FINAL as submitted
3/24/05

Welt am Sonntag
Edited March 24, 2005

Interview with Dr. Kissinger

It seems that the Alliance in Iraq is falling apart. First Italy and then
Bulgaria have announced the withdrawal of their troops from Iraq by the
end of the year. What are the consequences?

**Henry Kissinger:** The European contribution to security is less important now; the major challenge is political construction. Within the next two or three years, the situation in Iraq will either evolve towards stability or towards chaos. But if you look at the European history, it took several centuries for democracy to develop in its present form. If Iraq becomes a success without allied help, the Europeans might be a little ashamed of themselves.

And if it fails...

**Kissinger:** ...they will be victims together with us. We will have the same problem with an unstable region, the Middle East.

Hasn't the case of Iraq proven that we need more legitimacy for military
use?

1

**Kissinger:** Of course, it is true that if a country tries to base an international system on power, it will exhaust itself. But you can't replace power by an abstract idea of legitimacy. The challenge is to find a balance between security and legitimacy. The American problem is to translate power into legitimacy. The European problem is to recognize that legitimacy must have some objective basis, some sort of security equilibrium. The task is to find the balance between these conceptions.

*Do you think that after the experience with Iraq the US is more likely to accept that Europeans put more emphasis on the use of "soft power" in situations of conflict?*

**Kissinger:** America is not running the world and should not try to run the world. If the Europeans want to put the emphasis on soft power, they should do so. What matters is the relevance to the existing problem. With regard to Iraq, the aim must be that the country becomes organized enough so it doesn't depend on military force. Until you reach that point, you can't avoid the issue of military force.

*What about Iran where the Europeans are trying to denuclearize the country by diplomatic means?*

2

**Kissinger:** Iran is a good test case of both proliferation and US-European cooperation. We should support what the Europeans are doing diplomatically. But the test of European policy will come when diplomacy either succeeds or fails. If it stalemates, which I think is likely, then the challenge is to decide on other measures.

*Do you think that the Europeans are ready to take other measures if
diplomacy fails?*

**Kissinger:** Not at this moment. And then we will have a new crisis. If we accept that Iran is becoming a nuclear country, Egypt and Turkey and others will also become nuclear countries. We will then live in a totally different world in which the possibility of nuclear material getting into unauthorized hands is infinite. We don't avoid the problem with Iran by ducking it.

*How realistic is the military option?*

3

**Kissinger:** This is not the time to discuss a military scenario for Iran.

This is a time to get clear about what the alternatives are down the road
and to see whether a common analysis can be developed.

*Another growing transatlantic conflict is the European ambition to lift the EU weapons embargo against China.*

**Kissinger:** I am one of the principal American advocates for having close and cooperative relations with China. Every effort must be made to integrate China into the international community. But I think the embargo is not a great issue on which to fight this battle. The Europeans are saying: "We are lifting the sanctions, but we won't deliver weapons." Then why have this tremendous fight? I think the effort to lift the embargo was bound to provoke a reaction from the United States. At the same time, I think that some Americans exaggerate in their reactions to it.

*Do we still need the transatlantic partnership as a fundament for international relations?*

4

**Henry Kissinger:** I matured in a world in which transatlantic relations were considered as a psychological necessity. For the United States, it was the symbolic and philosophical break with isolationism. For Europe, it was a way to restore its history, its dignity and its importance. For Germany, in particular, the problem was how to emerge from the total isolation and achieve a respectable position. This kind of psychological bond of my generation is ending on both sides of the Atlantic. But I still believe that Atlantic relations are crucial because we are moving into a world which is totally unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of India, a new national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred million people. Those are going to be centers of powers tied together by globalization. Therefore, the question is: Can the nations of the West with parallel cultures develop parallel policies? Will they deal with problems as common problems or will they deal with them by the traditions of the nation-state with which they grew up?

*Will on the American side the neoconservatives continue to dominate US foreign policy?*

**Kissinger:** The caricature in Europe of both George W. Bush and the Republicans is vastly exaggerated. The Europeans should understand

5

that this is a strong President with considerable leadership abilities and
that he heads a Republican party with many different views. Some of
them are international-minded, strong on foreign policy and liberal on
social reforms. Others are more missionary. The neoconservatives are
influential, but not dominant.

But in the spotlight, you'll find hawks like Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense, whom Bush has chosen as the US nominee to head the World Bank.

**Kissinger:** Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as Ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as Assistant Secretary for Asia will confirm to you that he was a strong promoter of democracy and social progress in those countries. The Wolfowitz opponents will be surprised how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms he will be on the progressive side.

*What about the second much contested nomination: John Bolton, the designated US Ambassador to the United Nations?*

**Kissinger:** He is different. He is a traditional conservative.

6

And a traditional unilateralist...

**Kissinger:** On the question of unilateralism and multilateralism, the issue is more complicated than it is often presented in Europe. It arises primarily when there are fundamental differences of opinions. And then any country has to decide whether it will give a veto over his convictions regarding its security to foreign countries, or whether it carries out its own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country says on an issue like Iraq: "This is so important that we cannot give a veto to other countries," than this is not necessarily a unilateralist approach. The challenge is to harmonize underlying purposes, not to stress slogans.

*Germany was in line with France and other European countries.*

**Kissinger:** We were with England and a group of others. But the issue is not numbers; it is whether we can still define an underlying community of interest.

7

There is the discussion to change the US Constitution so that foreign-born politicians like Arnold Schwarzenegger could become President of the United States. This must sound familiar to you because it was also discussed when you became the first foreign-born Secretary of State of the US. Will it happen this time?

**Kissinger:** Whenever a person emerges who might have a chance to get elected, such an amendment will not pass because the existing politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the Constitution is a process which takes a decade. I think it will happen eventually, not because of people like Schwarzenegger and me, but because of the influence of the Latin population. Sooner or later, there will be candidates from the Latin side.

Do you think that in 2008 the US is ready for a female president? Some even predict a race between Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton?

**Kissinger:** There is no possible way that Condoleezza Rice could become a candidate while she is the Secretary of State. She would have to resign a year ahead of it. Practically, I don't think it could happen, although she certainly has the qualities for it. Hillary certainly wants to run. She is

8

certainly qualified, but who knows what hidden prejudices of an election
of a woman president will appear in a secret ballot.

*You left Germany in 1938 at the age of 15. Do you still feel German
sometimes, at least partly?*

**Kissinger:** My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific.

Yet I have never lost a very special feeling for the country of my birth. Its development and role in the world mean a great deal to me; to me, it is never an entirely foreign country. I still follow the soccer of my hometown...

...the city of Fürth in Bavaria....

**Kissinger:** ...which I fear will disappoint me again. I was hoping they would make it into the Bundesliga, but it doesn't look like it. I understand Germany better than most countries and think about it more. Do I feel European? Probably, yes, to some extent.

