HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY

2 PARK STREET BOSTON 02107

In case you missed it when it was
published August of 1966, we thought you'd
like to catch up with this important book
in view of the present situation.

Houghton Mifflin Company

December 27, 1968

350, STRADA SAN VITO
10133 TORINO - TEL. 659.327

September 20, 1971

Dear Mr. Kissinger,

it was nice to see you again
in Vermont after a long time.

I am sending you, under separate cover,
a collection of essays on the relations between
the U.S. and Italy during the Fascist period,
though I am sure you have little time to spare
for this sort of reading.

Dr. Henry Kissinger
The White House
Washington, D.C.

FG6-11-1/KISSINGER, HENRY A.
KISSINGER, HENRY A./M*

TAKEO MIKI
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
DIET BUILDING, TOKYO, JAPAN

July 20, 1970

His Excellency Henry A. Kissinger
Special Assistant to the President
White House
Washington, D.C.
U. S. A.

Your Excellency

Please allow me to express my gratitude for the
most rewarding opportunity to see and discuss with Your
Excellency during my visit with the United States.

The occasion, I have found, was the most informative
one, giving me a deeper insight into problems of peace and
security in the world, particularly in Asia. I am grateful for
the frankness with which Your Excellency discussed problems
of our mutual interest.

I am looking forward greatly to having another
opportunity to see Your Excellency some time in the near
future.

PRESS -- 10/8/71 (Ids)

MILES -- open

Type of Request & Date

(Last name and pending date)

GENERAL

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

Name: Dick Miles, writer for SPORTS ILLUSTRATED

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

Request: Mr. Miles, who has been the U.S. Table Tennis Champion a number of times and who was a member of the U.S. team which visited The People's Republic of China, said he had been given an interesting assignment by Sports Illustrated. His editor thought it would be a nice idea if they could prevail upon Mr. Kissinger to take a table tennis lesson (with pictures) prior to his departure for China. They had been saving this idea for the President, but since Mr. Kissinger is a "regular visitor" they would like for him to do it. [Mr. Miles said Chou En-lai has a marvelous back-hand which he demonstrated at the reception for the tennis players and he plays western style.]

DRH's Recommendation:

RSVP: Dick Miles -- Res: 212/861-6799

or

Patricia Ryan, Editor -- 212/556-3117

HAK's Answer: NO - 10/11

Date and Time:

Party Contacted:

Additional Information:

Enclosures filed in 6091
X Oversize Attachments #

Resolution:

29 March 1971

National Security Council
Attn.: Dr. Henry Kissinger
The White House
Washington, D. C.

Dear Dr. Kissinger:

I have enclosed a paper that you should enjoy reading which is entitled, "Toward a Stable World Order," written by me. It coincides in many places with ideas expressed in the *State of the World Messages*.

In brief, the paper offers the supporting scientific theory for a supranational model of world government based almost entirely upon a regional or "continental" restructuring of the UN Security Council. This model overcomes present obstacles to the attainment of peace and disarmament, having an immediate bearing upon settlement of the Middle East and Indochina conflicts because of its novel approach, and providing a series of arms rollbacks leading to the formation of a UN Navy submarine fleet and the necessary political perspective within which this may be achieved.

I am circulating copies of this paper before publishing it so that I may obtain comments on it. I certainly would like to know your opinion about it. Please feel free to forward copies of it to interested parties.

Thank you for your consideration.

Bruce K. Miller
455 S. Lamar St.
Denver, Colo. 80226
(303) 922-0104

TOWARD A STABLE WORLD ORDER

A new concept of international organization has evolved from general systems theory, the only science based upon the study of organized complexity, whether it be in the social, biological or physical sciences. This concept provides the basis and reason for creating a World Government, one which will effect peace, disarmament and the betterment of mankind. The crises that face man today can only be overcome by this proposed reorganization of the United Nations.

