ABRAHAM RIBCOFF

April 10, 1996

Dr. & Mrs. Henry Kissinger
435 East 52nd Street
New York, New York 10022

APR 15 1996

Dear Nancy and Henry:

Both of you are two best friends. We are so pleased that
you are in our lives.

That was, indeed, a special gift. The huge and fabulous
bottle of wine will be with me and you at all our birthdays so we can toast
one another.

AAR/eg

Robinson & Associates, Inc.

Charles W. Robinson, President

128 Grant Avenue, Suite 24
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501
(505) 988-5589

Mailing Address
P.O. Box 2224
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504
FAX (505) 988-5580

FEB 27 1996

February 23, 1996

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
Kissinger & Associates
350 Park Avenue
New York City, New York 10022

Dear Henry;

I had hoped to see you during my brief stay in New York last Thursday to discuss ways in which we might overcome the "US birth" rule to allow you to save us from the Pat Buchanan isolationist threat. I was not surprised but disappointed to miss you.

I would also like to bring you up to date on progress I'm making in commercializing my new Sail boat technology. This replaces the traditional keel and rudder with a "Canting Ballast Twin Foil" (CBTF) design. I'm enclosing:

- A Dyna Yacht Inc. brochure describing CBTF and our latest boat "Green Hornet", and

- An outline of racing results for this 38' boat since she went in the water in September last year.

You may recall that a year or two ago I mentioned this program and suggested that your good friend Agnelli might be interested. His response was that "it wouldn't work". Not only does it work but we are proceeding with commercial development in the U.S.. I have also concluded an agreement with another Italian sailing "nut" by the name of Sandro Buzzi, who knows Agnelli. He is President of a large cement company near Milano - "Cementi Buzzi" and has suggested that Agnelli contact him regarding our "CBTF" technology. He is installing this on a 60' international ocean racing hull which we designed for him to be built in Germany later this year.

Buzzi reports that Agnelli is also planning construction of a new racing sailboat and believes that Agnelli would be making a serious mistake not to consider our technology for which Buzzi has become one of our strongest supporters.

JAN-29-96 MON 03:04 PM DYNA YACHT

619 277 3066

P.01

DynaYacht Inc.

* The tow tank *measured it!*

* The VPP *predicted it!*

* The race course *proved it!*

The DynaFlyer 38 is the fastest monohull of its size!

No boat under 50 ft. has beaten the DF 38 on elapsed time to date.

* Jan. 96 Cabrillo Race 1 (33 miles)

1) Blondie: Santa Cruz 70

2) Lone Star - Nelson Marek 55

3) Green Hornet - DynaFlyer 38 (17'53" behind Blondie, 4'15" behind Lone Star)

Green Hornet finished ahead of 52 boats from 24ft - 57ft

* Jan. 96 San Diego New Year's Day Race (10miles)

1) Lone Star - Nelson 55

2) Green Hornet - DynaFlyer 38 (3'45" behind Lone Star)

Green Hornet finished ahead of 28 boats from 24 ft. - 57 ft.

* Oct. 95: SD- Ensenada (62 miles)

1 - 6) ULDB 70 footers

7) Lone Star - Nelson Marek 55

8) "Green Hornet" - DynaFlyer 38 (1'53" behind Lone Star)

"Green Hornet" finished ahead of 79 boats from 24ft. - 70ft

* Sept. 95. Dana Point - San Diego (54 miles)

1) Pyewacket - Turbocharged SC 70

2) Swiftsure - Nelson 70

3) Blondie - Santa Cruz 70

4) Climax - Barnet 52

5) Bombay Blaster - Santa Cruz 50

6) "Green Hornet" - DynaFlyer 38 (3'23" behind Bombay Blaster)

5) Two Dogs Gone - Santa Cruz 52

"Green Hornet" finished ahead of 36 boats from 24 ft - 54 ft

Elapsed time race results to date

The DF 38 by Hobie Cat will soon be available for about $99,000
for info: 619-758-9100 ext. 650

8170 RONSON ROAD
SUITE G
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
92111, USA

619.277.4551 PHONE
619.277.3066 FAX
619.636.0923 PAGER

DYI line@aol.com

DynaFlyer

YACHTS

X Interlux.
Coatings Supplier for DF-38

30 ROCKEFELLER PLAZA

NEW YORK, N.Y. 10112

ROOM 5600

(212) 649-5600

JAN 1 1 1996

January 9, 1996

Dear Henry:

I have learned from Mr. Patrick Gallagher, Executive Director of the Paley Foundation, that at your request they have made a grant of $5,000 to The Rockefeller University. What a nice thing for you to have done! You can be sure it will be put to good use, and all of us connected with the University are grateful to you.

Nancy has been a great help on the Board of the University. I am sure that the good word she put in with Bob Day, on behalf of a major grant the University had applied for from the Keck Foundation, played an important role in getting them to approve the $1.5 million we had asked for. She has had many other useful ideas as well.