*Are there moments when you don't feel American?*

9

**Kissinger:** When you have come to America as a refugee, you have a special gratitude to America and its democracy. Almost all the people from my background are very impatient with the assaults on American purposes, even when we recognize America's weaknesses. We know what America meant to us in our hour of need. In the internal debate in America, there is a tendency to be more ideological than I am comfortable with. Whenever people say there is a final solution to the problems we have, I have trouble with that. On the other hand, I recognize that the idealism of the Americans is an important aspect in the world. Many of the good things wouldn't have been done without it. When I was a young professor, I called President Harry S. Truman, who was then retired. I asked: "What are you most proud of?" He answered: "I am most proud of that we totally defeated our enemies and then we brought them back to the community of nations - as equals." I think this is a very American attitude.

Interview conducted by Miriam Hollstein for "Welt am Sonntag"

10

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 24, 2005

## Interview with Dr. Kissinger

It seems that the Alliance in Iraq is falling apart. First Italy and then Bulgaria have announced the withdrawal of their troops Iraq by the end of the year. What are the consequences?

**Henry Kissinger:** The European contribution to security is less important now; the major challenge is political construction. Within the next two or three years, the situation in Iraq will either evolve towards stability or towards chaos. But if you look at the European history, it took several centuries for democracy to develop in its present form. If Iraq becomes a success, without allied help, the Europeans might be a little ashamed of themselves.

And if it fails...

1

2

**Kissinger:** Iran is a good test-case of both proliferation and US-European cooperation. We should support what the Europeans are doing diplomatically. But the test of European policy will come when diplomacy either succeeds or fails. If it stalemates, which I think is likely, then the challenge is to decide on other measures.

3

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 24, 2005

This is a time to get clear about what the alternatives are down the road
and to see whether a common analysis could be developed.

*Another growing transatlantic conflict is the European ambition to lift the EU weapon embargo against China.*

**Kissinger:** I am one of the principal American advocates for having close and cooperative relations with China. Every effort must be made to integrate China into the international community. But I think the embargo is not a great issue on which to fight this battle. The Europeans are saying: We are lifting the sanctions but we won't deliver weapons.

4

**Henry Kissinger:** I matured in a world in which transatlantic relations were considered as a psychological necessity. For the United States, it was the symbolic and philosophical break with isolationism. For Europe, it was a way to restore its history, its dignity and its importance. For Germany in particular the problem was how to emerge from the total isolation and achieve a respectable position. This kind of psychological bond of my generation is ending on both sides of the Atlantic. But I still believe that the Atlantic relations are crucial because we are moving into a world which is totally unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of India, a new national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred million people. Those are going to be centers of powers tied together by globalization. Therefore the question is: Can the nations of the West with parallel cultures develop parallel policies? Will they deal with problems as common problems or will they deal with it by the traditions of the nation-state with which they grew up?

*Willon the American side the Neoconservatives continue to dominate US foreign policy?*

5

that this is a strong President with considerable leadership abilities and
that he heads a Republic party with many different views. Some of them
are international-minded, strong on foreign policy and liberal on social
reforms. Others are more missionary. The neo-conservatives are
influential, but not dominant.

But in the spotlight you'll find hawks like Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy
Secretary of Defense, who Bush has chosen as the US nominee to head the
World Bank.

**Kissinger:** Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as Ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as Assistant Secretary for Asia will confirm to you that Wolfowitz was a strong promoter of democracy and social progress in those countries. The Wolfowitz opponents will be surprised how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms he will be on the progressive side.

6

**Kissinger:** On the question of unilateralism and multilateralism, the issue is more complicated than it is often presented in Europe. It arises primarily when there are fundamental differences of opinions. And then any country has to decide whether it will give a veto over his convictions regarding its security to foreign countries or whether it carries out its own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto to other countries, then this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. The challenge is to harmonize underlying purposes, not to stress slogans.

*There is the discussion to change constitution that foreign-born politicians like Arnold Schwarzenegger could become President of the United States.*

7

*This must sound familiar to you because it was also discussed when you became the first foreign-born Secretary of State of the US. Will it happen this time?*

**Kissinger:** Whenever a person emerges who might have a chance to get elected, such an amendment will not pass because the existing politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the constitution is a process which takes a decade. I think it will happen eventually, not because of people like Schwarzenegger and me but because of influence of Latin population. Sooner or later there will be candidates from the Latin side.

*Do you think that in 2008 the US is ready for a female president? Some even predict a race between Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton?*

**Kissinger:** There is no possible way that Condoleezza Rice could become a candidate while she is the Secretary of State. She would have to resign a year ahead of it. Practically, I don't think it could happen although she certainly has the quality for it. Hillary certainly wants to run. She is certainly qualified but who knows what hidden prejudices of an election of a woman president will appear in a secret ballot.

8

**Kissinger:** My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific. Yet, I have never lost a very special feeling for the country of my birth. Its development and role in the world mean a great deal to me; to me it is never an entirely foreign country. I still follow the soccer of my hometown...

9

from my background are very impatient the assaults on American
purposes, even when we recognize America's weaknesses. We know what
America meant to us in our hours of need. In the internal debate in
America, there is a tendency to be more ideological than I am comfortable
with. Whenever people say there is a final solution to the problems we
have, I have trouble with that. On the other hand, I recognize that the
idealism of the Americans is an important aspect in the world. Many of
the good things wouldn't have been done without it. When I was a young
professor, I called President Harry S. Truman who was then retired. I
asked: What are you most proud of? He answered: I am most proud of
that we totally defeated our enemies and then we brought them back to
the community of nations - as equals. I think this is a very American
attitude.

10

Theresa Cimino

LCJ

From: TMS [tms@mail.funne.com]

Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 3:16 PM

To: Kissinger, Henry - English

Subject: 3/25 Henry Kissinger

20050325tp--t.a.do 20050325tp--t.a.tx

c (24 KB)

t (11 KB)

HENRY KISSINGER

For immediate release

Attention editors: This interview between Henry Kissinger and Miriam Hollstein of Welt am Sonntag magazine is being sent as a bonus column.

ŒA SPECIAL GRATITUDE TO AMERICA AND ITS DEMOCRACY¹

By Henry A. Kissinger

WELT AM SONNTAG: It seems that the Alliance in Iraq is falling apart. First Italy and then Bulgaria have announced the withdrawal of their troops from Iraq by the end of the year. What are the consequences?

HENRY KISSINGER: The European contribution to security is less important now; the major challenge is political construction. Within the next two or three years, the situation in Iraq will either evolve toward stability or toward chaos. But if you look at the European history, it took several centuries for democracy to develop in its present form. If Iraq becomes a success without allied help, the Europeans might be a little ashamed of themselves.

WELT AM SONNTAG: And if it fails?

KISSINGER: They will be victims together with us. We will have the same problem with an unstable region, the Middle East.

WELT AM SONNTAG: Hasn't the case of Iraq proven that we need more legitimacy for military use?

KISSINGER: Of course, it is true that if a country tries to base an international system on power, it will exhaust itself. But you can't replace power by an abstract idea of legitimacy. The challenge is to find a balance between security and legitimacy. The American problem is to translate power into legitimacy. The European problem is to recognize that legitimacy must have some objective basis, some sort of security equilibrium. The task is to find the balance between these conceptions.

