difficult to form their own opinions and more difficult to lead
their people. America needs above all to define its purpose in the
world.

Europe, too, faces serious challenges. How is Europe to be
constituted? Where does Europe begin and where does it end? How
can one incorporate the new nations of Eastern Europe into the
European system? Last week, I was in Brussels and spoke to an
eminent European about whether the Baltic states should enter NATO
or not. I said, "Why can't they at a minimum be taken into the
European Union quickly? What possible damage could 10 million
Balts do if they were taken into the European Union now?" Well,
this distinguished gentlemen said to me, "The schedule does not
permit it. They are not scheduled for a discussion, and we must
follow the procedures." The question, therefore, is this: how
is Europe to be formed? And whether it is to be defined by the
bureaucratic norms of existing institutions, or whether it can be
given some longer-term vision. Then the next question is: What
should be the relationship between Europe and America? It is a
question that must be asked on both sides of the Atlantic.

In our country, one of the favorite parlor games of intellectuals
and politicians is to debate the following: Should American
foreign policy be informed by moral principles dedicated to
democracy, or should it be conducted on the basis of *Realpolitik*?

5

One usually associates the horrible example of _Realpolitik_ with
"somebody that reads Metternich and Bismarck by candlelight." But
the fact is that pure _Realpolitik_ is not possible because all the
tough decisions are 51-49 decisions and the easier ones are the
50.1-49.9 and are without strong moral conviction. In some moral
compass, statesmanship becomes a prescription for a nervous
breakdown. And its real questions do not revolve around whether our
animating principle ought to be commitment to democracy.

The issue with respect to the spread of democracy around the world
is quite a different one. Democracy developed in Western societies
as a result of 800 years of evolution and of very particular
historical accidents and circumstances: the existence of an
aristocracy independent of the kings, and the existence of a
religion which, no matter how autocratic itself, had a separate
line of authority so that pluralism became built into the system.
None of this happened in any other society. The Reformation, the
Age of Enlightenment, Capitalism, and the Age of Discovery produced
a mix which, by the middle of the 20th century, created what we now
call pluralistic democracy. In our dealings with other societies,
we should show some understanding and patience and not ask them to
adopt in the initial decades of their new dispensations the final
results of 800 years of our own particular cultural evolution.
This would be relevant to our relations with the Middle East, Asia
and elsewhere.

There is one area in the world, however, in which the practice of
our democratic values can be relevant today. This is in the
relationship between Europe and the United States and, I would add,
with the rest of the Hemisphere. In a world of growing "fundame-
ntalism" in the emerging states which call themselves nations but
are really classical empires, the Western democracies should affirm
the bonds of their common destiny and parallel policies. In the
next phase of Atlantic policies, that should be the objective on
both sides of the Atlantic. Some Europeans say they must unify so
that they can prevent American domination of Europe. They need
have no fear of this. It is easy to get America interested in
Europe; but it is much harder to keep America committed, and that
requires some sense of common destiny.

Therefore I would say that, on both sides of the Atlantic, the next
phase of our foreign policy will require restoration of some of
the dedication, attitudes and convictions of the common destiny
that brought us to this point - though, of course, under totally
new conditions. And in this the American-German relationship will
be decisive. The unification of Europe could not occur without a
major and significant contribution from Germany. And I am sure
that history will record the role of Chancellor Kohl as having been
as important for the unification of Europe as were the decisions
of the Adenauer period for Atlantic relations.

7

Yet we have not cultivated common projects between Europe and America, having focused too much on the tactical issues. We have talked too much of technical command arrangements and too little of the purposes they are supposed to serve. That seems to me the challenge we have before us for the future.

Another reason this evening is so moving to me is because, when I look around this room, I see so many who have contributed to bringing us to this point: so many comrades in a common struggle. Marion and Hans-Dietrich are not foreigners as far as I am concerned. They are partners and friends in joint enterprises. And if one went around the room and started naming people and drawing lines among the relationships, there would be many who feel exactly the same. The task of organizations like this is to ensure that the next generation in the 21st century looks back and at some comparable period is able to say that our problem was that we accomplished everything we had set out to do - and provided that the task was worthy of those efforts.

Thank you very much.

8

Mr. Chairman, Hans Dietrich, Marion and friends, Secretary General, so many distinguished guests. After all these brilliant remarks that have been attributed to me, including from my old friend, Dick Holbrooke--and you would do him a great favor, if you don't spread the word that he and I were usually on the same side. I find myself in the position in which I once was at a reception where a lady came up to me and said, "I understand you are a fascinating man. Fascinate me." It turned into one of the less successful conversations that I have had. I find this evening a very moving occasion--the fact that my mother can be here, and my brother, taking us back to our youth in Germany. The fact that Hans-Dietrich Genscher, my colleague and friend, came across the Atlantic to make that speech. And Marion Dönhoff, with whom I have been meeting for forty years. I occasionally have an influence on her writings for about three weeks, and then she backslides again, none of which has ever affected my affection for her. Indeed, on one of her birthday celebrations that I had the honor to attend, I thought about Marion. In Jewish mythology, there is a saying that this sinful world is being preserved by God, because at any one time there are ten just men or women in this world which make it worth saving. Marion is certainly one of them.