General systems theory provides an insight into the underlying structures and functions of an organic entity. The utility of these ideas in analyzing international relations and international government has been disregarded in the past, but now offers a fresh and fertile approach in the search for an efficient means to achieve a stable world order. The central concept of general systems theory is that of an "open hierarchical system," which is closely analogous to the system of federal government. This fruitful concept provides the philosophy upon which world government should be based. Whether man realizes it or not, planet Earth is a closed, ecological system or organic entity. Therefore, organic considerations should determine his intelligent choice of a political system, since by now he has transcended the blind process of evolution by natural selection. By logical analysis, man can decide which form of government, similar to the UN, will be most likely to survive and meet his needs.

But first, before exploring the properties of open hierarchical systems and their implications for world government, an analysis of the present form of international organization must be considered. The UN is a minor form of international organization compared to the structure of traditional international relations. Therefore, we will consider the latter form to begin with, since it is the predominant form of international organization. Traditionally, international relations have sought to enhance a nation's autonomy and independence. However, with the proliferation of international relations, this

Miller 2

underlying assumption has become antiquated. There is mathematical
evidence that this structure of international relations has become
overwhelmingly complex and unstable. It causes an element of
unpredictability to determine a nation's foreign affairs. And, in
this age of a nuclear balance of terror when one slight mishap could
plunge the world into total destruction, such a factor can not be
ignored. This factor of unpredictable instability arises from the
incredibly complex nature of international relations and the
interdependencies between the various nations. Man's ignorant faith
in these relations can be countered only by sound evidence of a
mathematical nature to the contrary.

A conservative figure for the magnitude of the complexity of
the international relations that the United States has with the rest
of the world is easy to obtain. The easiest approach to this problem
is to use the general theory of relations, an important branch of
mathematical logic. The results of a simple problem will be used
to solve the more difficult problem of the international relations
of the United States. Using three nations x, y and z, and the most
general relation of "amity" between them, denoted by R, we write xRy
to mean that "nation x is friends with nation y." This general
relation of amity may have many subrelations, such as communication,
transportation, emmigration, immigration, travel, trade, military
and economic ties, and can even be functional, input-output,
feedback or control relations. Also, in the absence of this amity
relation or any subrelation of it, another relation exists between
two nations which can be either indifference or enmity. Call this
the absence of the relation R, denoted by $\nabla$. The fact that xRz and
yRz does not imply xRy, that is, two nations being friendly with
a third nation does not imply they are friendly with each other.
The possible combinations of relations between the three nations
are: xMyRz, xRyRz, xRy\*z and xRyRz, or $4 (2^2)$ of them. For the sake
of simplicity, we are not considering the subrelations. This number
of the possible combinations of relations we will call the magnitude
of the complexity of the international relations for one of the nations,
say nation x. For our example, then, suppose that the United States

Miller 3

has relations with 100 other nations, to choose a round, modest figure. The magnitude of the complexity of these international relations is approximately $1 \times 10^{30}$ ($2^{100}$), an overwhelmingly large number.

We have chosen the possible combinations of relations to represent the complexity because of the interrelatedness and interdependence of nations. You can see that a change in only one of the relations affects the whole structure, thereby destabilizing it and causing another unpredictable crisis as all the remaining relations have to compensate for the change in the one relation. The number of discrete changes that the structure can go through by decay or deterioration of relations is a reasonable measure of the complexity of this form of international organization. We do not choose to calculate the complexity of the international relations of other nations because most of them would be redundant to those of the United States, and it is only the point of view of this nation with which we are concerned.

In examining this traditional form of international organization further, we find that it is hardly related to the minor form of international organization, the UN. In the development of international relations there has been a tendency to form regional security and economic institutions, but then again, these are not related or connected to the UN. The major regional institutions are: North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Organization of American States (OAS), European Common Market, Warsaw Pact, Comencom, Arab League, Organization of African Unity and Southeast Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO). If these regional institutions could in some way be related more directly to the UN, international organization would become more streamlined. The regional security institutions are only indirectly related to the UN through the membership of the Big Four in the Security Council. The other sovereign members of the Security Council, except Taiwan, are selected on a rotational basis and are for the most part almost entirely unrepresentative of any comprehensive, large blocs of nations. Some regions of the world may be unrepresented for several years at a time. Moreover, the nations in the Security Council usually represent their own, narrow interests with hardly any consideration for the regional institutions of which they are members.

