Judy Woodruff interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of “The Atlantic” 11/21/2016 Screen grab from video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fgFK084gls
Judy Woodruff, a listed member of the “Council on Foreign Relations“, interviews Jeffrey Goldberg, the Editor-in-Chief of “The Atlantic” about his interview with Henry Kissinger.
The interviews between Henry Kissinger and Jeffrey Goldberg can be found at these two articles in “The Atlantic”, which were available to read without subscription. Links: Interviewing Henry Kissinger and The Lessons of Henry Kissinger
This election outcome has exposed the veneer of false neutrality and also the deceit of many of the major news sources and reporters in their coverage and tone. “The Atlantic” is not neutral in their views of the election outcome, but were honest and probably hoping their two-cents might sway some voters. The elites wanted a candidate who would fall in step or was already co-opted or part of their mind hive or was at least malleable to the ongoing power view.
If Hillary Clinton were facing Mitt Romney, or John McCain, or George W. Bush, or, for that matter, any of the leading candidates Trump vanquished in the Republican primaries, we would not have contemplated making this endorsement. [1]
Hillary Clinton, a former Secretary of State under Barack Obama, stated with pride that “I was very flattered when Henry Kissinger said I ran the State Department better — better than anybody had run it in a long time. So I have an idea of what it’s going to take to make our government work more efficiently.” Hillary of the “We came, we saw, he died.” laughing regime change had been groomed by Henry Kissinger in foreign policy. The Clintons have vacationed with Henry Kissinger and consider him a close personal friend.
Henry Kissinger has a 1973 Nobel Peace prize for his negotiations with Vietnam that involved massive bombings, including into neighboring Cambodia. Many agree with Bernie Sander’s description of Kissinger’s years in the Nixon administration as being responsible for one of the “worst genocides in the history of the world.” Bernie Sanders is “proud” that Kissinger was not his friend.
Meanwhile the Obama Administration granted Henry Kissinger a “Distinguished Public Service Award”. Jeffrey Goldberg did extensive interviews with President Barack Obama that can be found at this link: The Obama Doctrine
Donald Trump did meet with Kissinger in May 2016 during his campaign. Kissinger also recently went to Trump Tower for a meeting with the now President-elect Trump. “President-elect Trump and Dr. Kissinger have known each other for years and had a great meeting. They discussed China, Russia, Iran, the EU and other events and issues around the world” says the Trump transition press release.
For most supporters of Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump’s election was an unexpected shock and also a puzzlement. There has been scrambling to try to understand what the election of Trump might mean for the United States, as well as how his Presidency will affect the direction and plans for shaping the world power structure. Many articles by CFR members expressed their shock and dismay and “what now” view of an impending Trump Presidency. Dr. Henry Kissinger has had long association with the “Council on Foreign Relations” that began in the mid-1950’s as a young man. He is looking for a path to advising yet another president and to advise others who might get Trump’s ear.
Kissinger in his foreign policy believes in ‘realpolitik’, which is an amoral world view that puts balance and world stability over human rights. This makes his decisions and actions quite controversial. He is still respected and sought for his advice and “long arc” view of the world’s history. Trump expressed more nationalism and country sovereignty with protecting borders and less interest in regime change and openness to new cooperation, as well as changing the more globalist view of trade negotiations. The globalist corporatists are scrambling to co-opt Trump, as they have with so many others.
Judy Woodruff says the “report” is part of an ongoing collaboration between “The Atlantic” and the “PBS NewsHour“.
Note: This is my transcription of Jeffrey Goldberg’s comments with some paraphrasing for brevity of the questions by Judy Woodruff.
Jeffrey Goldberg says…
He (Kissinger) still really is the most influential foreign policy thinker in American in a lot of ways. So in my experience with him there is always something to learn even at the age of 93. Maybe especially at the age of 93 there is always something to learn from him. And so we ended up spending hours talking not just about the Obama Doctrine. We talked about the order of the world currently. We talked a lot about the election. He, like a lot of people, thought Hillary Clinton was going to win. We talked about both candidates. Well, here we are.
He thinks that the President is too passive in his approach to foreign policy. That the American President has a responsibility to make more order in the world, especially as it relates to the other great powers – Russia and China in particular.
He also thinks the President is too burdened by the alleged sins of the past. Kissinger would think of them more as alleged sins of American behavior during the Cold War and various places including Vietnam and Cambodia. But mainly it has to do with passivity that he sees in the President and a lack of strategic thinking and lack of assertion.