Hans-Dietrich Genscher, with whom I had the honor to work for a number of years and then to observe for several decades thereafter, has made an extraordinary contribution. To be Foreign Minister of a divided country is an extraordinarily

difficult task. On the one hand, Germany's position depended on close ties to the alliance. On the other, any German Foreign Minister had to keep alive the principle of unification, and no matter what any of us would say, German unification had to be more of a concern for Germans than for Germany's friends, no matter how seriously they took it. So there was always the danger that a German Foreign Minister, pursuing the inevitable objectives of Germany, might be misunderstood as conducting a largely nationalist policy. Hans-Dietrich conducted his policy with enormous delicacy--a friend of America devoted to the alliance and nevertheless never losing sight of the long range necessities of his own people.

About two years ago, I had the privilege of spending a weekend in Halle, Hans-Dietrich's birthplace. It came about in the following manner: Hans-Dietrich had the habit of asking all the Minister's or Heads of State he dealt with to promise him that they would go with him to Halle whenever Germany was unified. It was an easy promise for us to make, because we felt it would never happen. So Hans-Dietrich had asked me to make that promise, and he had asked Gorbachev to make that promise, which, I must say, took some nerve, considering that East Germany at that time was under communist rule. It was a triumph of faith over "cool analysis" that the day would come that Hans-Dietrich could call in his promissory notes. And Gorbachev and I visited Halle with him as his guests to a series of ceremonies which marked the culmination of an evolution, to which nobody

contributed more than Hans-Dietrich Genscher. In addition, of course, I have greatly valued his friendship and loyalty and, if it does not ruin his reputation, I will say, that I appreciate the sentimental side of his nature as much as his statesman-like side.

Now, people often refer to my birth in Germany and to the ties that were formed then. But the Germany that I have been most closely associated with and feel most closely connected to is the postwar Germany. I arrived with an American infantry division in a country totally destroyed. The younger generation that did not live through it cannot imagine the rubble of those cities, the absence of any communications. I mention it only to point out the moral strength it took even to begin the process of rebuilding physically. Then out of this rubble grew a democratic society, which around 1949 made a heroic decision for which it has never has received full credit. Namely, that the leaders of democratic Germany, having been offered unification in return for neutrality, nevertheless decided they would rather keep the country divided, so that they could remain tied to the democratic west rather than to embark again on an uncertain cause of nationalism. It was a heroic decision. Nobody could predict at that time that it would never end. Or how it would end. It is in this period that a community of values and a community of interests grew up between Germany and America and Germany and Europe. Without this, the Cold War would not have come to the conclusion that it did. Now the two sides of the Atlantic find

(4)

themselves in the position that they have achieved everything
they set out to do forty years ago. And the question arises
whether that unity that brought us so far was a necessity of a
particular danger or has a deeper purpose.

Both sides of the Atlantic are undergoing extraordinary changes.
In the United States, the generation that formed the Marshall
Plan and NATO and the structure of the Cold War--the generation
that ended the depression and went through World War II and the
Korean War--was characterized by a deep faith in America and its
role in the world. The generation that succeeded it was formed
by the Vietnam War, which was an unsuccessful enterprise. And it
grew more inward looking and was more concerned with removing
America's blemishes. Nor did they believe that foreign policy
could be identified with the spread of American institutions on a
global basis. And in addition, the span of attention of the
generation brought up on computers and television is shorter than
of the generation brought up on books. So political leaders,
first of all, find it more difficult to form their own opinions
and more difficult to lead their people. America is in need of
defining its purpose in the world.

But Europe too has serious challenges. How is Europe to be
formed? Where does Europe begin and end? How can one
incorporate the new nations of eastern Europe into the European
system? Last week, I was in Brussels and spoke to one eminent

European about the issue: should the Baltic states enter NATO or not? And I said, "Why can't they at a minimum, at least be taken into the European Union quickly. What possible damage could 10 million Balts do, if they were taken into the European Union now? Well this distinguished gentlemen said to me, "The schedule does not permit it. They are not scheduled for a discussion, and we must follow the procedures." So it is an important question: how is Europe to be formed? Whether it is to be defined by the bureaucratic norms of existing institutions, or whether it can be given some longer-term vision. And the next question: What should be the relationship of Europe to America? It is a question that must be asked on both sides of the Atlantic.

In our country, one of the favorite parlor games of intellectuals and politicians is to debate the question: Should American foreign policy be informed by moral principles in dedication to democracy, or should it be conducted on the basis of _Realpolitik_? I usually mention this horrible example of _Realpolitik_ as "somebody that reads Metternich and Bismarck by candlelight." But the fact is pure _Realpolitik_ is not possible because all tough decisions are 51-49, and those are the easier ones. 50.1-49.9 and without strong moral conviction. In some moral compass, statesmanship becomes a prescription for a nervous breakdown. So the question is not whether we should be animated by commitment to democracy.

The question with respect to the spread of democracy around the

world is a different one. Democracy developed in the western societies as a result of 800 years of evolution and of very particular historical accidents and circumstances: the existence of an aristocracy independent of the kings, the existence of a religion which no matter how autocratic itself had a separate line of authority, so that pluralism was built into the system, which has happened in no other society. The Reformation, the Age of Enlightenment, Capitalism, the Age of Discovery. All these produced a mix that by the middle of the 20th century had produced what we now call pluralistic democracy.

In dealing with other societies, we should have some understanding and some patience in not asking them to accept in the first decades of their new positions the final results of 800 years of a particular cultural evolution. This is relevant to our relations in the Middle East, Asia and elsewhere.