WELT AM SONNTAG: Do you think that after the experience with Iraq, the U.S. is more likely to accept that Europeans put more emphasis on the use of ³soft power² in situations of conflict?

KISSINGER: America is not running the world and should not try to run the world. If the Europeans want to put the emphasis on soft power, they should do so. What matters is the relevance to the existing problem. With regard to Iraq, the aim must be that the country becomes organized enough so it doesn't depend on military force. Until you reach that point, you can't avoid the issue of military force.

WELT AM SONNTAG: What about Iran, where the Europeans are trying to denuclearize the country by diplomatic means?

KISSINGER: Iran is a good test case of both proliferation and U.S.-European cooperation. We should support what the Europeans are doing diplomatically.

1

**WELT AM SONNTAG:** Do you think that the Europeans are ready to take other measures if diplomacy fails?

**KISSINGER:** Not at this moment. And then we will have a new crisis. If we accept that Iran is becoming a nuclear country, Egypt and Turkey and others will also become nuclear countries. We will then live in a totally different world, in which the possibility of nuclear material getting into unauthorized hands is infinite. We don't avoid the problem with Iran by ducking it.

**WELT AM SONNTAG:** How realistic is the military option?

**KISSINGER:** This is not the time to discuss a military scenario for Iran. This is a time to get clear about what the alternatives are down the road and to see whether a common analysis can be developed.

**WELT AM SONNTAG:** Another growing transatlantic conflict is the European ambition to lift the EU weapons embargo against China.

**KISSINGER:** I am one of the principal American advocates for having close and cooperative relations with China. Every effort must be made to integrate China into the international community. But I think the embargo is not a great issue on which to fight this battle. The Europeans are saying: ³We are lifting the sanctions, but we won't deliver weapons.² Then why have this tremendous fight? I think the effort to lift the embargo was bound to provoke a reaction from the United States. At the same time, I think that some Americans exaggerate in their reactions to it.

**WELT AM SONNTAG:** Do we still need the transatlantic partnership as a fundament for international relations?

**KISSINGER:** I matured in a world in which transatlantic relations were considered a psychological necessity. For the United States, it was the symbolic and philosophical break with isolationism. For Europe, it was a way to restore its history, its dignity and its importance. For Germany, in particular, the problem was how to emerge from the total isolation and achieve a respectable position. This kind of psychological bond of my generation is ending on both sides of the Atlantic. But I still believe that Atlantic relations are crucial because we are moving into a world which is totally unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of India, a new national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred million people. Those are going to be centers of powers tied together by globalization.

**WELT AM SONNTAG:** On the American, will side the neoconservatives continue to dominate U.S. foreign policy?

**KISSINGER:** The caricature in Europe of both George W. Bush and the Republicans is vastly exaggerated. The Europeans should understand that this is a strong president with considerable leadership abilities and that he heads a Republican party with many different views. Some of them are international-minded, strong on foreign policy and liberal on social reforms. Others are more missionary. The neoconservatives are influential, but not dominant.

**WELT AM SONNTAG:** But in the spotlight, you'll find hawks like Paul

2

Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense, whom Bush has chosen as the U.S. nominee to head the World Bank.

KISSINGER: Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as assistant secretary for Asia will confirm to you that he was a strong promoter of democracy and social progress in those countries. The Wolfowitz opponents will be surprised at how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms, he will be on the progressive side.

WELT AM SONNTAG: What about the second much-contested nomination, John Bolton, the designated U.S. ambassador to the United Nations?

KISSINGER: He is different. He is a traditional conservative.

WELT AM SONNTAG: And a traditional unilateralist.

KISSINGER: On the question of unilateralism and multilateralism, the issue is more complicated than it is often presented in Europe. It arises primarily when there are fundamental differences of opinions. And then any country has to decide whether it will give a veto over his convictions regarding its security to foreign countries, or whether it carries out its own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country says on an issue like Iraq: ³This is so important that we cannot give a veto to other countries,² than this is not necessarily a unilateralist approach. The challenge is to harmonize underlying purposes, not to stress slogans.

WELT AM SONNTAG: Germany was in line with France and other European countries.

KISSINGER: We were with England and a group of others. But the issue is not numbers; it is whether we can still define an underlying community of interest.

WELT AM SONNTAG: There is the discussion to change the U.S. Constitution so that foreign-born politicians like Arnold Schwarzenegger could become president of the United States. This must sound familiar to you, because it was also discussed when you became the first foreign-born secretary of state of the U.S. Will it happen this time?

KISSINGER: Whenever a person emerges who might have a chance to get elected, such an amendment will not pass because the existing politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the Constitution is a process that takes a decade. I think it will happen eventually, not because of people like Schwarzenegger and me, but because of the influence of the Latin population. Sooner or later, there will be candidates from the Latin side.

WELT AM SONNTAG: Do you think that in 2008 the U.S. will be ready for a female president? Some even predict a race between Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton.

KISSINGER: There is no possible way that Condoleezza Rice could become a candidate while she is the secretary of state. She would have to resign a year ahead of it. Practically, I don't think it could happen, although she certainly has the qualities for it. Hillary certainly wants to run. She is certainly qualified, but who knows what hidden prejudices of an election of a woman president will appear in a secret ballot?

WELT AM SONNTAG: You left Germany in 1938 at the age of 15. Do you still feel German sometimes, at least partly?

KISSINGER: My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific. Yet I have never lost a very special feeling for the country of my birth. Its development and role in the world mean a great deal to me; to me, it is never an entirely foreign country. I still follow the soccer of my hometown.

3

WELT AM SONNTAG: The city of Furth in Bavaria.

KISSINGER: ... which I fear will disappoint me again. I was hoping they would make it into the Bundesliga, but it doesn't look like it. I understand Germany better than most countries and think about it more. Do I feel European? Probably, yes, to some extent.

WELT AM SONNTAG: Are there moments when you don't feel American?

KISSINGER: When you have come to America as a refugee, you have a special gratitude to America and its democracy. Almost all the people from my background are very impatient with the assaults on American purposes, even when we recognize America's weaknesses. We know what America meant to us in our hour of need. In the internal debate in America, there is a tendency to be more ideological than I am comfortable with. Whenever people say there is a final solution to the problems we have, I have trouble with that. On the other hand, I recognize that the idealism of the Americans is an important aspect in the world. Many of the good things wouldn't have been done without it. When I was a young professor, I called President Harry S. Truman, who was then retired. I asked: ³What are you most proud of?² He answered: ³I am most proud that we totally defeated our enemies and then we brought them back to the community of nations < as equals.² I think this is a very American attitude.

© 2005 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.