Jeffrey Goldberg of “The Atlantic” talking on “PBS/Newshour” about Kissinger, Obama and Trump // Screen grab from video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fgFK084gls
And obviously the President when I was interviewing him on these subjects Kissinger was almost sort of a specter in the room at various points. The President would talk about the “red line” in Syria, for instance, and talk about how one of the worst reasons to bomb someone is to prove that you are willing to bomb someone.
And I felt as if he were addressing Henry Kissinger and Kissinger’s role in Cambodia using bombing to enhance American credibility at the negotiating table. I found it was a totally fascinating process for me because I was moderating non-chronologically an argument between President Obama and the most important and most controversial foreign policy statesman of the modern era.
And so there was that piece… the other piece of this is that Obama in some ways resembles Henry Kissinger. Kissinger recognizes this to some degree. I think that the President recognizes this to some degree. Neither man particularly obsesses about human rights as a key issue in a way America organizes the relationship with other countries.
Kissinger is still defending the decisions that were made in the early part of the Nixon administration in the Vietnam War.
I don’t think he’ll stop defending them. He feels as if his decision-making is misunderstood in the country and he wants to make his point.
The interesting thing, if I may, is on Syria he noted to me that John Kerry, Secretary of State, guy who has the job that Henry Kissinger had – who started his public career as a Vietnam protester arguing to the President that we have to bomb the Assad regime in order to focus their attention on the necessity of negotiation.
And so you see these very interesting echos throughout history, these unsolvable problems, these challenges that are in front of policy makers.
I have a feeling that John Kerry and Barack Obama today have a slightly more understanding for the decisions that Nixon and Kissinger made in Vietnam. They may not agree with them, but they have a little bit more understanding.
Human rights is not at the top of their priorities.
Well that is one of the interesting things that “Hope and Change” is limited to within American borders in a lot of cases. I don’t think that President Obama would appreciate being called a neo-Henry Kissinger, but Obama’s view is “I, as President, have to manage my relationship with China” and me spending a lot of time lecturing them and ‘punishing them’ for their human rights violations is not going to advance my immediate and long-term national security interests and economic interests.
Talking about President Obama’s approach to China…
First of all, I asked him what grade he gives Obama for the China portfolio. He said B+. I said “That’s a pretty high-grade.” He said “Yes, it’s a B+ on tactics”. It is lower probably on strategy.. on thinking through strategy.”
Kissinger’s focus in global affairs has always been what are the needs of the great powers, how do those needs align with our needs, how do we organize that. The opening to China, of course, is the apogee to this theory.
Henry Kissinger meets with leaders in People’s Republic of China – Zhou Enlai and Mao Zedong (Wikimedia) [2]
It was his greatest achievement, it was a world historical achievement.
Kissinger took a secret trip to PRC in 1971, which had not had relation with US in over 20 years. This paved the way for Nixon’s ‘opening to China’ in 1972. This was the beginning of China’s emergence as a world power.
China is going to be the world’s biggest economy, if things keep going the way they are going. Our economic future, the American economic future, is in Asia.
China believes itself to be the most powerful country in the world, the central kingdom. He is saying that Presidents have to have a strategic view to understand how to manage that aspect of China’s relationship without coming to war.
The stability of the entire world depends on a constructive relationship between the United States and China. If that relationship deteriorates, then it is bad for the United States and it is bad for the entire world. It should be the number one priority of American foreign policy, but there is chaos in the world too. American Presidents have to deal with chaos at the same time they are thinking about 10, 20, 30 years out on how they are going to deal with China.
What about Trump?
In our most recent conversation, I said “Do you think that Donald Trump has matured? Do you think he has become smarter or more studious?”
He said “I’m not having that conversation. He’s the President elect of the United States.”
And so, what we should do…is essentially, I’m paraphrasing now, is to wish him well and be available to help him study and help him understand the challenges before him. Obviously Henry Kissinger is a person, even at 93, who doesn’t like to be out of the game. He doesn’t like to be out of the lime-light.
He’s basically saying “I’m here for you Don and I want to give you some sound advice.”
Kissinger met with Trump, who said afterwards ‘ I have tremendous respect for Dr. Kissinger and appreciate him sharing his thoughts with me.’
Kissinger’s basic rule, I think, is to know what you want to do and know what things are unacceptable to you.
You have to know going into the Presidency what things you cannot accept as the leader of the United States. You have to reverse engineer the problem.
What could China do in the south China Sea that is not acceptable to US national security? What could happen in the Middle East that is not acceptable? So first you have to decide what your, to borrow a phrase, what your red lines are and work back from there.