It has been sometime since we have had a chance for a visit. Hopefully that can be corrected in the not too distant future.

All the best to Nancy and yourself for 1996!

The Honorable Henry A. Kissinger
Kissinger Associates
350 Park Avenue, 26th Floor
New York, N. Y. 10022

Victor K. Atkins

120 Montgomery Street, Suite 1880
San Francisco, California 94104

October 15, 1996

OCT 2 1 1996

Dear Henry:

I am sponsoring David Rockefeller, Jr. for non-resident membership in the Bohemian Club. He now fully meets the criteria to be considered for Preferential Consideration by the Membership Committee. Would you feel comfortable and be willing to help with this process?

If yes, please promptly address a letter to:

Mr. John H. Bickel
Chairman Membership Committee
Bohemian Club
624 Taylor Street
San Francisco, CA 94102

In your letter, urging Preferential Consideration, please cover how well you know David and express your opinion, if elected, that he can and will render outstanding service to Bohemia.

David has expressed keen interest in proceeding with this process and plans to assist by making at least one trip to San Francisco prior to the 1997 Grove. From my letter (enclosed), you can observe he has already shown strong interest in rendering outstanding service by participating in Preachers' Sons Night and other shows while a Grove guest.

Please let me know if I can help with any additional input or if you are not completely comfortable writing. Many thanks in advance.

Dr. Henry Kissinger
Kissinger Associates
350 Park Avenue, 26th floor
New York, N.Y. 10022

VICTOR K. ATKINS

120 MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE 1080
BANJERTRUDE, CALIFORNIA 94104

(415) 788-3170

July 31, 1996

Mr. John H. Bickel, Chairman
Membership Committee
Bohemian Club
624 Taylor Street
San Francisco, CA 94102

Dear Jack:

I am writing to strongly urge preferential consideration of David Rockefeller, Jr., for non-resident membership in the Club.

David has demonstrated his Bohemian Temperament by enthusiastically participating in informal Campfire Shows (Preachers' Sons Night and others) and entertaining for events in several camps while an Encampment Guest. He was a delightful companion around campfires in his host's Camp and in many on the road. As much as a non-member can, I believe he understands active participation is a major part of the magic of Bohemia.

He is an accomplished singer who has sung with many groups and started his own "Barber Shop" quartet. His vocal talent will make a significant contribution to the Club's aims.

Although a very busy man resident in New York, I am sure he would participate regularly at the Grove and several Tuesday and Thursday nights during the year. David has an enthusiastic desire to become a participating Bohemian.

Early in his career he spent five years as Assistant Manager of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, has been an Adjunct Professor in the Columbia University School of the Arts and been a consultant to the Ford Foundation.

He is recognized as an international leader in cultural and humanitarian affairs. His affiliations in leadership roles include:

- The Boston Plan for Excellence in the Public Schools

- Boston Symphony Orchestra

- Tanglewood Music Center Capital Campaign

- The Cantata Singers (Boston)

- The Citizens Participation Project (voter registration)

- Council on Foreign Relations

- Museum of Modern Art (NY)

Mr. John H. Bickel

July 31, 1996

Page Two

Radio City Music Hall

Recruiting Young Teachers Inc.

American Council for the Arts

Boston Camerata

Chamber Music Society of Lincoln Center

Harvard College, Advisory Committee on the Arts

Kodaly Musical Training Institute

Massachusetts Governor's Task Force on Educational
Opportunities in the Arts

MIT Arts Council

National Endowment for the Arts

National Public Radio

He is the son of a member, has been a guest at the Grove
four times, and been on the waiting list more than five
years. David Rockefeller, Jr., is an outstanding person, a
talented singer, and occupies a most distinguished position
of leadership. He is a wonderful, humble, thoughtful,
caring man who would be a most welcome addition to our fine
membership.

Victor K. Atkins

VKA:pl

DATE MAR 2 1 1996

CORR. FILE Rockefeller, Happy

ACTION:

AJS LPB ARB MKD SSM
JG DF LI TC

CROSS REF. _________

SUBJ. FILE _________

COMMENTS:

Original photo in HAK mail

DC OFFICE:

INFO COPY TO:

ROUTE CC COPY TO: OK

TO BE FILED ✓

WESTCHESTER • 1460AM

WVOX

WRTN

RETURNRADIO • (93.5 FM)

Whitney Radio

14A Tuesday, October 8, 1996

NANCY Q. KEEFE

COMMENTARY

Rockefeller
fan shares
enthusiasm

They compared Nelson Rockefeller to Thomas Jefferson early and often during a panel discussion marking the 25th anniversary of Purchase College last week.

Jefferson, you recall, built the University of Virginia and inscribed the deed on his tombstone. Rockefeller, who as governor reorganized the state university system on a grand scale in the 1960s, had the idea for Purchase to unite the arts and the liberal arts.