4

Digital copy of the interview with Dr. Kissinger in Welt am Sonntag

Page 1 of 1

Jessee Incao

From: miriam.hollstein@wams.de

Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 9:32 AM

To: jincao@kmaglobal.com

Subject: Digital copy of the interview with Dr. Kissinger in Welt am Sonntag

<<WS%23WAMS%2327.03.05%23WSBE-HP%23POLITIK%2311%2311.pdf>>

MAR 30 2005

Dear Jessee:

Please find enclosed a digital copy of the interview with Dr. Kissinger which we published last Sunday in "Welt am Sonntag". I will send a paper version today. If you need anything else, please let me know.

3/30/2005

With your edits

3/24/05

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

And if it fails...

1

Welt am Sonntag
Edited March 23, 2005

**Kissinger:** Of course, it is true that if you try to find an international system on power, you will exhaust yourself. But you can't replace power by an abstract idea of legitimacy. The challenge is to find a balance between security and legitimacy. The American problem is to translate power into legitimacy. The European problem is to recognize that legitimacy must have some objective basis, some sort of security equilibrium.

The task is to find the balance between the
unipolar world.

**Kissinger:** America is not running the world. If the Europeans want to put the emphasis on soft power, they should do so. What matters is the relevance to the existing problem. With regard to Iraq, the aim is that the country becomes organized enough so it doesn't depend on military force. Until you reach that point, you can't avoid the issue of military force.

2

CYJ

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

**Kissinger:** Iran is a good test-case. We should support what the Europeans are doing diplomatically. But the test of European policy will come when diplomacy either succeeds or fails. If it **stays effective**, which I think is likely, then the challenge is to decide on other measures.

**Kissinger:** Not at this moment. And then we will have a new crisis. If we accept that Iran is becoming a nuclear country, Egypt and Turkey and others will also become nuclear countries. We will then **stay active** in a totally different world in which the possibility of nuclear material getting into unauthorized hands is infinite. We don't avoid the problem with Iran by ducking it.

**Kissinger:** This is not the time to discuss a military scenario for Iran. This is a time to get clear about what the alternatives are down the road and to see whether a common analysis could be developed.

3

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

**Kissinger:** I am one of the principal American advocates for having close and cooperative relations with China. Every effort must be made to integrate China into the international community. But I think the embargo is not a great issue on which to fight this battle. The Europeans are saying: We are lifting the sanctions but we won't deliver weapons. Then why have this tremendous fight? I think the effort to lift the embargo was bound to provoke a reaction from the United States. At the same time, I think that some Americans exaggerate in their reactions to it.

*Do we still need the transatlantic partnership as a fundament for*
*international relations?*

4

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

isolation and achieve a respectable position. This kind of psychological
on best not of the Atlantic
bond of my generation is ending. But I still believe that the Atlantic
relations are crucial because we are moving into a world which is totally
unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of India, a new
national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred million people.
Those are going to be centers of powers tied together by globalization.
Therefore the real question is: Can the nations of the West with parallel
cultures develop parallel policies? Will they deal with problems as
common problems or will they deal with it by the traditions of the nation-
state with which they grew up?

**Kissinger:** The caricature in Europe of both George W. Bush and the Republicans is vastly exaggerated. The Europeans should understand that this is a strong President with considerable leadership abilities and that he heads a Republic [party] with many different views. Some of them are international-minded, strong on foreign policy and liberal on social reforms. Others are more missionary. The neo-conservatives are influential, but not dominant.

5

**Kissinger:** Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as Ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as Assistant Secretary for Asia will confirm to you that Wolfowitz was a strong promoter of democracy and social progress in those countries. The Wolfowitz *& J. F. Kennedy* will be surprised how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms he will be on the progressive side.

*And a traditional unilateralist...*

6

primarily when there are fundamental differences of opinions. And then
any country has to decide whether it will give a veto over his convictions
regarding its security to foreign countries or whether it carries out its
own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country
says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto
to other countries, than this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. The
challenge is to harmonize underlying purposes. not & sten stigam

There is the discussion to change constitution that foreign-born politicians
like Arnold Schwarzenegger could become President of the United States.
This must sound familiar to you because it was also discussed when you
became the first foreign-born Secretary of State of the US. Will it happen
this time?

7

**Kissinger:** Whenever you have a person who might have a chance to get elected, such an amendment will not pass because the existing politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the constitution is a process which takes a decade. I think it will happen eventually, not because of people like Schwarzenegger and me but because of influence of Latin population. Sooner or later there will be candidates from the Latin side.

8

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

**Kissinger:** My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific. (I have never lost a very special feeling for the country of my birth. I still follow the soccer of my hometown...

**Kissinger:** ....which I fear will disappoint me again. I was hoping they would make it into the Bundesliga, but it doesn't look like it. I understand Germany better than most countries and think about it more. Do I feel European? Probably, yes, to some extent.

**Kissinger:** When you have come to America as a refugee, you have a special gratitude to America and its democracy. Almost all the people from my background are very impatient with the assaults on American purposes, even when we recognize America's weaknesses. We know what America meant to us in our hours of need. In the internal debate in America, there is a tendency to be more ideological than I am comfortable with. Whenever people say there is a solution to the problems we have and we will do it in two years, I have trouble with that. On the other

9

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

10

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

And if it fails...

1

2

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

**Kissinger:** Iran is a good test-case. We should support what the Europeans are doing diplomatically. But the test of European policy will come when diplomacy either succeeds or fails. If it ______, which I think is likely, then the challenge is to decide on other measures.

**Kissinger:** Not at this moment. And then we will have a new crisis. If we accept that Iran is becoming a nuclear country, Egypt and Turkey and others will also become nuclear countries. We will then **[live?]** in a totally different world in which the possibility of nuclear material getting into unauthorized hands is infinite. We don't avoid the problem with Iran by ducking it.

3

4

Welt am Sonntag

Edited March 23, 2005

isolation and achieve a respectable position. This kind of psychological
bond of my generation is ending. But I still believe that the Atlantic
relations are crucial because we are moving into a world which is totally
unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of India, a new
national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred million people.
Those are going to be centers of powers tied together by globalization.
Therefore the real question is: Can the nations of the West with parallel
cultures develop parallel policies? Will they deal with problems as
common problems or will they deal with it by the traditions of the nation-
state with which they grew up?

5

**Kissinger:** Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as Ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as Assistant Secretary for Asia will confirm to you that Wolfowitz was a strong promoter of democracy and social progress in those countries. The Wolfowitz of __________ will be surprised how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms he will be on the progressive side.

6

primarily when there are fundamental differences of opinions. And then
any country has to decide whether it will give a veto over his convictions
regarding its security to foreign countries or whether it carries out its
own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country
says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto
to other countries, than this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. The
challenge is to harmonize underlying purposes.

*There is the discussion to change constitution that foreign-born politicians like Arnold Schwarzenegger could become President of the United States. This must sound familiar to you because it was also discussed when you became the first foreign-born Secretary of State of the US. Will it happen this time?*

7

**Kissinger:** Whenever you have a person who might have a chance to get elected, such an amendment will never pass because the existing politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the constitution is a process which takes a decade. I think it will happen eventually, not because of people like Schwarzenegger and me but because of influence of Latin population. Sooner or later there will be candidates from the Latin side.