Miller 4

On the other hand, some times regional interests take precedence to
the detriment of the Security Council. There has been no way to
coordinate these conflicting tendencies.

Further examination of the Security Council reveals more gross
imbalances. China, with one-fourth of the world's population is not
a member of the UN General Assembly or Security Council. This is a
foolish disregard of a real-world situation. Already having the H-bomb,
China is expected to deploy a complete ICBM force by 1975. The
Sino-Soviet border dispute has only one-sided representation in
the Security Council. Japan, with the world's third largest gross
national product and a strong military potential, is not a permanent
member of the Security Council. Although West Germany is not a member
of the UN, it is the second strongest member of NATO next to the
United States. To make the Security Council more representative of
the security conditions around the world, West Germany should also
be represented in some way in the Security Council. These are a few
of the faults to be overcome by a UN reorganization.

A UN reorganization based upon the above considerations would still
have to use the organizational principles of the open hierarchical system
mentioned earlier. These principles, although not yet mathematically
formulated, provide the necessary insights into such real-world
phenomena as nationalism, isolationism, totalitarianism, despotism,
authoritarianism, anarchism and imperialism, and the disintegrative
effects these phenomena have upon the whole, organic community.

A system is generally recognized to be a collection of
interdependent elements, not a random aggregate. An open system is
a locally organized entity which is open to its environment and receives
sustenance from it in the form of information, matter and/or energy.
An open hierarchical system is one which is organized in structure
and function according to hierarchical principles. Such a system is
called an "organism" or "community" (a quasi-organism). There are
many correspondences or isomorphisms between organisms and communities
which are more than mere analogies. Therefore, study of the most
organized of complexities, or organisms, is bound to give much insight

Miller 5

and understanding for the analysis of more simple forms of organization,
such as societies or communities. In the following discussion of
hierarchical principles of organization, when organisms are mentioned
it is because of this strong similarity. (The following five
paragraphs, set off by asterisks, are after Koestler (1967): *The
Ghost in the Machine*, pp. 341-48.)

*Hierarchies are defined to be "vertically" arborizing (tree-like) structures whose branches interlock with those of other hierarchies at a multiplicity of levels and form "horizontal" networks. These features of arborization and reticulation are complementary principles in the architecture of organisms and societies. The branching lines between strata and of networks within strata represent the channels of communication and control.

Hence, an organism or society is defined to be a multi-levelled
hierarchy of semi-autonomous sub-wholes, branching into sub-wholes
of a lower order, and so on. Sub-wholes on any level of the hierarchy
will be referred to as *holons*, to reconcile the differences between
parts and wholes, since in the domain of life parts and wholes do not
exist in the absolute sense. Biological holons (as large as the
individual organism, or as small as one of its cells) are self-regulating
open systems which display both the autonomous properties of wholes
and the dependent properties of parts. This dichotomy of partness
and wholeness is present on every level of every type of hierarchic
organization. Social holons (as large as a nation, or as small as
one of its individuals) are stable, rule-governed sub-wholes.

Every holon has the dual tendency to preserve and assert its
individuality as a quasi-autonomous whole; and to function as an
integrated part of an (existing or evolving) larger whole. This
polarity between the Self-Assertive (S-A) and Integrative (INT) tendencies
is inherent in the concept of hierarchic order; and a universal
characteristic of life. The S-A tendencies are the dynamic expression
of the holon's wholeness, the INT tendencies of its partness.

The disorderly manifestations of the S-A tendencies are competition,
individualism and the separative forces of tribalism, nationalism, etc.