At UVa, they revere Jeffer-
son for his monumental
achievement. But on the Pur-
chase campus, Emily Grant
noted wistfully, no one seems to
know who Rockefeller was.

"Maybe it takes a few gener-
ations to realize the impor-
tance, for the hero to surface,"
said Grant, chairwoman of the
Purchase College Foundation.
The panel strove to impart a
sense of Rockefeller but
couldn't manage it, mainly be-
cause the acclaimed interview-
er Charlie Rose, who was the
moderator, had not known him.

OCT 15 1996

If Purchase had instead
asked Bill O'Shaughnessy, the
New Rochelle radio man who is
not only an artful questioner
but a dedicated Rockefeller ad-
mirer, the audience would have
gotten a wonderful sense of the
man.

The panel had all the high-
minded generalities. Bill tells
the stories.

"I flew with him in his Gulf-
stream to Cleveland one day,"
Bill said yesterday. "I was a
young, wide-eyed radio report-
er. I looked down and said, 'Is
that where the Indians play?'"
To the pilot, Nelson said, 'Take
a turn. Mr. O'Shaughnessy
wants to see who's on first.' "

On that trip to campaign for
a candidate, Rockefeller was
installed in a suite in a run-
down hotel, Cleveland not yet
having undergone its downtown
rebirth. In the suite, Bill said,
"was a silver tray with 200
Oreo cookies, a bottle of Du-
bonnet and a quart of milk. I
was looking in all the cabinets
for a bottle of Canadian Club.

"But Nelson looked at the
spread and said, 'Break it out!
Wow! Isn't it fabulous?' Which
politician today would say
'Wow!' about an Oreo cookie?"
Bill asked. "Or which politician
would cause us to say 'wow'?

"He had such curiosity and
excitement. First of all, it's
clear that Nelson could, as a
rich man's son, could have been
an absolutely glorious bum,
could have squandered a life.
Instead, he had a lot of differ-
ent lives.

"This was the guy who put
all those parcels of land togeth-
er and built the U.N. This is
the guy who practically rebuilt
Latin America," Bill went on.
And he had the vision for Pur-
chase College.

"He was also the guy who
knew how to talk to Yonkers
ward heelers. He had this won-
derful zest and energy and dy-
namism when he walked into
the room. He was the greatest
optimist in American politics.
Everything was 'fabulous,' with
a nasal 'ai: fabulous.'"

Rockefeller had dyslexia and never could give the great speech, Bill said, recalling his "terrible speech at the 1968 Republican Convention. But that night, up in the CBS sky booth with Walter Cronkite, before the first question, Nelson said, 'Wait a minute, Mr. Cronkite. I want to thank you for all you do for the nation.'

"Walter went over like a gi-
ant oak," Bill said. "From any-
one else, it would have been
outrageous flattery. But not
from Nelson. His enthusiasm
and his optimism came from a
place deep inside him. And it
came instinctively. He had a
grace and class beyond being a
rich man's son."

On the morning after the
first presidential debate this
year and all the film clips of
earlier debates, Bill said,
"When I look at these guys
running for president, I think
Nelson had too much class for
the job of president. He wanted
the presidency but was never
quite willing to give up his soul
for it.

"He was a dazzling son of Westchester. We haven't had anybody like him. And we never will again."

GANNETT

Make the most of where you live

One Broadcast Forum, New Rochelle, N.Y. 10801 (914) 636-1460

WVOX
THE VOICE OF WESTCHESTER 1460 AM

WRTN
THE NEW YORK TOUCH 93.5 FM

WHITNEY BROADCASTING

Nelson. A Child of the Neighborhood.
A WVOX Editorial of the Air

broadcast January 27, 1979

by William O'Shaughnessy, President and Editorial Director

The phone rang after midnight. Joseph Wood Canzeri, president of the Greenrock Company, which runs the Rockefeller estates, was calling from Pocantico in the hills above Tarrytown. "Billy ... Nelson died last night."

It is bad timing. Saturday is a day for jeans and chores around the house, for errands, trips to the dry cleaner, the greengrocer and shopping at the A & P. It is not the sort of day I feel like getting on the radio to announce that Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller died. He deserves better than our Saturday edition.

But last night Nelson Rockefeller, a former member of the Westchester County Board of Health, collapsed at his office in New York. He was one of the neighbors' children. And all night long and into these early morning hours the newspapers and the radio were preparing bulletins and obituaries to tell you this fabulous and zestful man's heart had stopped on him. In cold, clinical, medical language he had a "massive" heart attack. It would have to be a slammer to take out this particular 70-year old man.

This weekend, there will be a lot written and broadcast in the national media about Nelson Rockefeller. And if you want an objective, arms-length report, you'd better tune elsewhere, For you'll not get an unbiased version here at his hometown radio station. Or from me. We were with him at countless political dinners, dedications, functions, "events" as they called them ... and we rode with him over the years in airplanes and helicopters and even in golf carts.