I want to indicate that there is one area in the world in which the practice of our democratic values can be relevant today.

This is in the relationship of Europe to the United States, and, I would add, the rest of the hemisphere--in a world of growing "fundamentalists" in emerging states that called themselves nations but are really classical empires. In such a world, the western democracies should affirm a common destiny and parallel policies. In the next phase of Atlantic policies, that should be the objective on both sides of the Atlantic. Some Europeans say they must unify, so that they can prevent American domination of Europe. They need have no fear of this. It is easy to get

America this interested in Europe. It is much harder to keep
America committed, and that requires some sense of common
destiny.

So I would say that on both sides of the Atlantic the next phase
of our foreign policy needs to be a restoration of some of the
dedication and attitudes and convictions of a common destiny that
brought us to this point, but, of course, now in totally new
conditions. And in this the American-German relationship will be
decisive. The unification of Europe could not occur without a
major decisive contribution from Germany. And I am sure that
history will record that the role of Chancellor Kohl was as
important for the unification of Europe, as were the original
decisions of the Adenauer period (for the future of the Atlantic
alliance). But we have not cultivated common projects between
Europe and America. We have focused too much on tactical issues.
We have talked too much of technical command arrangements and too
little of the purposes that they are supposed to serve. That
seems to me the challenge we have for the future.

Now the reason this evening is so moving to me is because, when I
look around in this room, I see so many who have contributed to
bringing us to this point. So many comrades in a common
struggle. Marion and Hans-Dietrich are not foreigners as far as
I am concerned. They are partners and friends in joint
enterprises. And if one went around the room and started naming
people and drew lines among the relationships, there would be

many who feel exactly the same way. The task of organizations
like this is to see that the next generation in the 21st century
looks back and at a similar period of time says our problem is
that we accomplished everything we set out to do. Provided what
they set out to do is big enough to be worthy of those efforts.

Thank you very much.

DEC 17 '96 16:02

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

RECEPTION AND DINNER

HONORING

DR. HENRY A. KISSINGER

GENERAL JOHN GALVIN

Welcome ladies and gentlemen. Herzliche Wilkommen, meine sehr geehrter Damen und Herren. I would like to take this moment to welcome all of you and especially a few people. Secretary General Boutros-Ghali, we are very happy to have you with us tonight. Minister Genscher, Ambassador Chrobog, Ambassador Eitel, Ambassador Holbrooke, Maestro Masur, Marion Countess Dönhoff, Senator Mac Mathias and Ambassador and Mrs. Stabreit. I would also like to congratulate Guido Goldman, who has been Chairman of the Steering Committee that has put this program together. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to you all!

And now a special welcome to the Kissinger family. Nancy Kissinger; Walter Kissinger, Henry's brother; and Paula, Mrs. Louis Kissinger, Henry's mother, who is here tonight; and, if I can ask him to stand, Secretary Henry Kissinger--we are so glad that you could be with us tonight.

A standing ovation and grateful tribute to a man who has given so much to his country!

I will restrict my own words tonight and try to be an example to everyone else. But as a soldier, I recognize and admire Henry Kissinger's extraordinarily accurate understanding of the meaning of power, policy, and politics, and how they work in the international system. His brilliantly pragmatic articulation of that understanding over a long passage of time and a long series of events is something that I know you admire very much. It is therefore eminently fitting that the President of the United States has chosen to send a personal message to him. I will read that message now. From the White House, dated today:

President Bill Clinton

I am delighted to join the members of the American Council on
Germany in paying tribute to Dr. Henry A. Kissinger.

As one of America's foremost statesmen, Dr. Kissinger has
played a vital role in shaping our nation's modern diplomatic
history. His ability to negotiate effectively, along with
his keen awareness of the concerns of America's allies, were
pillars of the policy that ultimately led to democracy's
triumph in the Cold War. Those of us who grapple with the
complex foreign policy issues facing our country appreciate
his continuing contributions to our national security and

DEC 17 '96 16:03

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

PAGE. 003

value his steadfast advocacy of American internationalism.

It is especially fitting that the American Council on Germany has chosen to honor Dr. Kissinger for his strong and productive support of U.S.-German ties. A close friend of the Council's founder, John J. McCloy, Dr. Kissinger understands the importance of the German-American relationship to world stability and has done much to reaffirm that relationship. I know that Dr. Kissinger, as a Board Member of the American Council on Germany, will continue to strengthen the friendship between our two countries, and I congratulate him on this great honor.

And now ladies and gentleman, may I introduce Juergen Chrobog, the Ambassador of the Federal Republic of Germany to the United States, who will also read a message. May I thank him for being a good friend to the American Council on Germany.

AMBASSADOR JUERGEN CHROBOG

Ladies and gentlemen, I have the honor to read to you a personal message from Chancellor Kohl to Henry Kissinger.

Chancellor Helmut Kohl

Dear Friend,

During your long and successful political career, in particular as Secretary of State of the United States of America, you made a very personal contribution towards intensifying German-American relations.

The friendship between Germany and the United States of America, which developed anew after the Second World War, was a result of the generous assistance given by the citizens of the U.S.A. for the needy German people. The Marshall Plan and the Berlin airlift were some of the crucial prerequisites for peace and freedom over the last few decades and for the attainment of German unity.