Miller 6

The disorderly manifestations of the INT tendencies occur when the power of the whole over its parts erodes their autonomy and individuality seen, for example, in reactionary repression and tyrannical oppression. An organism or society is said to be in dynamic equilibrium if the S-A and INT tendencies of its holons counterbalance each other. In a stressful situation, this equilibrium can be unbalanced when one of the holons becomes overdominant to the detriment of the whole, or if the whole's coordinative, integrative powers are weakened to the extent that it can not control its parts.

The term "equilibrium" in a hierarchic system does not refer to relations between parts on the same level, but to the relation between part and whole (the whole being represented by the agency which controls the part from the next higher level). The higher echelons in a hierarchy are not normally in direct communication with lower ones, and vice versa; signals are transmitted through "regulation channels," one step at a time, up or down. Output hierarchies begin with general, abstract instructions in the higher echelons which become progressively more concretized and particularized as the instructions descend in the hierarchy. (Input hierarchies operate in the opposite fashion.) A holon on a given level of an output hierarchy is represented on the next higher level as a unit. A holon, in other words, is a detailed system of concrete, specific relations which is represented on the next higher level as a unit of a more abstract, general relation.*

It should be obvious, by now, that the upper echelons of the open hierarchical system, whether biological or social, tend to become increasingly centralized as the numbers of holons decrease. It should also be obvious that this is the only type of system which preserves, and actually thrives upon, differentiation, variety and heterogeneity. This type of system is the only one capable of reversing the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that components of a system tend to become maximally disordered (randomized and disorganized). Furthermore, this reversal of the Second Law coincides with the evolution of life to more complex and better organized forms. In fact, such systems are dynamically homeostatic, ultrastable and have regenerative capabilities. Within their environment, such systems are highly

Miller 7

adaptive and are even able to imagine environments derived from extrapolation in space and time.

It is evident from the foregoing analysis and discussion of principles that the UN is not hierarchically organized. There is a lack of coordination and control between national and international levels of government. As mentioned earlier, regional organizations are coming into prominence and with sufficient planning could fill this vacuum. Another closely related phenomena is Big Power politics within "spheres of influence" which unfortunately, up until now, have overlapped causing competition, confrontations, conflicts of interest, general instability and unpredictable results. These two trends are reconciled into one idealized, politically feasible model of a world government, presented below.

A geopolitical, supranational model for a UN reorganization, rather than an international model, fulfills the principles of hierarchic organization. Long overlooked are certain articles of the UN Charter dealing with regional security agencies, notably Articles 33.1, 47.4, 52, 53 and 54, and their possible relationship to the Security Council. With the development of a few new regional, or "continental," security agencies and the modification of old ones, complete global security would be achieved, thus rendering the Security Council with its sovereign member nations obsolete. These continental institutions would then elect one member to represent their continent on the Security Council, thus providing complete, collective security and coordination of efforts. This removes the dilemmas surrounding the Security Council membership mentioned earlier.

The continental security agencies would be drawn along Cold War lines, but would transcend present and future difficulties in the maintenance of peace. The optimum continental arrangements for achieving these ends are: North America with a sphere of influence of South America; Western Europe with a sphere of influence of Africa (except the Arabs); Eastern Europe with a sphere of influence of Arabia (includes the Arabs and Israelis); Union of Soviet Socialist Republics with a sphere of influence of Indostan (includes the rest of the Middle

Miller 8

East, India and Pakistan); China; and Japanesia (includes the balance of Southeast Asia and Australia).

Not surprisingly, this proposed reorganization of the UN Security Council provides an amazing simplification in the international relations of the United States by reducing their complexity to a magnitude of 1025, using the same technique as we did before. This figure is derived by considering the relations between nations within the North American continent and the single relation any nation has with the UN. So, with the complexity of one nation's international relations decreased by such a fantastic degree, one can imagine how the whole new world order would benefit in stability, reliability and efficiency.