It started with Louis Lefkowitz and Jack Gilhooley down at Ratner's on Delancey Street in New York City. And it was outside this famous, old Jewish delicatessen in a Puerto Rican neighborhood where I first discovered the Great Squire of Pocantico Hills. As the old men from the neighborhood looked on - this patrician, an "aristocrat" from Westchester, plowed into the crowd of Hispanic faces yelling at him: "Senor Rocky!"

For over ten years we followed Nelson Rockefeller as he dominated New York State politics ... settling garbage strikes, battling with John Lindsay, building colleges and a great state university, pushing bond issues, building roads and expressways. He was always the best story of the day ... even just sitting up there on the dais at the Westchester Republican dinners at the old Commodore Hotel with the late Fred Powers and telling his neighbors: "Good to see you! ... Nice to see you! ... Wow ... You look fabaabulous!"

ONE BROADCAST FORUM • NEW ROCHELLE • NEW YORK 10801 • (914) 636-1460 • FAX: (914) 636-2900

He loved to tell them about the time old Boss Ward, the legendary Republican leader, put him on the Westchester Board of Health. And just last Thursday, as Henry Kissinger spoke at this year's county dinner, I was reminded of the time Fred Powers gave him a hug replica of the great Sword of Excalibur, which the Wilkinson Sword people had made up. And Nelson Rockefeller was like a kid and just _loved_ it! "Are you suggesting I'm ... a great ... _swordsman_!"

There were so many nights and speeches and trips and so many arrivals at the county airport. The Governor would come down out of his Gulfstream, exhausted, in the middle of the night. He might finesse an interview with the networks. But he _never_ waved off a WVOX microphone. And when he left Albany he gave us the last question at his final press conference as governor. And when we used the occasion to inquire which of his predecessors, of all those staring down at us in the Red Room, had "inspired" him, Nelson said a lot of great men had been Governor of New York ... but _Teddy Roosevelt_ had really inspired him, "as a young boy".

And there was the time Air Force Two brought a tired Vice President home from a long trip around the world. And as the national press and TV camera crews clamored for interviews, the "Governor", as we still called him, made straight for the news crew from our local station. And on this terrible, sad morning, my mind also drifts back to the time we accompanied him on a swing through the Deep South. David Broder and I were finishing a drink with Nelson as Air Force Two, a DC-9, hit the runway with a hell of an abrupt jolt - landing "hot", as the pilots call it, at Columbia, South Carolina. It reminded David Broder and me of our own mortality for a brief, nervous, fleeting moment. But Rockefeller never even winced. He winked and bounded down out of the plane to meet Strom Thurmond and about fifty southern belles in hoop skirts. "Wow!" On this same trip, down on Mobile Bay, he even charmed old George Wallace and his lady Cornelia. Eastern, patrician, aristocratic, wealthy, _yankee_ Nelson Rockefeller wowed even the red necks down South. And we saw it. And felt it. And we remember.

He could never, of course, make the great, _formal_ speech in front of a television camera. But in a room, with a crowd, or one-on-one, he was superb when he was _informal_. In 1963, in Miami, he had just delivered an uninspired formal speech to the delegates to the Republican National Convention. He didn't come across. But then, after his formal presentation, the Governor of New York joined Walter Cronkite in the CBS broadcast booth for a more informal discussion. The great Cronkite was trying hard to be his usual, objective self when Nelson reached over, put his hand on Walter's arm and said: "Just a minute, Walter ... I'd like to thank you, sir ... for all that you do ... The way you conduct yourself is an inspiration to me ... and to our _country_!" An astonished, but flattered, Walter Cronkite went over like a giant oak!

I'll remember lots of moments with this neighbor of ours. None more than the day just before Christmas, in 1974, when he walked into the Oval Office to be sworn in as Vice President of the United States. And America, which had just been through Watergate, felt good again about itself, having this extraordinary man at center stage for a while. And I remember Gerald Ford, the President, telling us over drinks in the White House: "Don't worry, Bill ... I agree with you ... Nelson and I are a good team ... he'll be on my ticket ... and we're going to win." That, of course, was before Bo Calloway and the mean, narrow southerners and the Rockefeller-haters started after him. Most men would sell their soul for the vice presidency or to sit in the Oval Office. He took himself _out_ of it - with style and with class and with that sense of grace which came so naturally.

[cc]

And on this morning after he died last night in New York City, it is his sense of humor that keeps coming back to me. I heard him say - on a plane or in a chopper: "My lawyer just sued me!" I didn't understand - until Bobby Douglass, his counsellor, explained that Louis Lefkowitz, the attorney general, had just brought suit against Mobil Oil.

