that Japan has capital punishment.
But Obama's administration actually engaged in some of the most aggressive pushback against Russian influence
Yes, when his reset was rebuffed he seemed to take it personally. And now Trump has promised that if his Russia reset is rebuffed, he will come down on the Russians like a sack of bricks. As I said, orange is the new black.
Rough, I think I knew that, but a six-pack plus one for lagniappe is impressive.
“The army sent him to study engineering at Lafayette College, Pennsylvania, but the program was canceled, and Kissinger was reassigned to the 84th Infantry Division. There, he made the acquaintance of Fritz Kraemer, a fellow Jewish immigrant from Germany who noted Kissinger's fluency in German and his intellect, and arranged for him to be assigned to the military intelligence section of the division. Kissinger saw combat with the division, and volunteered for hazardous intelligence duties during the Battle of the Bulge.”
Interesting. My parents met at the University of Illinois when my father was in a similar program. As with Kissinger, the program was canceled before he had completed it. The difference is that my father was then assigned to the Signal Corp, and then fell sick before being posted. If he had graduated and been assigned with his original classmates, he would have ended up in the Battle of the Buldge. As it was, he ended in the CBI theater, and spent the end of the war in the midst of rural China, as the sgt in charge of a small detachment that had a teletype that got one message through it a day. This was the second time he got sick while in the Army. The first time, was when he was entering that engineering program, and would have gone to BYU instead of Illinois, if he hadn’t been sick. Joked with him that we all would have been Mormon if he’d started on time. Despite those bouts of sickness when in the Army, and Rhumatic fever when in middle school, he almost made 95, before passing away a couple years ago.
The US Army had the Army Specialized Training Program and the Navy had the V-12, where they took high IQ kids and sent them to US colleges for 2 years prior to commissioning. My Father in law went to Queens College in NY. The war was ending and they canceled the program and a lot of the students were made sergeants (without Degrees) and sent to Europe. This was mainly a way to keep Colleges alive when all the young men were out fighting. My Father in law got screwed by being called up as an infantry Lt. in Korea and had to suffer thru Bloody Hill with the 38th inf rgt.
I am not so much defending Trump, BTW, as wondering where the person better than him is. He is our horse now, and we can't shoot him out from under us, until we have another I guess.
Nothing you just wrote has anything to do with "geopolitics," which is about the influence of geography on international relations.
It’s kinda funny that the word “geopolitics” is defined in dictionaries that way, as if it were merely politics related geography. Of course, the word is actually never used purely in that sense, instead always including global/international dimension. I would have expected lexicographers to get a clue and define the word as having to do with earth (as in global, not dirt) politics. I wonder what the reticence is.
This is why discussions with Farmer are mostly pointless.
I agree and gave up some time ago.
On the V 12 program, they did that with medical school, too. My partner who died a couple of years ago was a young medical officer who went ashore with the Marines at Iwo Jima. He and his wife went back to the 50th anniversary in 1995.
I know another guy who was in that program but the war ended before he finished.
Hillary is already getting angry pushback from the survivors of Benghazi.
buwaya said...
...Its perfectly visible, if you understand what you are looking at. For instance look into any busy harbor.
Why are those, such huge, fat, unmaneuverable, defenseless, ships, loaded with immensely valuable cargoes, there at all? Why aren't they intercepted and looted at will by every despot they pass en route, to which their cargoes are not intended?
This is a link to a live piracy map: https://www.icc-ccs.org/piracy-reporting-centre/live-piracy-map There are others. Piracy is a modern day problem, in places where the US Navy, European Navies, and the Japanese Navy don't routinely patrol.
The United States Navy was reconstituted after it had been all but disbanded following the revolution in order to take on the Barbary States, which practiced piracy. Barabary pirates didn't take British ships- it was too dangerous. Our merchants lost that protection following independence. We had to establish that attacking a ship with the American flag was just as hazardous as attacking one with a British flag. Our fledgling Navy did an outstanding job at that.
In the days of iron men and wooden ships sending a merchantman outside of territorial waters without being armed was virtual maritime malpractice. Dutch East Indiamen were particularly well armed. The current practice of unarmed ships sailing the high seas is a very modern practice. And not a wise one IMHO. Piracy should carry the risk of sudden death. And pirates captured at sea should be hanged at sea.
Even pleasure boats, luxury motorized yachts and sailing vessels alike should be armed. But can't be in many ports. Liberal governments continue to refuse to believe that an armed populace discourages violent crime whether at sea or in NYC
@Balfegor - Don't be such a declinist! It is true that post-WWII conditions that favored the U.S. are unlikely to be repeated - and we should hope it so, as the contrary situation requires another global conflagration. But India and China aren't going to be running the world any time soon. They are both ancient cultures- if they are capable of global leadership, where is the evidence of the past 1,000 years alone? Are you expecting a 21st century hockey stick effect? I'm not.
Gospace @ 7:19
Hence a carrier task force in every ocean.
And since 75% of all shipping goes through the South China Sea, China wants to control that 75%. Hence the island building.
"Five days after the Helsinki summit I am inclined to believe that President Donald Trump either knows exactly what he is doing...."
Trump is an asshole version of Chance the Gardner.
"Trump is an asshole version of Chance the Gardner."
You've said some pretty dumb things Bob but this one is a stunner. I think the reason is you don't want to admit that Trump is probably smarter than you are. He has played just about everybody that has arrayed themselves against him. That's not what people with deveopmental disabilities do.
When did Robert Cook change nicks?... And why? Everything OK Bob?
@tim in vermont:
This is why discussions with Farmer are mostly pointless. He makes no effort to understand any point of view of which he is not already unalterably convinced.
Unsurprisingly, I completely disagree with this characterization. My standard action on this forum is to quote things people say and then give my response. I am more than willing to have (and have had on numerous occasions) fruitful dialogue with others here. Point out what facts I get wrong or why my logic is invalid or why my arguments do not work. I am more than willing to have those conversations. When I first started writing here several years ago, I was constantly called a "leftists" (as if that's an argument) for advocating a non-interventionist foreign policy. Now the standard ad hominem and only when critiquing the US relationship with Israel is that I am an "anti-Semite" (as if that's an argument). I don't recall any posts by you Tim denouncing those kinds of fruitless conversation enders. And oddly, whenever I critique our relationship with Egypt or Saudi Arabia, I am never accused of being motivated by an anti-Arab orientation.
He seems "trained" the way to "train" a vine, to follow a precise course and not wander outside of the box, which I always thought was the point of these low stakes blog comment discussions.
I am paleoconservative with ethno-nationalsit and white separatist sympathies. Those are not exactly mainstream opinions, so I utterly reject the notion that I do not "wander outside of the box." I am much more interested in being correct than in being popular. And of course this critique only seems to come up on the subject of foreign policy, where I differ from most of the people here (though seemingly less so than in the past). When I talk about race or immigration restrictionism, I never get that criticism. Why do you think that is?
Post a Comment