However, friendship is not an abstract term but, rather, must be revitalized regularly. Mr. Kissinger, as a statesman, you have enriched relations between our two countries and provided them with important impetus through your extraordinary commitment. We are deeply indebted to you for this, particularly in view of your own biography.

AMBASSADOR CHROBOG

DEC 17 '96 16:04

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

PAGE. 004

Dr. Kissinger, please allow me as German Ambassador to the United
States to join Chancellor Kohl in thanking you for all you have
done to strengthen German-American relations. Thank you.

GENERAL GALVIN

I have the great honor of saying a couple of words about a young
man I have known for 28 years, since we worked together in
Secretary of Defense McNamara's office on "The Pentagon Papers."
I was a writer, and he was more a director, but I am very proud
to have known him over these three decades. As you know, Dick
Holbrooke has been the Ambassador to Germany in recent years. He
has been a negotiator *par excellence* in all that he has done. I
would like to remind you that it is precisely one year to the day
since the Dayton Agreements were signed. In fact, Dick has come
to us tonight directly from Dayton, where there was another
meeting to discuss the furtherance of the Dayton Agreements. So
it gives me the greatest pleasure and a great sense of honor to
introduce at this time my old friend, Ambassador Richard
Holbrooke, one of the people with the highest profile in this
country today. Thank you for being here.

AMBASSADOR RICHARD HOLBROOKE

Thank you so much General Galvin, Dr. and Mrs. Kissinger, Mrs.
Kissinger, Secretary General Boutros-Ghali, fellow Democrats.
Paul Volcker recently asked Henry Kissinger if he thought the
political elite was in decline. And he replied "No, but I am
getting lonely." I am truly honored by Jack Galvin's invitation
to join you tonight. It is true I came from Dayton, where we
were commemorating the first anniversary of the Agreements and
talking about where we go from here. But this was not a hard
decision. I am a private citizen now, and the chance to honor
Henry Kissinger, whom I have known for 30 years, was something I
did not want to turn down.

We go back a long way. We first met in Vietnam, when I was a
junior Foreign Service Officer, and he was already one of the
most distinguished members of the American academic community and
an advisor to the Johnson Administration. Our paths crossed many
times--not always on the same side--but, I am glad to say,
usually on the same side. Above all, in regard to two issues of
central concern to both him and me: China and Germany. He and
I and Nancy Kissinger have been together in both countries. I am
particularly grateful to him for his help, when, quite
unexpectedly, Secretary Christopher and President Clinton asked
me to go to Germany as Ambassador in May of 1993. This was a job
that I had never thought would be offered to me and had never
even thought about. My first call, after I received the offer,
was to my mother, who, as many of you know, was born in Germany,
left in 1933, and never returned. Her answer, falling back in
her native tongue, was "Ach, das noch."

DEC 17 '96 16:04

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

Then I called Henry Kissinger, and after a long pause, he absorbed the news and said "Ach, das noch." Henry was enormously supportive. First, he sent messages to the German government, as Ambassador Chrobog, then Political Director at the German Foreign Ministry, knows, saying that even though I knew nothing about Germany, Germany should give me a chance. He then sent messages to the Chancellor and to other Germans including Hans-Dietrich Genscher and gave me a great deal of advice. All of which--and I am not joking--I followed carefully. To be with Henry in Germany is an extraordinary experience. He speaks to the Germans as an American but with a special understanding, one that is so important to all of us. I think it is very fitting that this great organization, The American Council on Germany, with which I am proud to be associated, with its roots in the John McCloy era, but with its view to the future, honors Henry tonight. I am intensely grateful to him.

One of the many things we tried to do during my ambassadorship in Germany was to find ways to make the transition from the era of John McCloy to the post Cold War era--the era when there would be no more American troops in Berlin, and the American troop presence in Germany would be reduced. On my last weekend in Germany--in Berlin--as the American, British and French troops left Berlin for the last time in a very solemn ceremony, we inaugurated an attempt to leave a legacy behind in Germany. The "American Academy in Berlin" is to be modeled after the American Academy of Rome. I was delighted that Henry Kissinger joined President Richard von Weizsäcker as Co-Chairman of this enterprise, which is still in the process of being formed and which has recently asked me to join its Board as Chairman. Many of you in this room have already supported this effort, and we will collect the rest of your names at the door. But this is an important effort, and the fact that Henry Kissinger is associated with it demonstrates that he is not only a living testament to the past German-American relationship but is, like all of us in this room, trying to look to the future. How do we build an enduring tie for a new generation of Americans and Germans who will soon only look back on the Cold War as a receding memory. You in this room do not need to be told about the relationship. But the next generation will need to be told, and so projects like this are very important.

So Henry, I thank you again for your support and your friendship, your advice, and Nancy's friendship. It is wonderful to see your mother here, and I am honored to be part of this wonderful evening. Thank you very much.

GENERAL GALVIN

We are lucky enough, ladies and gentlemen, to have with us former Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher, someone that in my years

DEC 17 '96 16:05

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

PAGE. 005

in Germany I grew to admire greatly. He is a man who has established a record that no one can match in terms of service to his country in that position or, indeed, in comparison with anybody around the world. And so, without any further ado, I would like to ask Hans-Dietrich Genscher to come and take the podium. Thank you for being with us tonight, Minister Genscher.