And he was in great, good form at his last public appearance here in the county at SUNY Purchase where he showed slides of his art collection to a very tony group - members of the Westchester Arts Council. He quipped and joked and raised his eyebrows and moved his blocky shoulders and his eyes twinkled and it was vintage Rockefeller. And as he greeted this staid, artsy crowd, an exceptionally well-endowed lady came through the receiving line - rather falling out of a plenty revealing dress. Nelson's eyes lit up. And when he noticed that Joe Canzeri and I had also tuned in on the display, the Governor threw a sly, mischievous wink to us (and to Happy standing next to him) and said to the lady: "Wow... how are you ... yes, sir ... good to see you!"

He was a man of great enthusiasm. He could find humor in almost any situation. But he had to have been hurt by that number done on him and his art reproductions by the reporter in the Times last month. And this weekend in the mighty New York Times, you can be sure James Reston, at least, will write a sweet, affectionate column about him - while Anthony Lewis, who shares the same page, will, predictably, find some way to tell us he never forgave Nelson for Attica. And many Catholics will never understand his stand on abortion. And, indeed, they have already declined to even pray for him among the formal petitions Sunday at Holy Family Church in New Rochelle! But in the same city, the Christian Brothers of Ireland at Iona Grammar School will remember the soul of Nelson Rockefeller at a mass for fathers and sons.

There was a big, broad range to his life. He was a high roller who was equally at ease with the Emperor of Japan and the Shah as he was with Meade Esposito of Brooklyn or any Yonkers politician. As a wealthy man, as a Rockefeller, he had a lot of material things - Kykuit, the house at Pocantico, an apartment on Fifth Avenue, the place at Seal Harbor, in Maine, his newest project in the desert near Brownsville, Texas. He would sit at "21" and jet off to Dorado for vacations or with Happy to visit an Italian princess named Letitia in Rome. But he also had great enthusiasm for some of the ordinary pleasures.

I discovered this night we flew to Cleveland to campaign for Governor Jim Rhodes. A busy tour had been arranged - TV interviews, a visit to the publishers of the Plain-Dealer and a rubber chicken political dinner. Just before the supper we stopped at a slightly run-down Sheraton Hotel which was probably the best Cleveland had to offer. There were anti-abortion pickets screaming outside. But the Governor's hosts had laid on the "presidential suite" high above street level where we might repair for a brief rest stop before dinner. As we cased the room the Governor spotted a portable bar stocked with Dubonnet and milk ... which suited him just fine. I could have used a Canadian Club! And there also sat a gleaming silver tray with oreo cookies, all grandly wrapped in cellophane and with a ribbon. "Wow"... said the Governor of New York ... "Look at that!" And so there we sat in shirt sleeves eating oreo cookies, sipping Dubonnet and milk in the presidential suite while pickets chanted below ...

He has his name on great, tall buildings now - in Albany and in New York. And he has left around this State a lot of soaring architecture which will remind us and future generations of Nelson Rockefeller. But I will think of him everytime I encounter enthusiasm and energy and optimism. And everytime I see a kid eating an oreo cookie.

As I sit here at this microphone I can still hear and I can almost feel some of the rejection which met the man as he pursued his dreams across so many years, the rich man's son who could have been quite a glorious bum instead.

There will be a huge turnout at Riverside church next week when the Rockefellers bury their most dazzling son. But as dying is something you have to do all by yourself, there were no crowds to cheer him last night on 55th street.

In countless radio editorials over the years I've tried to tell you what he has done for our State and for our nation - his accomplishments. They are many and known to you. You can read about them all weekend in the public press. And when you are old, you can see all of it in the history books. But this morning I think I merely want to say I'm glad he was our neighbor - and a friend.

He ... lit ... up ... our ... lives ...

Nelson ... you were faabulous!

This is a WVOX Editorial of the Air. This is William O'Shaughnessy.

30 ROCKEFELLER PLAZA

NEW YORK, N.Y. 10112

ROOM 5600

(212) 649-5600

April 19, 1996

APR 29 1996

Dear Friends,

In our sadness over our mother's death, which we know is shared by you and so many others, we have decided to put together a book to which any one of her friends and family who wants could contribute a thought or feeling. We would aim to give this to our father on our mother's birthday (September 28), but we would also make copies for all of her friends and family.

If you would like to join us, please send something -- a letter, poem, drawing, photo, etc. to Linda Goelz at 30 Rockefeller Plaza, Room 5600, New York, New York 10112 by June 1. Many of you have already written wonderful letters to us or our father. If you have done so and would want us to include part or all of it, please let us know.

We also have another idea. As you undoubtedly know, our mother wrote wonderful letters -- many funny and many very moving. If you have saved any of her letters that you would be willing to share for another book, please send it/them to the same address.

There is not a lot one can do to make up for such a loss, but we thought that putting together some of our feelings and memories, as well as some of her words, would evoke her amazing spirit.