8

**Kissinger:** My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific. I have never lost a very special feeling for the country of my birth. I still follow the soccer of my hometown...

9

10

Welt am Sonntag
original Transcript

3/23/05

with HAK
edits

Interview with Dr. Kissinger

**Henry Kissinger:** We don't need the European anymore for military security is no important now, it's more for challenges things because now it is a question of the political construction. Within the next two or three years, the situation in Iraq will either evolve towards stability or towards chaos. At this moment, it is hard to tell. But if you look at the European history, it took several centuries for democracy to develop in its present form. If the Iraq becomes a success, all this help the Europeans might be a little ashamed of themselves.

And if it fails...

[Y]

**Kissinger:** Of course, it is true that if you try to found an international system on power, you will exhaust yourself. But you can't replace power completely by an abstract idea of legitimacy. The challenge is to find a balance between security and legitimacy. The American problem is to translate power into legitimacy. The European problem is to recognize that legitimacy must have some objective basis, some sort of equilibrium.

**Kissinger:** America is not running the world. If the Europeans want to put the emphasis on soft power, there is nothing we could do to stop it. And by the way, the Europeans are not the first to discover the magic trick of soft power. It was the United States who had the Marshall Plan. With regard to Iraq, the aim is that the country becomes organized enough so it doesn't depend on military force. Until you reach that point, you can't avoid the issue of military force.

**Kissinger:** Iran is a good test-case. We should support what the Europeans are doing. But the test of European policy will come when either succeeds or fails. If it fails, then the challenge is to decide on other measures.

**Kissinger:** Well, And then we will have a new crisis. If we accept that Iran is becoming a nuclear country, Egypt and Turkey and others will also become nuclear countries. We will then in a totally different world in which the possibility of nuclear material getting into unauthorized hands is infinite. We don't avoid the problem with Iran by ducking it.

**Kissinger:** I am one of the principal advocates for having relations with China. Every effort must be made to integrate China into the international community. But I think the embargo is not a great issue on which to fight this battle. The Europeans are saying: We are lifting the sanctions but we won't deliver weapons. Then why have this tremendous fight? I think the effort to lift the embargo is aimed at provoking a reaction from the United States. At the same time, I think that some Americans exaggerate in their reactions to it.

**Henry Kissinger:** I grew up in an atmosphere in which transatlantic relations were considered as a psychological necessity. For the United States, it was the symbolic and philosophical break with isolationism. For Europe, it was a way to restore its history, its dignity and its importance. For Germany in particular the problem was how to emerge from the total isolation and achieve a respectable position. This kind of

psychological ~~bound~~ of my generation is ending. But I still believe that the Atlantic relations are crucial because we are moving into a world which is totally unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of India, a new national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred million people. Those are going to be centres of powers tied together by ~~lon~~ globalization. Therefore the real question is: Do the nations of the West ~~mett~~ *develolly parallel policies* remain parallel cultures. Will they deal with problems as common problems or will they deal with it by the traditions of the nation-state with which they grew up?

**Kissinger:** The caricature in Europe of both George W. Bush and the Republicans is sort of ridiculous. The Europeans should understand that this is a strong President with considerable leadership abilities and that ~~Le leadsa~~ *wile manydifficult men* the Republicans are a mixed group. Some of them are international minded, strong on foreign policy and liberal on social reforms. *Albus are more missiminy. The neo-conservative are influential but not dominant.*

**Kissinger:** Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as Ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as Assistant Secretary for Asia will confirm to you that Wolfowitz was a strong promoter of democracy in those regions. The number of Wolfowitz people will be surprised how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms he will be on the progressive side.

any country has to decide whether it will give a veto against his
convictions for approval foreign countries or whether it carries out its
own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country
says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto
to other countries than this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. You
in Germany could equally well say that Germany conducted a unilateralist policy in
terms of the alliance.

Kissinger: We were with England and a lot more

This must sound familiar to you because it was also discussed when you
became the first foreign-born Secretary of State of the U.S. Will it happen
this time?

**Kissinger:** Whenever you have a person who might have a chance to get elected, then such an amendment will never pass. Because the existing politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the

any country has to decide whether it will give a veto against his
convictions for approval foreign countries or whether it carries out its
own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country
says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto
to other countries than this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. You
is &amp;唇&唇&唇&唇&唇 could equally well say that Germany conducted a unilateralist policy in
terms of the alliance.

This must sound familiar to you because it was also discussed when you
became the first foreign-born Secretary of State of the United States. Will it happen
this time?

any country has to decide whether it will give a veto against his
convictions for approval foreign countries or whether it carries out its
own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country
says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto
to other countries than this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. You
is to be considered an unhelpful purpose
could equally well say that Germany conducted a unilateralist policy in
terms of the alliance.

M

**Kissinger:** There is no possible way that Condoleezza Rice could become a candidate while she is the Secretary of State. She would have to resign a year ahead of it. Practically, I don't think it could happen although she certainly has the quality for it. Hillary certainly wants to run. She is certainly qualified but who know what hidden prejudices of an election of a woman president will appear in a secret ballot.

**Kissinger:** My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific, but I have never seen a very special feeling for the country of my birth. Yet there is this strange thing that I still follow the soccer of my hometown...

**Kissinger:** ...which will disappoint me again. I was hoping they would make it into the first league but it doesn't look like it. I don't feel German but of course I understand Germany better, speaking the language. Do I feel European? Probably, yes, to some extent.

**Kissinger:** When you have come to America as a refugee, you have a special gratitude to America and its democracy. Almost all the people from my background are very impatient with these arguments that US policy is fascist even when we recognize the weaknesses. In the internal debate in America there is a tendency to be more ideological than I am comfortable with. Whenever people say there is a solution to the problems we have and we will do it in a two years, I have trouble with that. On the other hand, I recognize that the idealism of the Americans is an important aspect in the world. Many of the good things wouldn't have been done without it. When I was a young professor, I called President Harry S. Truman who was then retired. I asked: What are you most

proud of? He answered: I am most proud of that we totally defeated our
enemies and then we brought them back to the community of nations –
as equals. I think this is a very American attitude.

Welt am Sonntag Interview
Original Transcript from Hollstein 3/23/05

Interview with Dr. Kissinger

**Henry Kissinger:** We don't need the Europeans anymore for military things because now it is a question of the political construction. Within the next two or three years, the situation in Iraq will either evolve towards stability or towards chaos. At this moment, it is hard to tell. But if you look at the European history, it took several centuries for democracy to develop in its present form. If the Iraq becomes a success, the Europeans might be a little ashamed of themselves.

And if it fails...

1

**Kissinger:** America is not running the world. If the Europeans want to put the emphasis on soft power, there is nothing we could do to stop them. And by the way: the Europeans are not the first to discover the magic trick of soft power. It was the United States who had the Marshall Plan. With regard to Iraq, the aim is that the country becomes organized enough so it doesn't depend on military force. Until you reach that point, you can't avoid the issue of military force.

