Published :
Updated :
For all latest news, follow The Financial Express Google News channel.
Henry Kissinger, the man who represented the American will in the international world, perhaps more than all others, is finally dead after completing a century. His death comes at a time when the world has changed vastly and the US shares power with several contenders and not one.. He came to the US as a German Jewish refugee during WW 2 and after a series of splendid academic careers became the mandarin of US foreign policy.
Most would like to think of him as a great producer of US foreign policies but that is more good media copy than reality. He was like all before and after him, a servant not the maker of US's foreign policy needs.
Ben Rhodes, a former deputy national security adviser and author of a sort of guilt driven apologia ,"After the Fall: The Rise of Authoritarianism in the World We've Made," says in his New York Times article, "From 1969 to 1977, Mr. Kissinger established himself as one of the most powerful functionaries in history. For a portion of that time, he was the only person ever to serve concurrently as national security adviser and secretary of state that simultaneously made him responsible for shaping and carrying out American foreign policy. The ease with which he wielded power made him a natural avatar for an American national security state that grew and gained momentum through the 20th century, like an organism that survives by enlarging itself."
Such feelings probably come from a reality check of the situation today. The US is not exactly in charge of the whole world anymore as it thought before. Being a super power is not a permanent job it seems. They are as much prisoners of history as, say, Basket case Bangladesh is.
Did Kissinger really say that Bangladesh was a "basket case"? It doesn't matter. Bangladesh didn't matter to the US in 1971. To be honest we didn't matter to anyone -- US, USSR, China or India and Pakistan -- except us. Everyone looked after themselves and if we were creating opportunities for some on the global stage we were probably some sort of pebbles in the path for others. No more.
Calling Bangladesh a "Basket case" which basically means an endless pit of foreign charity consumption was what the US thought of most of the world except themselves and the West. There was nothing personal here. In 1971, we were not considered a significant issue worth too much consideration either and certainly not worth going to war over as US secret documents relating to 1971 says.
Problem is there are no good or bad states, only self-interest driven ones. Point is, every state, like every human being, is selfish and self-centered and there is little difference between them. And few want to accept that.
There is only our side and their side and nothing else matters. And basket case means a high aid consuming state without an economic future. Isn't this what we also call ourselves often when politically and otherwise unhappy? It doesn't matter.
Let's face it. It is 1971 and a cold war crisis on and here is this punk state that has come into being despite White House disapproval. Nixon and Kissinger have been trying to put India and its ally Russia in trouble but then the US strategy fails. What is a miffed US and its chief of foreign policy supposed to call Bangladesh? "The Taj mahal?.
Kissinger's death has caused a lot of so-called soul searching in the US and saying Kissinger was no American hero but pushing an "oppressive cold war" policy. This self-beating didn't happen before when the US foreign policy looked supreme. Then everyone admired him. But now the mandarins see that days are perhaps not the same. They seem, I am afraid, the same as they claim Kissinger was.
Critics now say he used American concepts of democracy, human rights and international law for dubious gains. The war in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, support to genocidal campaigns by Pakistan against Bangladeshis and by Indonesia against the East Timorese are examples cited by them. He also backed Pinochet in Chile to finish off Salvador Allende-all in the name of the American ideal of the global variety.
The supreme enemy was the Soviet Union and the rest didn't matter. As Kissinger said, "The issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves." But this was the state agenda not Kissinger's personal wish list. It's tough to face that fact hence abuse the individual and let the state go.
Let's face it. US policy no longer rolls as it once did. The Soviet Union is gone but China has emerged and is stronger than the Soviets were with Russia in tow. Bangladesh is no longer a basket case whatever else it may be and Chile is not under Allende types and its voters are deciding for itself not the US. US think tanks are saying there is no US exit policy in Gaza, Ukraine is a lost cause where Russia runs riot and the list gets longer every afternoon. Maybe the only place where they seem powerful is in the old basket case Bangladesh. While Kissinger is gone Bangladesh goes on.
Sleep well Henry, in the end, you didn't win. None does, only history wins.