The Security Council would contain the above six member continents until the year 2000, when South America, Africa, Arabia and Indostan would be admitted. Three communistic continents and three democratic continents could deadlock the Security Council on important security matters, in which case the more neutral General Assembly would vote. When the other four continents were admitted in the year 2000, they would probably be neutral, thus failing to upset the balance of power.

Resolution of intracontinental conflicts would involve several steps. First, the disputants would appear before a continental tribunal which would attempt to resolve the conflict peacefully. Second, if the conflict demands fast action, even before it can be presented to the tribunal, the continental security agency may take immediate action; or if the dispute has been settled by tribunal, the continental security agency might have to enforce the decision. Third, either of the disputants could appeal the continental tribunal or security agency decision to the International Court of Justice or Security Council. Fourth, the General Assembly would remain as a "relief-valve" to its sovereign members to insure that no nation feels its sovereign rights are infringed upon by the new system, and its principle functions as a forum and legislature would remain.

Resolution of conflicts within spheres of influence would follow a similar pattern, although such conflicts would be within the jurisdiction of the parent continent. For example, a dispute in

Miller 9

South America would come before the North American tribunal and be enforced by the North American security agency. It is doubtful whether the "Poor Four" continents would be able to form their own continental security agencies in the near future, and even more doubtful whether they could afford such an unnecessary luxury. One could expect fewer conflicts as we approach the year 2000, with a subsequent decrease in military necessities.

This proposed Security Council reorganization has important implications for the settlement of the Middle East dispute. It gives the UN stronger authority to settle local disputes through its increased powers of collective legitimization and collective security. Mandatory arbitration of a Middle East peace settlement could be sponsored and enforced by Eastern Europe, even while the Big Power influences, which have made peace unattainable so far, are pulling out.

Settlement of the Indochina conflict also appears likelier in this reorganization. Only nations within the Japanese continent would sit on a tribunal to settle this conflict and enforce the peace. Such a settlement would be more attainable with the removal of Soviet, Chinese and American influences.

In line with this proposed, supranational reorganization of the Security Council and following the trend toward regional economic cooperation, a perfectly natural corollary would be to form continental economic agencies, a delegate from each such institution sitting on the UN Economic and Social Council. Such a reorganization would coordinate international efforts to help underdeveloped nations. Other international agencies could be reorganized according to this supranational system.

Recently, it was proposed that an Ocean Regime be established in the UN Secretariat. It would be responsible for administering UN-owned seas and seabeds, provide overall ecological controls, encourage oceanological research and derive incomes from mineral leases which would help pay for UN operating costs, with any surpluses being equitably distributed among its member nations.

Miller 10

This proposal would complete the global authority of a world
government, thereby removing possible future sources of conflict.

Arms limitations (SALT) probably will not go far enough in
light of the perspective that this model of world government gives us.
Certainly, the hazardous balance of terror can be drastically reduced.
China, Britain and France could give real hope to the world by
offering their nuclear disarmament in return for Soviet and American
removal of all land-based nuclear weapons. When anticipating an
invulnerable UN missile-equipped submarine fleet that would be superior
to all continental armies, thus preventing intercontinental conflicts,
real progress in arms limitations could be made with a lesser risk
to humanity than the present situation allows. As sovereign surface
navies are phased out, both the Americans and Soviets lose their
anti-submarine warfare methods. Gradual unification of their submarine
fleets under a UN Navy command would probably disallow nuclear torpedoes
and MIRV's. This fleet should have neutral island bases to prevent
continental interferences. The systems technology now exists to
design such a fail-safe fleet.

In summary, the earlier pages of this paper dealt with a logical
analysis of the complexity of traditional, present-day international
relations and showed their unrelatedness to the United Nations, along
with the attendant disorganization that this implied. General systems
theory was invoked to unify these two contradictory forms of
international organization in an attempt to overcome present obstacles
to the obtainment of peace and disarmament. In essence, this heuristical
approach breaks the bonds of the predominant form of international
organization by capitalizing on the "genetic predisposition" of the
United Nations Charter and introduces a supranational organizational
principle which will allow Blastula Earth to develop into Organism Earth.