Does he believe that someone who hasn’t had experience in foreign policy can make a determination like that?
He was very assiduous about not providing his opinion about where Donald Trump is on the learning curve right now.
I think it is a big universal truth that if you are not willing or able to take on board new information, new analysis, have long involved conversations about these important issues then you are going to be operating at a real deficit.
Much, if not most, of the foreign policy establishment in the United States has not been on board with Donald Trump.
Quite the opposite.
How can he move ahead making decisions that are good for the country when he hasn’t had these relationships before?
Well, he is going have to do something that is out of character with Donald Trump, which is to say bygones be bygones. Pick up the phone to say to Colin Powell, to Madeleine Albright, say to all these people.. “Come in and talk to me about what you know”.
At the lower level he is going to have to be open to the idea that people who disagreed with him, with his candidacy, that they should come back into government and help.
The flip side is that all of these people who were so nervous about Donald Trump becoming President now might have to say to themselves that “Well, Donald Trump IS President, President-elect, and so I better make myself available to the government because better me than some guy nobody ever heard of with no experience” because these are not unserious challenges. These are life and death issues. You want people who understand the global ISIS threat really well to be sitting next to Donald Trump when he actually has to make decisions.
What are you worried about right now? Do you have bad expectations about this administration?
I’m worried about everything for starters. I’m worried about a willingness to hire the best people. I’m worried about temperament. I’m worried about his attention, his focus. I am not entirely worried that he is actually going to carry out all of the things he said he would do. I’m worried about accidents.
Who do you want in the White House when the CIA director comes over and says the North Koreans now have the ability to deliver one of their nuclear weapons by intercontinental missile to the American mainland. What do you want to do about it, Mister or Madam President?
I want somebody in that job, obviously, who can make reasonable rational decisions and take in the best advice.
End of interview.
Donald Trump is not part of the clique of the globalist elite cabal nor has he been stewed in the foreign policy views of the “Council on Foreign Relations” nor had Henry Kissinger been whispering in his ear about “realpolitik”. Trump also is not a neo-con “idealist” wanting to spread Democracy around the world and instead leaving smoldering chaos behind. Donald Trump is a hope that the new change can be towards yet another “New World Order” that isn’t ruled solely by the globalists. A hope that the United States foreign policy is not deciding its moves decades in advance based largely on the globalist prophesied future of a transcendent China as a next great world power.
Henry Kissinger’s long arc view started the opening up of China in the 1970’s and he still pushes the view that we are handing off power “back” to China and Asia. The idea is that China was a great power and merely lost for a time before rising again, so we need to be prepared to hand over the golden keys. Does China realize they are being expected to take over the mantle of world shaper? The “so-called” pivot of Obama to the East isn’t far off the mark from where Kissinger would want him to be heading.
There was no mention of other historical foreign policy decisions of Kissinger, such as his involvement in a coup placing the brutal Chilean leader, Pinochet, in power. There is no mention that our involvement in Vietnam was premised on a lie [4] to the American people, which is a method of getting the United States into war to this day.
Why, as Americans, are we still honoring a man with so much blood on his hands? Why would we want Kissinger or his cronies to continue to shape the foreign policy and world order? They sit in their enclaves and ivory towers and plot and manipulate and smirk, but too often in hindsight the world finds out their great schemes are an ongoing disaster. America is used as a tool in their world chess games.
More is at play in the world and needs to be addressed with urgency than whether countries will blow each other up over land or failed trade cooperation. Failure of antibiotics and a global pandemic or a small meteor landing mid-ocean are too rarely discussed. Those would definitely throw a monkey wrench into the globalist prophesies of future power structure. Surprisingly “climate change” didn’t come up in the conversation with Kissinger, as that topic seems to be a constant thrum in media.
Henry Kissinger with Chilean despot Augusto Pinochet (Wikimedia) [3]
Reference:
[1] “The Atlantic” endorsed Hillary Clinton
[2] Wikimedia photo of Henry Kissinger “opening up” China
[3] Wikimedia photo of Henry Kissinger in Chile
[4] Wikipedia on “The Fog of War” with Robert McNamara
Jeffrey Goldberg stories at “The Atlantic”
Judy Woodruff stories on “PBS/The Newshour”
Wikipedia on “The Council on Foreign Relations”
Kissinger secret meeting with China from The National Security Archive 1970-1971
Kissinger involvement in Pinochet coup from The National Security Archive 1976
