When Bernie Sanders ferociously challenged Hillary Clinton's willingness to take input from Henry Kissinger, I was truly astonished.

Bernie said, "I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend," Sanders said angrily when he raised the issue in the debate. "I will not take advice from Henry Kissinger." But why? I have long held the opinion that Kissinger was one of the most effective Secretaries of State and foreign policy experts America has ever produced. What was Sanders talking about???

A quick Google scan showed that some folks viewed Kissinger as a war criminal. They blamed him for, among other things, the murders committed by the Khmer Rouge because of the US secret bombing of Cambodia during a time of undeclared war in Vietnam when the policy was to find those who were attacking us, no matter where they were. In my view, this was like blaming Abe Lincoln for the post-war murders of the Ku Klux Clan because Lincoln decided to pursue the Civil War. It sure sounded like a silly opinion held by unserious people.

I needed to know more. I turned to this book because of my respect for Walter Isaacson, its author. He is a serious biographer with, in my view, great integrity and credibility. Isaacson pointed out both the wondrous and the awful of Kissinger.

Isaacson made clear that Kissinger was brilliant, but he often used that skill when he lied, disobeyed the President, and was generally undemocratic in the pursuit of many of his initiatives. Kissinger often acted in an infantile way and had an ego that got in the way. He circumvented the State Department and misled many of those he dealt with.

Kissinger's central theme, per Isaacson, that would recur throughout his career was the tension that often exists, at least in his view, between morality and realism. Survival, he noted, sometimes required a disregard for moral standards that was "inconceivable" to those who had led "sheltered" lives. Kissinger contrasted the cold realist, who survives, with "the men of high morals," who, in brutal situations, have no chance (think Ned Stark in Game of Thrones).

However, when we pick any Secretary of State and ask what they accomplished (including Hillary?), Kissinger's successes dwarf the achievements of virtually all others. Here is a partial Kissinger scorecard of achievements: he brokered the First Strategic Nuclear Arms Limitation Agreement (SALT), the opening of China for US relationships from dialog to trade, a Berlin accord, a Moscow summit, and eventually a peace treaty for Vietnam. He also brokered a peace treaty between Egypt and Israel. The triumph of October 1973 was that he was able to maintain good relations with the Soviets while simultaneously reducing their influence in the Middle East. Kissinger and others helped to create a new global balance during the 1970s, one that preserved American influence by playing China and Russia off each other. He helped to preserve American influence in the post-Vietnam era and eventually contributed to the end of the Cold War.

There is more. In a Gallup poll in 1972, he had ranked fourth on the list of “most admired” Americans, after Nixon, Billy Graham, and Harry Truman. In 1973, he ranked first (Nixon had fallen to third after Graham, and Truman had died). He achieved an unprecedented nine-to-one ratio between those who viewed him “favorably” versus those saying “unfavorably.” Congressman Jonathan Bingham proposed a constitutional amendment to allow foreign-born citizens, such as Kissinger, to run for president. He became the most popular political figure at Madame Tussaud’s wax museum in London, and the contestants in the Miss Universe pageant overwhelmingly voted him “the greatest person in the world today.”

The book is an in-depth documentary, and my summary is incomplete. My conclusion is that Kissinger was a flawed man who did great things. I think he shares that with most of the Giants of history.

Walter Isaacson is an outstanding writer renowned for his historical accuracy, engaging storytelling, and incisive analysis of his subjects. This is vividly demonstrated in his biography of Henry Kissinger. Published in 1992, Isaacson had the privilege of interviewing key figures like Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford, who interacted with Kissinger during his tenure as National Security Adviser and later as Secretary of State.

One particularly well-crafted chapter focuses on September 1970, examining the numerous crises Kissinger faced simultaneously, including Vietnam, the Soviet missile crisis in Cuba, and issues in Chile and Jordan. Isaacson skillfully portrays how Kissinger had to deftly manage these complex and interconnected issues, not in isolation but in a web of geopolitical intricacies. He extensively draws on Kissinger's memoirs and those of other major players, providing valuable insights into Kissinger's decision-making process.

Kissinger's duplicity is no secret, and Isaacson does not shy away from highlighting it. His thin skin and arrogance made for a challenging personality, leading to high staff turnover and burnout. He even resorted to wiretapping aides, a fact they discovered much later, and which Kissinger initially denied. However, Isaacson also notes that Kissinger surrounded himself with the best minds, eager to hear their ideas and be challenged, as he recognized the value it brought to his work.