HIS EXCELLENCY HANS DIETRICH GENSCHER

Ladies and gentleman, dear Henry Kissinger, members of the Kissinger family. When the American Council on Germany asked me to write a speech and make remarks in honor of Henry Kissinger, I immediately agreed to this with great pleasure. I did so not only because I am among those who regard Henry Kissinger as an outstanding statesman, a brilliant historian, and a political analyst. Henry Kissinger is also an old and good friend of mine and, more importantly, he was my mentor. He introduced me to the art of diplomacy. Not many can claim this.

I met Henry Kissinger for the first time in Bad Reichenal after his famous press conference in Salzburg in summer 1974, shortly after I had been appointed Foreign Minister. At that time, America went through an extremely difficult period. During these months, Henry Kissinger rendered this country great service while the decision was being made for President Gerald Ford to take office in August 1974. In particular, he clearly indicated to the Soviet Union that any attempt to exploit this period of American weakness was doomed to failure. This was very important for us in Germany. Henry Kissinger's importance, however, extended far beyond foreign policy. In those days, I used to describe this as a circus tent, in which Kissinger performed the most daring artistic feats under the circus top high above the spectators. The public gazed spellbound upwards toward the unique artist and no longer saw the President below entangled in his fight for political survival.

Henry Kissinger not only impressed me with his outstanding professional skills at our first meeting. At that meeting, I was in the Chair of the European Community, and I had to explain to the American Secretary that we, Europeans would start the so-called "European-Arab Dialogue." Henry was totally opposed to the idea. I had to explain to him that this was the best idea the Europeans had ever had. In order to give his young colleague a chance to tell his own colleagues of his success, Henry said finally, "Good, Mr. Minister, I agree, this dialogue is, of course, totally useless but fortunately not very dangerous." Although he was the undisputed star among the foreign ministers, he never exploited the reputation of the country he represented. From the very beginning, Henry tried to establish a good working personal relationship with his new German colleague. This good working relationship became a true and long lasting friendship.

Henry Kissinger's open and constructive attitude toward Germany

DEC 17 '96 16:06

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

was anything but self-evident. In 1938, Henry and his family had to leave their hometown of Fuerth in Germany under terrible circumstances. Seven years later, Henry Kissinger returned to a totally destroyed Germany as an American citizen and as a member of the American troops. Despite all that had happened to him and his family, Henry played a major role within the strategic community of postWar America in explaining and analyzing the problems of Germany and European politics objectively and without any bitterness.

Almost exactly 30 years ago Henry Kissinger predicted, in one of his brilliant articles treating the "German question" as a problem of European and international security, that German unity would come as a result of a long process of fundamental change in East-West relations, including the diminishing roles of frontiers in Europe. Already at that time, Henry Kissinger was convinced that any progress toward German unity could only be achieved in a European context including the United States. Reading this article and comparing it with the events of 1989-1990, one can only admire the vision of the author. Due to his deep understanding of Germany and Europe, Henry Kissinger played a key role in shaping East/West relations during the formative period of the early '70s. During negotiations on the CSCE Final Act, he supported a particular German interest introducing a clause concerning the possibility of a peaceful change of existing borders in Europe. We owe it to Henry Kissinger's understanding and America's support that despite strong Soviet resistance, the principle of peaceful change was ultimately accepted by all CSCE states. Its consequences went far beyond Helsinki and Henry's term of office. Recognition of the principle of peaceful change became an essential precondition for overcoming the division of Germany. For me, as newly appointed Foreign Minister, the way in which Henry Kissinger handled the question of peaceful change proved how seriously the United States took the particular concerns of a divided German nation in the center of Europe. This experience was confirmed in the decisive years of 1989 and 1990. The strong support of the American people and the American government, in particular President Bush and Secretary of State Baker, were essential preconditions for German unity.

There are many examples of Henry Kissinger's firmness whenever vital German interests were at stake during the Cold War. I would only like to quote one: In July 1974, I went to San Clemente in order to meet President Nixon. When Henry Kissinger and I were waiting for the President, we were informed that transit on the motorway between the Federal Republic of Germany and West Berlin had been stopped. In this dramatic situation, I witnessed the manner in which Henry Kissinger used the whole weight of the world power of the United States in order to safeguard our common interests. He immediately instructed his close collaborator, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, to stop the ongoing talks between the U.S. and the so-called G.D.R. on the establishment of diplomatic relations. Furthermore, through his collaborator

DEC 17 '96 16:07

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

Hartmann, he let the Soviets know that the United States would regard any further impediment of transit from the Federal Republic to Berlin as a matter between themselves and the Soviet Union. Henry Kissinger's determined and clear reaction made a deep impression, and fortunately not only on me.

Henry Kissinger's attitude toward Germany and Europe has always been determined by his deep conviction that the fate of Europe is of vital importance for America. Already in his brilliant analysis of the troubled Atlantic partnership in 1965, Henry Kissinger had pointed out that the close relationship between America and Europe is an essential precondition for a stable world order based on the principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. That remains true also after the end of the division of Germany and Europe. Again and again, Henry Kissinger has explained to Americans and Europeans that there are no partners in world politics who have more in common than Europe and America.