2

**Kissinger:** Iran is a good test-case. We should support what the Europeans are doing. But the test of European policy will come when diplomacy fails which I think is likely.

**Kissinger:** No. And then we will have a new crisis. If we accept that Iran is becoming a nuclear country, Egypt and Turkey and others will also become nuclear countries. We will then in a totally different world in which the possibility of nuclear material getting into unauthorized hands is infinite. We don't avoid the problem with Iran by ducking it.

3

**Kissinger:** I am one of the principal advocates for having relations with China. Every effort must be made to integrate China into the international community. But I think the embargo is not a great issue on which to fight this battle. The Europeans are saying: We are lifting the sanctions but we won't deliver weapons. Then why have this tremendous fight? I think the effort to lift the embargo aims at provoking a reaction from the United States. At the same time, I think that some Americans exaggerate in their reactions to it.

4

psychological bound of my generation is ending. But I still believe that
the Atlantic relations are crucial because we are moving into a world
which is totally unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of
India, a new national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred
million people. Those are going to be centres of powers tied together by
globalization. Therefore the real question is: Do the nations of the West
remain parallel cultures. Will they deal with problems as common
problems or will they deal with it by the traditions of the nation-state
with which they grew up?

**Kissinger:** The caricature in Europe of both George W. Bush and the Republicans is sort of ridiculous. The Europeans should understand that this is a strong President with considerable leadership abilities and that the Republicans are a mixed group. Some of them are international minded, strong on foreign policy and liberal on social reforms.

5

**Kissinger:** Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as Ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as Assistant Secretary for Asia will confirm to you that Wolfowitz was a strong promoter of democracy in those regions. The Wolfowitz people will be surprised how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms he will be on the progressive side.

6

any country has to decide whether it will give a veto against his
convictions for approval foreign countries or whether it carries out its
own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country
says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto
to other countries than this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. You
could equally well say that Germany conducted a unilateralist policy in
terms of the alliance.

Kissinger: We were with England and a lot more.

Kissinger: Whenever you have a person who might have a chance to get
elected, then such an amendment will never pass. Because the existing
politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the

7

**Kissinger:** My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific but yet there is this strange thing that I still follow the soccer of my hometown...

8

9

10

Message

Page 1 of 3

Jessee Incao

Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 9:13 AM

To: jincao@kmaglobal.com

Subject: The Interview for Welt am Sonntag - German Version

Im Irak bröckelt die Allianz. Nach Italien hat nun auch Bulgarien angekündigt, bis Ende des
Jahres seine Truppen aus dem Irak abziehen zu wollen. Welche Auswirkungen hat das?

Henry Kissinger: Für die militärischen Fragen brauchen wir die Europäer nicht mehr, weil es jetzt um den politischen Wiederaufbau geht. Die nächsten zwei bis drei Jahre werden zeigen, ob sich der Irak in Richtung Stabilität oder Chaos entwickelt. Momentan ist das schwer abschätzbar. Aber wenn man die europäische Geschichte betrachtet, sieht man, daß die Demokratie dort mehrere Jahrhunderte brauchte, bis sie ihre heutige Form erreicht hatte.

Wenn der Irak ein Erfolg wird, werden sich die Europäer ein bißchen schämen.

Und wenn er ein Mißerfolg wird?

Kissinger: Dann werden wir alle Opfer sein, weil wir alle dasselbe Problem haben werden mit einer instabilen Region, dem Mittleren Osten.

Hat der Fall des Irak nicht gezeigt, daß für Militäreinsätze mehr Legitimität nötig ist?

Kissinger: Es ist natürlich richtig, daß man sich übernimmt, wenn man versucht, ein internationales System allein auf Macht zu gründen. Aber man kann Macht auch nicht einfach komplett durch eine abstrakte Vorstellung von Legitimität ersetzen. Die Herausforderung liegt darin, ein Gleichgewicht zwischen Sicherheit und Legitimität zu finden. Die Amerikaner haben Probleme damit, Macht in Legitimität zu übersetzen. Die Europäer haben Probleme damit, anzuerkennen, daß es für Legitimität eine objektive Basis geben muß, ein Gleichgewicht.

Glauben Sie, daß die Amerikaner nach der Erfahrung im Irak künftig gegenüber dem europäischen Konzept des Einsatzes von „Soft power" in Krisenfällen aufgeschlossener sein werden?

Kissinger: Amerika regiert nicht die Welt. Wenn die Europäer auf Soft power setzen wollen, können wir nichts dagegen tun. Im übrigen sind die Europäer ja nicht die Ersten, die den Zaubertrick mit der "weichen Macht" erfunden haben. Der Marshall Plan geht auf das Konto der Vereinigten Staaten. Was den Irak betrifft, ist das Ziel, daß das Land Stukturen erhält, die es vom Einsatz militärischer Gewalt unabhängig machen. Bis dies erreicht ist, ist das Thema militärische Gewalt unvermeidlich.

Wie sieht es mit dem Iran aus, den die Europäer mit diplomatischen Mitteln dazu bringen
wollen, sein Nuklearprogramm aufzugeben?

Kissinger: Der Iran ist ein guter Testfall. Wir sollten die Bemühungen der Europäer unterstützen. Aber für die europäische Strategie wird der Test kommen, wenn die Diplomatie scheitert, was ich für wahrscheinlich halte.

Glauben Sie, daß die Europäer in einem solchen Fall zu anderen Maßnahmen bereit sind?

Kissinger: Nein. Und dann werden wir eine neue Krise haben. Wenn wir hinnehmen, daß der Iran eine Nuklearmacht wird, werden auch Ägypten, die Türkei und andere zur Nuklearmacht werden. Als Folge werden wir in einer völlig veränderten Welt leben, in der die Wahrscheinlichkeit, daß Nuklearwaffen in kriminelle Hände geraten, groß ist. Wir entgehen also dem Problem mit dem Iran nicht, indem wir uns wegducken.

Wie realistisch ist denn die militärische Option?

Kissinger: Jetzt ist nicht die Zeit, ein militärisches Szenario für den Iran zu diskutieren. Wir sollten uns vielmehr darüber klar werden, welche Alternativen es gibt und ob wir eine

3/23/2005

Message

Page 2 of 3

gemeinsame Analyse entwickeln können.

Ein anderer Streitpunkt ist das europäische Bestreben, das EU-Waffenembargo gegen China aufzuheben.

Kissinger: Ich bin einer der größten Verfechter von guten Beziehungen zu China. Es sollte jede Anstrengung unternommen werden, um China in die internationale Gemeinschaft zu integrieren. Ich denke allerdings, das Embargo ist nicht das beste Thema, um diese Schlacht zu schlagen. Die Europäer sagen: Wir heben die Sanktionen auf, aber wir liefern keine Waffen. Warum dann einen Riesenstreit riskieren? Ich glaube, die Aufhebung des Embargos zielt vor allem darauf, Reaktionen aus den USA zu provozieren. Gleichzeitig denke ich, daß manche in Amerika übertrieben reagieren.