Isaacson also delves into Kissinger's relationships with Nixon, Ford, and other political luminaries. His relationship with Nixon was strange, with both being paranoid and suspicious of each other and everyone else. Isaacson astutely points out that their mutual paranoia only intensified. While Nixon's deviousness likely influenced Kissinger to some extent, Isaacson shows that Kissinger's behavior persisted even with Ford, a relatively straightforward president.

The book concludes with a concise yet analytical chapter on Kissinger's legacy, juxtaposing his strengths and weaknesses in both professional and personal contexts. Isaacson acknowledges Kissinger's intellectual prowess and his unique ability to understand complex geopolitical relationships. However, he also highlights the moral cost of Kissinger's policies, which often disregarded human rights and failed to consider the importance Americans placed on morality. This type of comprehensive analysis is often lacking in biographies of political figures, especially those of presidents.

Although the book was re-released in 2005 with a new forward by Isaacson, it would be beneficial to see him expand and update the work. Since its initial publication, Kissinger has completed the third volume of his memoirs, covering the Ford years. Isaacson could surely draw on this new material to enhance the chapters related to that period. Additionally, he could update the sections on Kissinger's post-office life, as he has remained actively involved in international affairs for the past forty years. With the passage of time, Isaacson may also be able to provide more context on the long-term impact of Kissinger's policies. Overall, this is an excellent and balanced biography of one of America's most controversial political figures, deserving of an A grade.

Henry Kissinger is a controversial figure. In 1938, when he was at George Washington High School, he was asked to write an essay about what it meant to be an American. He wrote that he thought it was a country where one could walk across the street with one's head erect. However, later in his career, he faced many accusations. Some, like Christopher Hitchens, called him a war criminal, stating that it was not just rhetoric but a job description. Jewish detractors also portrayed him as a cold-hearted manipulator who was willing to sacrifice Israel's security for personal goals and aggrandizement. Norman Finkelstein even said that he lost respect for Zsa Zsa Gabor when she dated Kissinger, calling him a monster. With such diverse opinions and accusations, it is truly up to each individual to decide who Henry Kissinger really was.

\\n  \\n


When I came here in 1938, I was asked to write an essay at George Washington High School about what it meant to be an American. I wrote that . . . I thought that this was a country where one could walk across the street with one’s head erect.—from a Kissinger farewell speech as secretary
of state, January 1977

\\"The statement: Henry Kissinger is a war criminal, is a statement I've been making for many years. It's not a piece of rhetoric, not a metaphor, it's a job description.\\" - Christopher Hitchens

\\"Kissinger’s Jewish detractors, nevertheless, have portrayed America’s first Jewish secretary of state as a cold-hearted manipulator, if not a “self-hating Jew” (Sheehan 1976: 173), who did not hesitate to sacrifice Israel’s security for goals and personal aggrandizement.\\"
In: \\"A Jew for all seasons: Henry Kissinger, Jewish expectations and the Yom Kippur War\\"
by Gil Ribak

\\"Apart from the obvious that he was a monster, my only strong memory of Henry Kissinger is that I lost all respect for Zsa Zsa Gabor when she dated him.\\"
Norman Finkelstein on X

\\n  \\n
\\n  \\n
(Today's Die Zeit edition)

Update

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united...

Henry Kissinger, a controversial figure in history, has passed away. Kissinger's actions and policies have been the subject of intense debate and criticism.

He was involved in many significant events during his career, including the Vietnam War. Some have accused him of being a war criminal due to his role in the bombing campaigns and other military actions that caused great destruction and loss of life.

However, others have defended Kissinger, arguing that he was a diplomat who was trying to navigate the complex geopolitical landscape of the time. They point to his efforts to improve relations with China and the Soviet Union as evidence of his diplomatic skills.

Regardless of one's opinion of Kissinger, his impact on the world cannot be ignored. His ideas and policies continue to shape international relations today.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics...

A fascinating book, Walter Isaacson’s “Kissinger” is a comprehensive life biography on the complex individual, Henry Kissinger. Spanning 855 pages of text, followed by archival family and professional photos, this is no short read. However, it offers an outstanding portrayal of a man with many facets.

Henry Kissinger’s family fled Nazi Germany, and he later served as a soldier in World War II in Europe, working in counter intelligence. He was educated at Harvard, where he earned his doctorate and later became a professor. A Nelson Rockefeller Republican and conservative, he served in both the Nixon and Ford administrations. First as Nixon’s National Security Adviser, and later as both National Security Adviser and Secretary of State simultaneously. He continued to serve Gerald Ford as Secretary of State, relinquishing his role as National Security Adviser.