After the end of the Cold War and on the threshold of the 21st century, Europe and America are facing new challenges on a global scale. They will only meet them and contribute to a stable and cooperative world order by acting closely together. Henry Kissinger has taught us that there are no simple answers to complex questions. He never believed that "blueprints" or "master plans" are useful for foreign policy. That is also my conviction in this ever more complex world. For him, any success in foreign policy must rely on a sound balance between pursuit of our interests and respect for our common values--peace, democracy, and freedom for mankind. It applies to America, and it applies to Europe. At the end of his great book on diplomacy, Henry Kissinger quotes a Spanish proverb in order to highlight the particularly difficult character of diplomacy. "Traveler, there are no roads. Roads are made by walking." This is true, but the more complex our world becomes, the more we need personalities who know where we come from and the direction we should take. Henry Kissinger is such a personality.

Dear Henry, we have every reason to thank you for what you achieved, not only for your country, but also for Germany and Europe. We will need you and your advice also in the future, in America as well as in Europe. Thank you very much.

GENERAL GALVIN

Thank you Minister Genscher. I now have the great honor to introduce one of Henry Kissinger's closest friends and compatriots, a woman who helped to found and publish over the years the great weekly newspaper, *Die Zeit*, and who has been its guiding spirit for a long time, a woman we are very happy to have with us here tonight: Marion Countess Dönhoff.

DEC 17 '96 16:07

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

MARION COUNTESS DONHOFF

Dear Henry, my thoughts go back forty years. It was in 1955 that we met for the first time in Harvard through Ham Armstrong, the editor of *Foreign Affairs*. You were then a young academician, who only a year before had gotten a PhD. I was fascinated by Henry's brilliant intellect and his world wide interests in politics. Hence, I felt this relationship absolutely must not vanish. We must continue it. He promised to let me know the next time he came to Germany. When he came, I invited him to lunch to the best restaurant that then existed. We had a delicious meal, drank a lot, and talked endlessly. I cannot quite remember what it was all about, but unforgettable was his answer to my question: "What kind of person is Mr. so and so?" Henry's answer: "He's one who knows everything and nothing else." Eventually we had to leave. But when I opened my purse in order to pay, I grew pale. There was nothing in my purse. Henry's deadpan reaction was "den Trick werde ich mir merken." ("I will make note of that trick.") And he paid the bill.

His first book, *A World Restored*, appeared in 1957. I was present when he gave his first speech in Berlin, the "Wallenberg Lecture," in which he referred to that book. He mentioned how impatiently he had waited for the first review. When it eventually appeared, the reviewer, according to Henry, had written, "I do not know whether this author is a great author. I only know that he who reads this book must be a great reader." I do not know anyone as quick in his reactions and as pertinent in his remarks as Henry Kissinger. In 1975, Bundespräsident Walter Scheel presented Jack McCloy, in honor of his 80th birthday, a donation which later became known as The John J. McCloy Fund. Kissinger gave a luncheon. He had just returned from one of his many journeys to the Near East and was, as usual, overburdened with problems. Everybody therefore waited with great attention when he began saying, "My most worrying problem has always been the act of the American constitution which does not allow me to become a candidate for the U.S. presidency, because I was not born in this country." But, he went on, "Now I have found a solution. I propose that Bavaria (where Strauss was ruling) be attached to the United States as a 51st state." And looking at Walter Scheel, he said, "From what I hear, Mr. President I think that this might also solve some of your problems."

Of Henry Kissinger's many achievements what I admire most is that he succeeded in changing America's intellectual approach to foreign policy. Until Kissinger, Kennedy's efforts notwithstanding, the rather simplistic ideology of John Foster Dulles, who divided the world into good and bad people, still prevailed. Remember that Dulles refused to shake hands with Chou En Lai because he was a communist. And Dean Rusk insisted that Taiwan, with 15 million people, was China and that mainland China, 1800 million Chinese, did not exist.

DEC 17 '96 16:08

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

Last year, Fritz Stern and I were invited for a weekend to Henry's Dacha. We spent an exciting evening together, discussing world affairs in all their aspects. This went on into next morning over breakfast. Somehow we eventually got to the question of whether an individual can influence the course of history. My argument: consider Hitler, who was badly wounded in the First World War; if he had been killed, there would have been no Nazism in Germany. Perhaps an authoritarian government as in Poland, Portugal, or Italy at the time, but no Nazism. If no Nazism, then the Second World War would not have taken place. If no Second World War, then no partition of Europe. I went on and on with my escalation. Suddenly one could hear Henry's voice: "And then I would be Oberlehrer (a schoolteacher) in Fuerth!"

Ladies and gentlemen, my country has brought many disasters to many nations. But sometimes other countries have also profited from Germany. Austria got from us its most prominent statesman, Prince Metternich, England its famous musician, Georg Friedrich Handel, and America the greatest Foreign Secretary in this century, Henry Kissinger.

## GENERAL GALVIN

I was once present when someone introduced Henry Kissinger. I think it was in Stuttgart. I learned something from that because that person said, "Everybody in the room knows Henry Kissinger, and so there is really no need for me to say anything." Henry got up. It was rather quiet, and he looked around and said "I suppose that was a good introduction, but a few superlatives would have been all right."