Warm regards from Peggy's children,

David,

Abby,

Neva,

Peggy,

Richard,

Eileen

01/25/96 THU 10:20 FAX 202 887 5222

NIXON CENTER

002

A FORUM FOR
AMERICAN INTERESTS

January 25, 1996

HONORARY CHAIRMAN
WALTER H. ANNENBERG

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

FOUNDING CHAIRMAN
GEORGE L. ARGYROS

VICE CHAIRS
TRICIA NIXON COX
JULIE NIXON EISENHOWER

DWAYNE O. ANDREAS
ROBERT F. ELLSWORTH
MAURICE R. GREENBERG
HENRY A. KISSINGER
EUGENE K. LAWSON
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN
C. WILLIAM MAYNES
JOHN MCCAIN
ANN MCLAUGHLIN
LIONEL H. OLMER
JAMES E. PERRELLA
JAMES R. SCHLESINGER
DIMITRI K. SIMES, EX OFFICIO
ROBERT S. STRAUSS
JOHN H. TAYLOR, SECRETARY

ADVISORY COUNCIL

CHAIRMAN
HENRY A. KISSINGER

JONATHAN AITKEN
GRAHAM ALLISON
ROBERT W. BLACKWILL
EDWARD F. COX
ROBERT W. DEAN
ALTON FRYE
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN
LEE H. HAMILTON
ARIANNA HUFFINGTON
JOSEF JOFFE
CHALMERS JOHNSON
NANCY A. LIEBERMAN
ROBERT C. McFARLANE
PETER R. ROSENBLATT
WILLIAM V. ROTH, JR.
BRENT SCOWCROFT

PRESIDENT
DIMITRI K. SIMES

SENIOR STAFF
GEOFFREY KEMP
PETER W. RODMAN
PAUL J. SAUNDERS

The Editor
Wall Street Journal
200 Liberty Street
New York, NY 10281

To the editor:

As a participant in the U.S. negotiations on Vietnam during the Nixon Administration, I am completely befuddled by the version of events in Stephen B. Young's letter published January 23.

In particular, the idea that the Nixon-Kissinger policy on Vietnam over four years was foisted on an absent-minded President by his devious national security advisor is one of the wackier ideas in recent circulation -- even more cartoonish a version of history than the Turner Television broadcast that Mr. Young was commenting upon. Nixon's reputation does not gain by having defenders like this.

Every negotiating trip by Kissinger to Paris followed the same procedure -- intensive private conversations with the President beforehand in the Oval Office and by phone; strategy memoranda submitted to the President, which came back peppered with detailed Nixon marginal comments and instructions; detailed reports to the President afterwards. This procedure was most emphatically followed in the case of the May 31, 1971, Paris meeting that Mr. Young is so exercised about.

On the issue of whether North Vietnamese troops could remain in the South, U.S. policy evolved in a manner that is no secret now and was not a secret to the South Vietnamese. Nixon formally proposed a ceasefire-in-place in a televised speech of October 7, 1970 -- with South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van Thieu's concurrence. A more elaborated U.S. proposal was presented to the North Vietnamese in the secret talks on May 31, 1971, including a ceasefire-in-place, U.S. withdrawal, and return of prisoners, leaving the political issues to be negotiated subsequently by the North and South Vietnamese. Amb. Ellsworth Bunker in Saigon, who knew all the details; he briefed Thieu in general terms (and correctly) that it was along the lines of the October 7, 1970, proposal. On January 25, 1972, President Nixon made the May 31

NIXON CENTER FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM

1620 EYE STREET, N.W., SUITE 900 ★ WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006
(202) 887-1000 ★ (202) 887-5222 FAX

JAN-25-1996 10:20

202 887 5222

97%

P.02

NIXON CENTER

☑ 003

2

proposal public in another televised speech, and made a revised offer based on it -- all with Thieu's explicit concurrence.

When in October 1972 Hanoi dropped all its political demands for dismantling the South Vietnamese government, the joint U.S.-South Vietnamese proposals on the table became the basis of the Paris Agreement. Thieu's fundamental unease at that point lay not so much in the terms or the negotiating tactics as in the stark fact that paper proposals for compromise which he had endorsed (which he may well have thought would never be accepted) were about to become reality.

The Paris Agreement of January 1973 essentially froze the status quo on the ground -- a military balance that had been much improved during 1972 by U.S. mining and bombing of North Vietnam and by the South Vietnamese army's performance. The Agreement included a ban on infiltration of arms or personnel to reinforce North Vietnamese troops in the South, as well as a ban on the use of Laotian or Cambodian territory for that purpose. The U.S. calculation was that illegal North Vietnamese resupply in the South after the Paris Agreement could be blocked or deterred by U.S. bombing if necessary, while the U.S. was permitted to continue to arm and train the South Vietnamese. But soon, Watergate and the Democratic Congress removed these instruments from our hands, and the balance of forces then tilted inexorably against the South Vietnamese.