Brauchen wir die transatlantische Partnerschaft überhaupt noch als Fundament der internationalen Beziehungen?

Kissinger: Als ich aufwuchs, galten die transatlantischen Beziehungen als psychologische Notwendigkeit. Für die Vereinigten Staaten waren sie ein symbolischer und philosophischer Bruch mit dem Isolationismus. Für Europa war es ein Weg, seine Geschichte, seine Würde und seine Bedeutung wieder herzustellen. Insbesondere für Deutschland war das Problem, aus der völligen Isolation zu kommen und eine respektierte Position zu erreichen. Doch das psychologische Band, das meine Generation hatte, schwindet. Ich denke dennoch, daß die transatlantischen Beziehungen entscheidend sind, weil wir eine völlig neue Welt erleben werden. Wir werden den Aufstieg Chinas erleben, den Aufstieg Indiens und eine neue japanische Nationalpolitik. In Indonesien leben mehrere hundert Millionen Menschen. Dies werden die künftigen Machtzentren, verbunden durch die Globalisierung. Die wirkliche Frage ist daher: Werden die Nationen des Westen auch weiterhin parallele Kulturen haben?

Werden sie Probleme als gemeinsame Probleme angehen oder werden sie sie aus der Tradition des Nationalstaats heraus beantworten, mit der sie aufgewachsen sind?

Werden denn auf amerikanischer Seite weiterhin die Neokonservativen die Außenpolitik prägen?

Kissinger: Es ist ein wenig lächerlich, wie in Europa sowohl George W. Bush als auch die Republikaner porträtiert werden. Die Europäer müssen begreifen, daß dies ein starker Präsident mit beachtlichen Führungsqualitäten und die Republikaner eine gemischte Gruppe sind. Unter ihnen gibt es auch solche, die international orientiert sind, außenpolitisch sehr aktiv und liberal bei sozialen Fragen.

Aber im Vordergrund stehen „Falken“ wie Vizeverteidigungsminister Paul Wolfowitz, den Bush gerade für den Chefposten der Weltbank nominiert – sehr zum Mißfallen vieler Europäer.

Kissinger: Jeder, der Wolfowitz als Botschafter auf den Philippinen und in Indonesien oder als Staatssekretär für Asien kannte, wird Ihnen bestätigen, daß er die demokratischen Bemühungen in der Region stark unterstützt hat. Seine Leute werden überrascht sein, wie aufgeschlossen er sich in diesem Amt zeigen wird. Ich denke, daß er sich in sozialen Fragen als sehr progressiv erweisen wird.

Ein anderer Hardliner, John Bolton, soll US-Botschafter bei der Uno werden.

Kissinger: Er ist ein anderer Fall. Er ist ein traditioneller Konservativer.

…und ein traditioneller Befürworter, eines einseitigen militärischen Vorgehens.

Kissinger: Was die Frage von Unilateralismus versus Multilaterismus betrifft, ist das Thema komplizierter, als es in Europa dargestellt wird. Die Frage stellt sich vor allem, wenn es fundamentale Meinungsverschiedenheiten gibt. Und dann muß jedes Land entscheiden, ob es gegen seine Überzeugungen stimmt oder seine eigene Politik macht. Das hängt auch immer davon ab, wie wichtig eine Sache ist. Wenn ein Land zum Beispiel beim Irak sagt: Das ist so wichtig, daß wir nicht gegen unsere Überzeugungen stimmen können, ist das nicht unbedingt ein unilateraler Ansatz. Genauso gut könnte man sagen, daß Deutschland im Hinblick auf die Allianz eine unilaterale Politik betrieben hat.

3/23/2005

Message

Page 3 of 3

Immerhin war es dabei in der Gesellschaft von Frankreich und anderen europäischen Staaten.

Kissinger: Wir hatten England und viele mehr.

In den USA wird derzeit diskutiert, die Verfassung so zu ändern, daß im Ausland geborene Politiker wie Arnold Schwarzenegger Präsident werden können. Die Diskussion gab es schon einmal, als Sie Außenminister waren. Sehen Sie diesmal Chancen dafür?

Kissinger: Nicht solange eine Person da ist, die ernsthaft gewählt werden könnte. Weil die anderen Politiker keine zusätzlichen Rivalen wollen. Außerdem braucht ein solcher Prozeß Jahre. Ich glaube aber, daß es am Ende passieren wird, nicht wegen Leuten wie Schwarzenegger oder mir sondern wegen des wachsenden Einflusses der Latinos in den USA. Früher oder später wird es von ihrer Seite Kandidaten geben.

Glauben Sie, daß die USA 2008 reif für eine Präsidentin ist? Manche sagen sogar ein Rennen zwischen Condoleezza Rice und Hillary Clinton vorher.

Kissinger: Solange Condoleezza Rice Außenministerin ist, sehe ich keine Möglichkeit, wie sie Präsidentschaftskandidatin werden könnte. Sie müßte mindestens ein Jahr vorher zurücktreten. Das halte ich für ausgeschlossen, auch wenn sie natürlich die Qualitäten dafür hätte. Hillary wird sicher antreten wollen. Auch sie ist auf alle Fälle qualifiziert, aber wer weiß, welche Ressentiments gegenüber weiblichen Kandidaten in geheimen Abstimmungen dann zutage treten werden?

Sie mußten 1938 als 15-Jähriger aus Deutschland fliehen. Gibt es Momente, in denen Sie sich noch deutsch fühlen?

Kissinger: Was ich in Deutschland vor dem Krieg erlebt habe, war nicht gerade großartig, aber es ist seltsam: Ich verfolge noch immer die Ergebnisse des Fußballclubs meiner Heimatstadt...

...Fürth in Franken....

Kissinger: ...der mich wohl wieder enttäuschen wird. Ich hatte gehofft, daß er es in die erste Liga schafft, aber es sieht nicht danach aus. Ich fühle mich nicht deutsch, aber natürlich verstehe ich Deutschland besser, schon allein, weil ich die Sprache verstehe. Fühle ich mich europäisch? Ich denke, ja, bis zu einem gewissen Grad.

Fühlen Sie sich manchmal „un-amerikanisch“?

Kissinger: Wenn man wie ich als Flüchtling nach Amerika gekommen ist, empfindet man eine besondere Dankbarkeit gegenüber diesem Land und seiner Demokratie. Fast alle Leute mit ähnlicher Biographie wie der meinen reagieren daher sehr ungeduldig auf Behauptungen, die amerikanische Politik sei faschistisch, auch wenn wir natürlich die Schwächen sehen. Es gibt in den USA die Tendenz, sehr ideologisch zu sein, die mir nicht liegt. Andererseits muß ich anerkennen, daß der Idealismus der Amerikaner wichtig für die Welt ist. Ohne ihn wären viele gute Dinge nicht geschehen. Als ich ein junger Professor war, rief ich den Präsidenten Harry S. Truman an, der damals schon im Ruhestand war. Ich fragte: Auf was sind Sie besonders stolz? Er antwortete: Am meisten bin ich darauf stolz, daß wir unsere Feinde völlig geschlagen und sie dann wieder in die Gemeinschaft der Völker zurückgebracht haben – als Gleiche unter Gleichen. Ich denke, das ist eine sehr amerikanische Haltung.