Kissinger was an old school European pragmatic, focused on advancing the interests of the United States as a nation, rather than as a moral crusader. He was criticized by both conservatives as being too liberal and by liberals as being too conservative. Neither a hawk nor a dove, he adopted whatever approach would best achieve his goals.

He worked tirelessly to extricate the United States from Vietnam, but also endorsed an escalation in the bombing of North Vietnam, as well as Cambodia and Laos. Ultimately, he was able to negotiate and sign the Paris Peace Accords, which earned him the Nobel Peace Prize. His other accomplishments include restarting relations with Communist China and achieving detente with the Soviet Union. He also played a key role in stabilizing relations in the Middle East after the Yom Kippur War.

While it may be difficult to find Henry Kissinger likable, he was undoubtedly an intriguing and complex individual. He ranks among the most influential and important Secretaries of State of the 20th century, along with Dean Acheson and George Marshall. He was able to balance the isolationist and interventionist forces to maintain a period of peace in the post-Vietnam years.

This is an incredible 4.5 to 5-star book on a fascinating individual.

In writing my thoughts on this book, it is extremely challenging to disentangle my opinion regarding the quality of the book from my emotional response to Henry Kissinger himself.

Once the book delved into recounting Kissinger's life as an adult, I swiftly developed a strong aversion towards him. He was haughty, devious, mendacious, and insincere. I fundamentally oppose the ostensible principles of his "realpolitik," which, on a very high plane, refers to an approach to diplomacy founded on practical considerations.

Now, I am indeed a strong advocate of practically realistic and advantageous policies and actions. However, all too often for Kissinger, the pursuit of a practical end result seemed to rationalize underhanded means. I firmly hold the belief that purportedly positive ends do not excuse dishonest or unethical means.

Kissinger's ascent from a German-born Jewish refugee fleeing Nazi persecution, who never shed his German accent, to the position of Secretary of State of the U.S.A. is a captivating story arc. It also serves as an affirmation of some of the fundamental reasons that make me proud to be an American.

Anyway, setting aside my personal feelings towards Kissinger, I think the book is well-crafted. It has assisted me in gaining a deeper understanding of the history underlying Vietnam, Cambodia, and the Nixon and Ford Era. Perhaps the book focused a touch too narrowly on Kissinger himself for my liking, but overall, it was very good.

Isaacson accomplishes an outstanding task in dissecting the intricate narrative of one of the most remarkable statesmen in American history.

Driven constantly by his realpolitik philosophy, Kissinger's proficiency as a deal broker culminated in numerous breakthroughs in American history. For example, the opening to China and the ground-breaking shuttle diplomacy. His unwavering emphasis on realism compelled him to disregard morality in political decisions. In many cases, this enabled him to achieve magnificent feats. However, it also left him with a tainted image following the East Pakistani War and Cambodia's Christmas Day bombing.

Nevertheless, it is an excellent piece of work, although it can be rather long-winded at times. It is recommended to anyone with an interest in mid-1900s politics and who has the sufficient time required to read it.

A comprehensive review of Kissinger up to 1991 offers a detailed look at his remarkable career. While it encompasses various aspects, it substantially focuses on his crucial position during the Nixon/Ford presidencies. Kissinger is widely regarded as a confirmed balance-of-power diplomat. His ability to navigate the complex international political landscape with finesse was truly remarkable. However, his secretive approach was sometimes a double-edged sword. On one hand, it allowed him to conduct delicate negotiations and achieve significant外交 breakthroughs. On the other hand, it also led to criticism and accusations of being too secretive and unaccountable. Additionally, Kissinger was a man with a large ego. His self-confidence and assertiveness sometimes rubbed people the wrong way. Nevertheless, his contributions to American foreign policy and international relations cannot be ignored.

A brilliant examination of a man driven by realpolitik both on the global stage and within the folds of his social life.

If, like myself, you hoped that over 700 pages of analysis would bring about a clear-cut answer to the nature of Kissinger's character, then you will be disappointed. One is left with the impression that he was ruthless, manipulative and destructive.

However, he was also a master of compromise, an intellectual of enormous heft. He played a significant role in bringing about shifts in the global order that would ultimately lead to the end of the Cold War.

In short, Kissinger was a man of immense complexity whose legacy is murky at best. His actions and decisions had far-reaching consequences that are still being debated today.