When Mr. Young accosted President Nixon in retirement 20 years later with his mysterious question about "Bunker's two-step approach to ending the war," no wonder he was met by a glassy stare. The reference and the description would have been unrecognizable to any of us.

The final outcome of 1975 was never foreordained -- least of all in the negotiating positions that the U.S. (and South Vietnam) had been putting forward themselves in 1970-72.

JAN-25-1996 10:21

202 887 5222

97%

P.03

02/13/96 TUE 10:41 FAX 202 887 5222

NIAUN CENTER

Foreword by Henry Kissinger

There is a profound intellectual problem in American foreign policy today. In the absence of a single overwhelming threat like that which galvanized us during the Cold War, our policy lacks a sense of direction. Our familiar categories of thinking no longer apply. We seem unsure of where we are, and even of where we want to be.

For most nations of the world, engagement in foreign policy is understood as a matter of necessity, not of choice. Americans are probably unique in their faith that -- shielded as we are by two great oceans and blessed with vast resources -- political engagement in the world is only optional. Much of the contemporary discussion of foreign policy reflects this comfortable assumption. But it is, of course, an illusory assumption. Even with our success in what was our main preoccupation of 50 years, the defeat of Soviet Communism, the world impinges on us. The world economy is more and more a global system -- integrated by modern communications -- and America's dependence on trade (and imported energy) has increased over the decades. Similarly, the security challenges of a new era are only more subtle and complex; they have not disappeared.

Seriousness about international issues is therefore as much a requirement now as before in our national debate. In a presidential election year, this seriousness is not always easy to come by. Yet the American people will not forgive their leaders for future disasters that came about because of neglect of our international

FEB-13-1996 16:42

202 887 5222

97%

P.02

04/13/90 TUE 10:42 FAX 202 001 5222

NIAON CENTER

003

2

responsibilities, even if this neglect seemed to be responsive to the public's present mood. Statesmanship means foresight -- most of all a vision of a future world consistent with our national interests and our principles, and a sense of how we can help ensure its coming into being.

This is the valuable contribution that Peter Rodman makes in this essay on American global strategy. Both the Clinton Administration and the Republican opposition have, at times, evaded some central strategic issues. With insight and imagination, Rodman offers a strategic approach to fill the void.

Peter Rodman was for a long time an associate of mine, in academic life and in government. He has since held senior positions in the White House and the State Department. He is one of our foremost thinkers and writers on foreign policy, and this short essay contains a wealth of astute analyses and acute perceptions. Most important, he offers an approach that can help restore the American people's confidence in this country's international role of leadership.

Henry Kissinger
New York

FEB-13-1996 16:43

202 887 5222

97%

P.03

04-19-96 05:41PM

TO KAI

P003

March 31, 1996

Dr. Henry A. Kissinger
1800 K St., N.W.
Suite 1021
Washington, DC 20006
U. S. A.

APR 19 1996

Dear Dr. Kissinger:

Hoping that the season finds you in good health and merriment, I write to you on behalf of my father, Roh Tae Woo. Despite the difficult situation he finds himself in, father has been wanting to send you his personal greeting for quite some time. This seems only right in light of the personal friendship and close cooperation you so kindly rendered him during his term in office.

Father deeply regrets the shock and distress the news of his arrest and the related developments must have brought to you. He is also concerned that the news from indiscrete media have been misleading and heart-breaking. As you have been knowing him; however, he is quite confident that your trust in him will not be hurt in the long run.

The fact that the country is able to stand unshaken despite having two former presidents in jail, is testimony to the solid friendships Korea enjoys in the global arena, thanks to your kind cooperation and support in the nation's ambitious diplomatic campaigns of the past. For this, he is doubly grateful to you, and asks that you continue to give him and this nation your affection and support.

These are trying times for father and our family. I can, however, inform you that he is healthy both in body and spirit, and the family is discovering new strengths within itself. Father and all my family join me in sending you our highest considerations and warmest wishes for your continued well-being and happiness.

APR-19-1996 17:38

96%

P.03

HENRY A. KISSINGER

January 30, 1996

Dear Dick:

As chairman of a bank on the Visa International Board, you
have undoubtedly seen articles in the press about the
complaint American Express filed with the European
Commission this week.

In its filing, American Express charges that Visa
International is engaged in anticompetitive activities by
advocating that its member banks be prohibited from issuing
American Express Cards. As a director of American Express,
I am taking the liberty to write you about this important
case.

American Express learned recently that Visa officials have
proposed a new organizational bylaw providing for the
automatic termination of association membership of Visa
banks who elect also to issue American Express Cards. Our
understanding is that the Visa International Board will
discuss the proposed bylaw at its March meeting and that the
Visa Europe Board will discuss it in February.

It is because of the imminent threat this bylaw poses to its
business operations and only after a long and thorough
review that American Express took these steps with the
European Commission. The proposed bylaw would affect
American Express' arrangements with its two newest partners
in Europe, Banco Comercial Portugues in Portugal and Alpha
Credit Bank in Greece, as well as others being negotiated
now.