Die Fragen stellte Miriam Hollstein

3/23/2005

Message

Page 1 of 4

3/19/05

Jessee Incao

Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 9:11 AM

To: jincao@kmaglobal.com

Subject: AW: Confirmation for the interview with Dr. Kissinger

Jessee:

Could you please forward this to Dr. Kissinger? It is the English version of the interview we had last week. I will
sent the German version (slightly shorter) in a separate mail. I have one more question: When can we expect the
authorization for the interview? We want to publish it in our upcoming issue, therefore the deadline would be this
Friday.

Thanks again for your support in arranging the interview. It was very interesting and inspiring.

Interview with Dr. Kissinger

*It seems that the Alliance in Iraq is falling apart. First Italy and then Bulgaria have announced the withdrawal of their troops Iraq by the end of the year. What are the consequences?*

Henry Kissinger: We don't need the Europeans anymore for military things because now it is a question of the political construction. Within the next two or three years, the situation in Iraq will either evolve towards stability or towards chaos. At this moment, it is hard to tell. But if you look at the European history, it took several centuries for democracy to develop in its present form. If the Iraq becomes a success, the Europeans might be a little ashamed of themselves.

*And if it fails...*

Kissinger: ...they will be victims together with us. We will have the same problem with an unstable region, the Middle East.

*Hasn't the case of Iraq proven that we need more legitimacy for military use?*

Kissinger: Of course, it is true that if you try to found an international system on power, you will exhaust yourself. But you can't replace power completely by an abstract idea of legitimacy. The challenge is to find a balance between security and legitimacy. The American problem is to translate power into legitimacy. The European problem is to recognize that legitimacy must have some objective basis, some sort of equilibrium.

Kissinger: America is not running the world. If the Europeans want to put the emphasis on soft power, there is nothing we could do to stop them. And by the way: the Europeans are not the first to discover the magic trick of soft power. It was the United States who had the Marshall Plan. With regard to Iraq, the aim is that the country becomes organized enough so it doesn't depend on military force. Until you reach that point, you can't avoid the issue of military force.

Kissinger: Iran is a good test-case. We should support what the Europeans are doing. But the test of European policy will come when diplomacy fails which I think is likely.

Kissinger: No. And then we will have a new crisis. If we accept that Iran is becoming a nuclear country, Egypt and Turkey and others will also become nuclear countries. We will then in a totally different world in which the possibility of nuclear material getting into unauthorized hands is infinite. We don't avoid the problem with Iran by ducking it.

3/23/2005

Message

Page 2 of 4

Kissinger: This is not the time to discuss a military scenario for Iran. This is a time to get clear about what the alternatives are down the road and to see whether a common analysis could be developed.

Kissinger: I am one of the principal advocates for having relations with China. Every effort must be made to integrate China into the international community. But I think the embargo is not a great issue on which to fight this battle. The Europeans are saying: We are lifting the sanctions but we won't deliver weapons. Then why have this tremendous fight? I think the effort to lift the embargo aims at provoking a reaction from the United States. At the same time, I think that some Americans exaggerate in their reactions to it.

Henry Kissinger: I grew up in an atmosphere in which transatlantic relations were considered as a psychological necessity. For the United States, it was the symbolic and philosophical break with isolationism. For Europe, it was a way to restore its history, its dignity and its importance. For Germany in particular the problem was how to emerge from the total isolation and achieve a respectable position. This kind of psychological bound of my generation is ending. But I still believe that the Atlantic relations are crucial because we are moving into a world which is totally unprecedented. We will see the rise of China, the rise of India, a new national policy in Japan. Indonesia has several hundred million people. Those are going to be centres of powers tied together by globalization. Therefore the real question is: Do the nations of the West remain parallel cultures. Will they deal with problems as common problems or will they deal with it by the traditions of the nation-state with which they grew up?

Kissinger: The caricature in Europe of both George W. Bush and the Republicans is sort of ridiculous. The Europeans should understand that this is a strong President with considerable leadership abilities and that the Republicans are a mixed group. Some of them are international minded, strong on foreign policy and liberal on social reforms.

*But in the spotlight you'll find hawks like Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense, who Bush has chosen as the US nominee to head the World Bank.*

Kissinger: Anyone who knew Wolfowitz as Ambassador to the Philippines and to Indonesia or as Assistant Secretary for Asia will confirm to you that Wolfowitz was a strong promoter of democracy in those regions. The Wolfowitz people will be surprised how open-minded he will turn out to be. I think on the issues of democracy and social reforms he will be on the progressive side.

Kissinger: He is different. He is a traditional conservative.

Kissinger: On the question of unilateralism and multilateralism, the issue is more complicated than it is often presented in Europe. It arises primarily when there are fundamental differences of opinions. And then any country has to decide whether it will give a veto against his convictions for approval foreign countries or whether it carries out its own policy. This depends on the importance of the subject. If a country says on an issue like Iraq: this is so important that we cannot give a veto to other countries than this not necessarily a unilateralist approach. You could equally well say that Germany conducted a unilateralist policy in terms of the alliance.

Kissinger: Whenever you have a person who might have a chance to get elected, then such an amendment will never pass. Because the existing politicians don't want an additional competitor. To change the constitution is a process which takes a decade. I think it will happen eventually, not because

3/23/2005

Message

Page 3 of 4

Kissinger: There is no possible way that Condoleezza Rice could become a candidate while she is the Secretary of State. She would have to resign a year ahead of it. Practically, I don't think it could happen although she certainly has the quality for it. Hillary certainly wants to run. She is certainly qualified but who know what hidden prejudices of an election of a woman president will appear in a secret ballot.

Kissinger: My experience in Germany before the war was not terrific but yet there is this strange thing that I still follow the soccer of my hometown...

*...the city of Fürth in Bavaria....*

Kissinger: ...which will disappoint me again. I was hoping they would make it into the first league but it doesn't look like it. I don't feel German but of course I understand Germany better, speaking the language. Do I feel European? Probably, yes, to some extent.

Kissinger: When you have come to America as a refugee, you have a special gratitude to America and its democracy. Almost all the people from my background are very impatient with these arguments that US policy is fascist even when we recognize the weaknesses. In the internal debate in America there is a tendency to be more ideological than I am comfortable with. Whenever people say there is a solution to the problems we have and we will do it in a two years, I have trouble with that. On the other hand, I recognize that the idealism of the Americans is an important aspect in the world. Many of the good things wouldn't have been done without it. When I was a young professor, I called President Harry S. Truman who was then retired. I asked: What are you most proud of? He answered: I am most proud of that we totally defeated our enemies and then we brought them back to the community of nations – as equals. I think this is a very American attitude.

3/23/2005