I was once in a distant, isolated place with him, when we landed in an airplane to get fuel. I never mentioned this anywhere, but it was something that affected me very much about Henry Kissinger. There are lots of things that are said about Henry Kissinger and his superb ego. In this instance, a television team there had heard that an important person was on this airplane, but they did not know who the important person was. As Henry and I were walking through the airport, they stopped us and said, "We know that there is an important person on this plane, and we would like to interview that person if possible." They were very polite people but unbelievably naive. "The important person," I said, "is Henry Kissinger, and here he is." They wanted to ask him some questions, but then they stumbled all over themselves. Finally, Henry said, "Well a good question would be this," and he gave them a question. And they said, "Thank you very much sir. Would you assume that we asked you that question?" And he said, "Yes and, as a matter of fact, I have an answer to that question." And it went on like that. He could have said that they didn't matter, as the place was very, very small. But it was so good of him--the way he handled it-- and I gained a lot more respect for him for that. And so ladies and gentlemen, I would like to introduce to you tonight, the

DEC 17 '96 16:09

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

Oberlehrer von Fuerth, Henry Kissinger.

DR. HENRY KISSINGER

DEC 17 '96 16:10

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

PAGE. 012

Now, people often refer to my birth in Germany and to the ties
that were formed then. But the Germany that I have been most
closely associated with and feel most closely connected to is the
postwar Germany. I arrived with an American infantry division in
a country totally destroyed. The younger generation that did not
live through it cannot imagine the rubble of those cities, the
absence of any communications. I mention it only to point out
the moral strength it took even to begin the process of
rebuilding physically. Then out of this rubble grew a democratic
society, which around 1949 made a heroic decision for which it
has never has received full credit. Namely, that the leaders of
democratic Germany, having been offered unification in return for
neutrality, nevertheless decided they would rather keep the
country divided, so that they could remain tied to the democratic
west rather than to embark again on an uncertain cause of
nationalism. It was a heroic decision. Nobody could predict at
that time that it would never end. Or how it would end. It is
in this period that a community of values and a community of
interests grew up between Germany and America and Germany and
Europe. Without this, the Cold War would not have come to the
conclusion that it did. Now the two sides of the Atlantic find
themselves in the position that they have achieved everything
they set out to do forty years ago. And the question arises
whether that unity that brought us so far was a necessity of a
particular danger or has a deeper purpose.

DEC 17 '96 16:11

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

In our country, one of the favorite parlor games of intellectuals and politicians is to debate the question: Should American foreign policy be informed by moral principles in dedication to democracy, or should it be conducted on the basis of Realpolitik? I usually mention this horrible example of Realpolitik as "somebody that reads Metternich and Bismarck by candlelight." But the fact is pure Realpolitik is not possible because all tough decisions are 51-49, and those are the easier ones. 50.1-49.9 and without strong moral conviction. In some moral compass, statesmanship becomes a prescription for a nervous breakdown. So the question is not whether we should be animated by commitment to democracy.

DEC 17 '96 16:11

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

Thank you very much.

GUIDO GOLDMAN

I want to first of all thank everybody who was part of this
evening. Also to say to Henry that I think the Council is video
taping the events, and I think you will have a copy of the video
in a few days.

Three very quick points. First, I don't know Henry as long as
Marion has known him. I met Henry when I was an undergraduate at
Harvard. In thinking about this extraordinary man and his
contribution to German-American understanding, you have to take
into account that remarkable chapter in his life when he was an
academic, a scholar, and a teacher. It made a huge impression on
many people, including myself.

DEC 17 '96 16:12

FROM AMER COUNCIL GERMANY

Secondly, Marion touched on something very profound regarding how great talent has left Germany to go elsewhere. Certainly Henry is an example of great talent. I think Kurt Masur is an example of great talent. But what Henry did in this country is really very remarkable. He essentially became someone who was able to project American values and American power. Very few people who come from one society to another, especially at the age in which he did, are able to do that. That puts him in a very small class of people who are remarkably gifted. They can take an opportunity and make of it something that extends beyond the normal dimensions of human endeavor.

Finally, I think Henry is a great example of what it is we try do at the Council. Among the founders of the Council, the person who I want to mention is Eric Warburg, because Eric represented a family that was both German and American very early in this century. He made a very big contribution on both sides of the Atlantic. He came here, helped found this organization with Jack McCloy, and went back to Germany. His daughter Maria is with us this evening. I think Henry is the most outstanding example of what we at the Council try to do. So we are pleased to have had the opportunity to honor you. And in that spirit, I want to wish you all a very good evening.

Thank you.

** TOTAL PAGE. 015 **

Translation

The Federal Republic of Germany
The Federal Chancellor

Bonn, 31 October 1996

Dear Friend,

The friendship between Germany and the United States of America, which developed anew after the Second World War as a result of the generous assistance given by the citizens of the USA for the needy German people, the Marshall Plan and the Berlin airlift, was one of the crucial prerequisites for peace and freedom over the last few decades and for the attainment of German unity.

However, friendship is not an abstract term but, rather, must be revitalized regularly. Mr Kissinger, as a statesman you have enriched relations between our two countries and provided them with important impetus through your extraordinary commitment. We are deeply indebted to you for this, particularly in view of your own biography.

Speech by Hans-Dietrich Genscher, MdB
on the occasion of a dinner
in honor of Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
on 20 November 1996 in New York

Thank you very much for your friendly welcome. It is a
pleasure to honor such __________. But, __________
we are invited to honor Henry Kissinger.

When the American Council on Germany asked me to hold a
speech in honor of Henry Kissinger, I immediately agreed
with great pleasure. I did so, not only because I belong to
those who regard Henry Kissinger as an outstanding
statesman, as a brilliant historian and political analyst.
Henry Kissinger is an old and good friend of mine. And he
was my mentor; he introduced me into the art of diplomacy.
Not many can lay claim on this. This dinner provides the
opportunity to thank Henry for what he did: that, __________
my hometown Halle is part of united Germany. I expressed my
gratitude already in December 1993 in Halle, in the presence
of Mikhail Gorbachev for at least(?) the center and the
__________ heart of Germany.