Critics or foes alike would do well to engage with Walter Isaacson's attempt to examine the life of one of America's greatest statesmen. Isaacson's detailed and comprehensive account provides valuable insights into Kissinger's character, his policies, and his impact on the world.

Whether you agree or disagree with Kissinger's actions, it is impossible to deny his significance in modern history. By reading Isaacson's book, we can gain a better understanding of this complex and controversial figure and the times in which he lived.

I guess I find myself at odds with the prevailing opinions regarding this book, even though I can fathom why it has gained popularity.

In numerous aspects, this is indeed an interesting and captivating read, replete with countless accounts of real conversations that took place within the corridors of power and in Kissinger's life there.

However, as I delved deeper into it, it became increasingly evident that the very reason this book was recommended to me - its supposed objectivity - was disturbingly absent. This deficiency colored the entire experience and my overall impression, not just of this book but also making me reflect on his other works. Although off the top of my head, I can't immediately recall how this might have influenced, for instance, his history of Leonardo.

I postulate that many people believe that the fact that Isaacson doesn't pen a diatribe against Kissinger and, in many cases, defends his thinking, equates to "objectivity." True, in many respects, it is a balanced book and, as such, has achieved a certain level of success. But the idea that there is no subjectivity involved is preposterous. Isaacson clearly harbors a strong personal antipathy towards Nixon and, to some extent, towards Kissinger as well. He frequently directs sarcastic barbs and mockery Kissinger's way. It's as if you can sense his struggle to hold it in, but sometimes he simply can't resist and has to release some pent-up emotions in a literary fashion.

Here's a case in point. On several occasions, Isaacson will quote something Kissinger said and then proceed to make the rather trite observation that "but this quote reveals more about Kissinger than it does of what he was actually saying." This is an overused tactic in this biography, and ironically, it reveals more about Isaacson than it does about Kissinger.

Feel free to have any opinion you like about Nixon; he surely doesn't require a defense. But the fact that Isaacson can't refrain from belittling him significantly undermines my ability to trust anything he says. It also circumscribes Isaacson's understanding of many of the events that unfolded during this period, often reducing complex events to rather simplistic portrayals of Nixon and his numerous motives. The same holds true for Isaacson's perception of Kissinger in many ways, although it is evident that he does, at the very least, respect Kissinger's inherent intelligence.

I would very much like to read a book of this nature, where the author had the same level of access but approached the subject matter with a more dispassionate gaze.

This is an amazing work by master biographer Walter Isaacson.

Kissinger is an incredibly complex person who was at the center of US foreign policy in the mid-20th century. That was a momentous time when the US lost its (never really deserved) innocence in Viet Nam and made a sort-of contentious peace with the USSR and China.

I remember the main events as a consumer of news back then. So, for me, the events are old hat. However, the behind-the-scenes machinations, and the fits-and-starts that never made the news fascinated me greatly. The same goes for the complex, dare I say love-hate relationships between Kissinger and Nixon, and between Kissinger and Ford. And the cabinet rivalries!

Looking back, many people revile Kissinger for his realpolitik balance-of-power approach that put national interest (as perceived back then) ahead of moral considerations. But considering what the world has become by now, I'm not sure the ideological human-rights orientation is better. Kissinger wouldn't tell other heads of state how to run their countries. Today, we try but often wind up failing. But one thing we had then that's lacking now are the three superpowers messing around via proxies but keeping those proxies sufficiently under control to prevent things from spinning too far out of hand. I get a sense that Isaacson is not a Kissinger fan. But given how the world has changed since the 1992 publication of this work, I'd say Kissinger's world view may have aged better than the author's subtle anti-realpolitik slant.

Walter Isaacson has once again penned a definitive biography.

It is replete with detailed events, intricate relationships, and hitherto untold secretive actions.

This book holds great significance. However, for those who are merely seeking a well-crafted profile, it can be an arduous task to wade through its extensive pages.

I chose to skip many of the "formative years" chapters and instead concentrated my energy on the Kissinger of the 60's.

I had harbored the hope of obtaining sufficient unbiased information about the man to refute decades' worth of partisan vitriol.

Fortunately, this was indeed the case. I am truly grateful to Mr. Isaacson for his remarkable work.

His efforts have provided a more comprehensive and objective understanding of the subject matter.

This biography serves as a valuable resource for anyone interested in delving deeper into the life and times of Kissinger.

It offers a wealth of insights and perspectives that are both enlightening and thought-provoking.

Overall, it is a must-read for those who wish to gain a more profound appreciation of this influential figure.