Herron: Kissinger shares insights at Pitt

Heinz Hall was not filled with the familiar melodies of the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra on… Heinz Hall was not filled with the familiar melodies of the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra on Monday. Instead, two chairs positioned around a coffee table accommodated a cozy discussion on stage in the grand auditorium. Paul O’Neill, U.S. treasury secretary from 2001-02, occupied the chair on the right. In the chair on the left sat Henry Kissinger, former national security advisor, secretary of state under Presidents Nixon and Ford, foreign policy guru and one of the most captivating individuals of the 20th century.

Kissinger fielded questions from O’Neill and the audience. He discussed the current economic crisis, China, energy, nuclear proliferation, the G-20 Summit, negotiating, the Middle East, the Cuban embargo and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. On this particular evening, Kissinger vibrantly displayed his knowledge of world affairs.

Although Nixon’s downfall has placed him among history’s most disappointing presidents, his foreign policy was relatively successful and progressive. Nixon’s accomplishments included ending American involvement in the Vietnam War, opening up diplomatic relations with China and implementing the policy of détente with the Soviet Union. Always looming within the background was Kissinger — negotiating with foreign leaders and pulling the correct diplomatic levers. Kissinger was even awarded the Nobel Peace Prize “for the 1973 Paris agreement intended to bring about a cease-fire in the Vietnam War and a withdrawal of the American forces,” according to NobelPrize.org.

Kissinger, throughout most of his career, was known as a proponent of Realpolitik, or less pejoratively, political realism. In his view, nations acted not in the interest of a greater moral good nor in consideration of the international community, but instead behaved in ways that would best enhance that particular nation’s relative economic and military power.

Yet, Monday evening Kissinger revealed that he had begun to retreat from the theory that had influenced the decisions he made while working for the State Department. He had come to terms with a world vastly different from the one that he had meticulously studied. The global economy, from Kissinger’s perspective, had become a dominating force behind international relations.

As he spoke of the recent global financial crisis, Kissinger said, “The economic organization of the world was out of whack with the political organization of the world.” While economics has become international, politics still remain national. Politics being what they are, the political interests subvert economic interests.

Kissinger also elaborated on another issue that the world must face in unity: global warming. The problem with coordinating efforts to fight global warming, Kissinger said, is that “in almost every country, the political leaders are driven by relatively short-term considerations.” Global warming is a long-term problem. World leaders must deal with the problem while dodging short-term electoral consequences. It’s this conflict that has been the primary bulwark against efforts to curb global warming.

Kissinger, 86, clearly understands this is a different world than that of the ’70s. He has come to accept that globalization has radically altered the way we understand what a nation’s interest is and that what might be in one nation’s interest might not be directly opposed to the well-being of another. The economic crisis revealed that there is a new interdependence among nations. The result, as Kissinger described it, is that everyone still wants to be more independent but has to stay close together.

At the end of the evening, O’Neill pointed out that it’s difficult to find an individual who has been as influential within U.S. government in the past 50 years as Henry Kissinger. I struggle to disagree.

During Kissinger’s analysis of the Cold War, he reminded the audience that it was not a “tea party” and that communism was a great fear and obsession of the United States. After communism’s collapse, those fears were alleviated and the doors appeared to open for a hopeful and promising future among nations. We no longer face the obsession with communism we once did, so our ability to develop and implement new ideas has flourished.

As the sun sets on Kissinger’s era, he still believes that, even with the obstacles we face today, “We live in a period of great opportunity, so, in that respect, I am optimistic.”

E-mail Mason at mph20@pitt.edu.