I met Henry Kissinger for the first time in Bad Reichenhall
in summer 1974, shortly after I had been appointed foreign
minister. At that time America went through an extremely
difficult period. In these months Henry Kissinger rendered
his country great services in the transitional period until
President Gerald Ford took office in August 1974. In
particular, he clearly indicated to the Soviet Union that
any attempt to exploit this period of America's weakness was
doomed to failure.

Henry Kissinger's importance, however, extended far beyond
the area of foreign policy. In those days, I used to
explain this with the image of a circus tent, in which
Kissinger performed the most daring artistic feats under the
circus top, high above the spectators. The public gazes
spellbound upwards at the unique artist and no longer sees
the President below entangled in his fight for political
survival.

Henry Kissinger did not only impress me with his
outstanding professional skills already at our very first

2

meeting. Although he was the undisputed star among the foreign ministers, he never exploited his reputation or the importance of the country he represented. From the very beginning Henry tried to establish a good-working personal relationship with his new German colleague. This good-working relationship became a true and long-lasting friendship.

Henry Kissinger's open and constructive attitude towards Germany was anything but self-evident. In 1938, Henry Kissinger and his family had to leave their hometown of Fürth in Germany under terrible circumstances. Seven years later Henry Kissinger returned to a totally destroyed Germany, now as an American citizen and as a member of the American troops. Despite all that had happened to him and his family, Henry Kissinger played a major role within the strategic community of the postwar America in explaining and analyzing the problems of German and European politics with objectivity and without bitterness.

Almost exactly thirty years ago, Henry Kissinger predicted in a brilliant article on the "German question as a problem of European and International security" that German unity would come as the result of a long process and following fundamental changes in East-West relations, including a diminishing role of ideology as well as of frontiers in Europe. During negotiations on the CSCE-final act, he supported the particular German interest in introducing a clause concerning the possibility of a peaceful change of existing borders in Europe. We owe it to Henry Kissinger's understanding and America's support that --despite strong Soviet resistance--the principle of peaceful change was ultimately accepted by all CSCE-states.

Its consequences went far beyond Helsinki and Henry's term of office; the recognition of the principle of peaceful change became an essential precondition for keeping open the option for overcoming the division of Germany. Already at that time Henry Kissinger was convinced that any progress towards German unity could only be achieved in a European context and including the USA. Rereading this article and comparing it with the events taking place in 1989/1990, one can only admire the vision of the author.

3

It was due to his deep understanding of Germany and Europe that Henry Kissinger could play a key role in shaping East-West relations during the formative period of the early seventies.

For me, as newly appointed German foreign minister, the way in which Henry Kissinger handled the question of peaceful change proved how seriously the USA took the particular concerns of a divided German nation in the center of Europe. This experience had been confirmed in the decisive years of 1989/1990; the strong support of the American people and the American government was an essential precondition for German unity in (in German).

In July 1974 I went to San Clemente in order to meet with President Nixon. When Henry Kissinger and I were waiting for the President, we were informed that the transit on the motorway between the Federal Republic of Germany and West Berlin had been stopped. In this dramatic situation I witnessed the manner in which Henry Kissinger used the whole weight of the world power of the USA in order to safeguard our common interests. He immediately instructed his close collaborator, Helmut Sonnenfeldt, to stop the ongoing talks between the USA and the GDR on the establishment of diplomatic relations. Furthermore, Henry and his collaborator (Sonnenfeldt?) let Soviets know that the US would regard any further impediment of transit from the Federal Republic to Berlin as a matter between themselves and the Soviet Union. Henry Kissinger's determined and clear reaction made a deep impression on me--fortunately not only on me.

Henry Kissinger's attitude toward Germany and Europe had always been determined by his deep conviction that the fate of Europe is of vital importance for America. Already in his brilliant analysis dating from 1965 on "The Troubled Partnership", Henry Kissinger had pointed out that the close relationship between America and Europe is an essential precondition for a stable world order, based on the principles of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. That remains true also after the end of the division of

4

Germany and Europe. Again and again Henry Kissinger has explained to Americans and Europeans that there are no partners in world politics who have more in common than Europe and America.

After the end of the cold war and on the threshold to the 21st century, Europe and America are facing new challenges on a global scale. They will only meet them and contribute to a stable and cooperative world order by acting closely together.

Henry Kissinger has taught us that there are no simple answers to complex questions. He never believed that blueprints or master-plans are of any use in foreign policy. That is also my conviction, and it is all the more true in an ever complex world. For him, any successful foreign policy has to rely on a sound balance between the pursuit of our interests and respect for our common values--peace, democracy, and freedom for mankind. That applies to America, and it applies to Europe.

At the end of his great book on diplomacy, Henry Kissinger quotes a Spanish proverb, in order to highlight the particularly difficult character of diplomacy: "Traveler, there are no roads. Roads are made by walking." This is true, but the more complex our world becomes, the more we need personalities who know where we come from and the direction we should take.

Dear Henry, we have every reason to thank you for what you achieved, not only for your country but also for Germany and Europe. We will need you and your advice also in the future--in America as well as in Europe.