- 30 -

HAK - Personal
Williams College Interns
July/August 1970
[Y]

(Last name and pending date)

KISSINGER, HENRY A. / m

Name: Franklin Miller for Williams College Interns

Request: 10 to 11 Summer Interns from Williams College would like to have an informal Q's and A's session with HAK in July or August while they are working here.

I told Mr. Miller, David Young would call him sometime after July 7th with an answer.

He may be contacted at the Office of Cong. John Monagan (mentioned the desire for a meeting was not political lobbying) 225-3825.

jlj

7/1

JTH's Recommendation:

HAK's Answer: DO 8/28

Date and Time:

Party Contacted:

Additional Information: Called 8/31 & told that Miller had left a couple of weeks before.

RECEIVED

SEP 4 1970

CENTRAL FILES

Resolution:

OFFICIAL

MILLER

Type of Request & Date

(Last name and pending date)

GENERAL

CO-34

FGG-11-1

KISSINGER, HENRY A./M/

Name: Vice Chancellor Norman Miller, UCLA

Request: Teach-in symposium on campus -- China relations coming from China visit. 12-15 scholars on China coming to UCLA in April -- 18th or 19th. Remarks in the evening in the auditorium, opened to campus and community, about 2000. In cooperation with National Committee on China. If HAK can join in panel after talk, great. Also trying to get Huang Hua.

213/825-3736

CSH's Recommendation:

HAK's Answer: NO 3/7

Date and Time:

Party Contacted: 3/7

Additional Information:

Resolution:

CONFIDENTIAL

KISSINGER, HENRY A.

Honolulu, Hawaii

9 December 1969

Dr. Henry Kissinger
The White House
Washington D. C.

Dear Henry:

Hope you are well and looking forward to a happy Christmas - remember that Christmas in Belgium in 1944. Can't remember if you were in the little town where I was on Christmas Day or not. The place was ours during the day and we hid in the cellars at night and the Germans walked around town on their hob nail boots at night. Christmas Day the sun came through and the fighter bombers could come to our assistance for the first time in about a month. I forget the name of the little town but the Stars and Stripes had a map showing in behind enemy lines - I remember that. Also that was the day our French Lt. got scared and took off for Paris - later he joined us back in Holland or Germany, but he got a coob reception from the gang. And he had a chest full of medals on his dress uniform as you will remember.

Things were different in that war Henry - principally because we did not have to contend with a hostile press. For the life of me I can't understand how so many news casters and writers got the impression that the war in Vietnam is all a big mistake. It is truly astounding the power of propaganda - the communists and our news media have said it so long it is a miracle we have not all been brainwashed. Poor Mr. Fullbright and other halfbrights have either bought the communist line - or they are stuck with a bad estimate of the situation and can't be honest enough to admit it. Fullbright and others like him will not be satisfied with anything less than a complete surrender by the U. S. in Vietnam.

South Vietnam has come a long way since 1965 and I feel sure Hanoi has given up on a military victory, but continues to hope for a diplomatic coup. North Vietnam certainly wants the foreign aid to continue to flow from China and the Soviet Bloc, so you can look for harassing actions to continue for another year or possibly longer in SVN. Hanoi might chance another TET offensive on a greatly reduced scale but I wouldn't bet on it. Frankly I believe we and the SVN forces could handle any type attack they might attempt and air and artillery would make it extremely costly. I look for some increase in mortar and rocket attacks and isolated position attacks but that is all. The only reason Hanoi would sacrifice the bulk of its remaining strength in SVN for a spectacular would be because it felt that one more victory - even though it might be shortlived - would cause the U. S. to completely collapse on the diplomatic front. I don't believe Hanoi feels there is any assurance that this would happen - especially with President Nixon leading the American people. Look at the support he got from his last speech on Vietnam policy.

CONFIDENTIAL

RECEIVED

DEC 16 1969

CENTRAL F