TWENTY-SIXTH FLOOR • 350 PARK AVENUE • NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022 • (212) 759-7919

page two

As you review this complaint, I urge you to consider four salient aspects of this case, several of which could affect your own business operations in the future.

- Visa's proposed bylaw is an unusual and unfortunate step toward restraining competition in international banking. More than ever before, banks are reaching out to new partners as the nature of financial services changes. The most successful banks offer an increasingly wide range of products. These opportunities not only expand relationships with consumers to the advantage of the banks. They also create mutually beneficial partnerships for both the bank and the nonbank partner. American Express has had long and positive commercial relations with banks around the world, not only in the card business but also in other business lines such as travelers cheques. These bank arrangements with American Express have proven equally profitable for both parties. The proposed Visa bylaw flies in the face of these trends in modern-day banking.

- Banks with international business expansion plans are increasingly attracted to issuing the American Express Card along with their other card offerings. I don't have to tell you how much banking is changing around the world. Not only are many banks combining to reduce costs, but they are also seeking to reach a wider market of consumers. Inevitably, banks will be seeking to attract new customers with whom they have not previously had a relationship. Quality products and excellent service will be the hallmarks of successful banking in the future. It is hard to imagine that banks would want to preclude their ability to offer such products, just because some products might be branded American Express.

Further, the banking world is being changed by technological advances. None of us know the impact that the internet will have on banking services and how consumers in the near future will seek to do their

page three

banking. Yet it is certain that banks will want to
serve their customers in whatever electronic businesses
develop. It is possible that American Express, which
has pioneered financial services on the internet, may
be an attractive partner for forward-looking banks in
the future. Such arrangements would be precluded,
however, if this bylaw is passed.

-- American Express is not piggybacking on Visa investments in Europe. Rather it uses its own network to support joint operations between banks and the American Express Card. While Visa has alleged that American Express is seeking to be a "free rider", this is in fact misleading and untrue. American Express is not applying to use the Visa network. It simply wants to be able to join with banks in issuing consumer cards on its own network.

Moreover, many Visa banks have issued MasterCard, Eurocard, Diners Club and JCB cards for many years. Visa has never taken issue with "free riding" by these systems in the past. If they have worked successfully in parallel with the Visa system, there is no reason that American Express will be any different.

-- **EC law protects the commercial parties' rights to choose the business partners of their choice.** Under EC competition law, the members of an association such as Visa are permitted to contract with anyone they choose. Additionally third parties cannot be precluded from participating in markets where such associations have a dominant market position. In light of these key EC laws, American Express has brought a case under Articles 85 and 86 charging that the proposed Visa bylaw will preclude it from distributing its Cards more widely throughout Europe. Authorities say that American Express has a good case and that the Commission could clearly rule against Visa. This is not a case which American Express brings lightly. But were Visa International to withdraw the bylaw, American Express would withdraw the complaint immediately.

page four

I hope you have found my observations to be helpful in
assessing the American Express case. I will call you in a
few days to discuss your reaction to their filing.

Thank you for your consideration.

Mr. Richard Rosenberg
Chairman of the Board
Bank of America
Executive Offices #3001
555 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94104

B
Bank of America

Richard M. Rosenberg
Chairman of the Board

February 15, 1996

Mr. Henry A. Kissinger
350 Park Avenue, 23rd Floor
New York, NY 10022

FEB 2 1 1996

Dear Henry:

Thank you for your January 30 letter concerning the complaint American
Express filed in the European Commission against Visa International.

As you may know, it has been several years since I served on Visa's Board of
Directors, so I am not personally familiar with American Express's charges as you
describe in your letter. For these reasons, and because American Express has instituted
legal action against Visa, of which Bank of America is a director and member, I hope
you understand why at this time I cannot comment on the specific issues you raise in
your letter. However, it is my understanding that the Visa Board intends to
"grandfather" any banks currently engaged in issuing American Express Cards.

In view of the evolution of credit card competition in the U.S., where the rule
now proposed for Europe exists, I expect that competition in other markets around the
world, including Europe, will also be innovative and aggressive, and consumers will be
the ultimate beneficiaries. I agree with you that competitive strategies should be
developed within the bounds of the law. I am also confident that any rule Visa adopts
for its members in Europe will comply with the laws of the European Community.
Because American Express has brought its charges before the European Commission, I
believe it would be best to let the Commission address the legal issues.

Warmest personal regards.

Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association Box 37000 San Francisco, California 94137

Recycled Paper

97 Hubbard Street
Concord, Massachusetts 01742

December 11, 1996

DEC 13 1996

Dear Secretary Kissinger:

It was very nice to talk to you on Monday. I really appreciate your willingness to hear my concerns about the Governor's mood and to place a call. This place is full of rumors. About the only thing clear is that Governor Weld wanted to win the election badly and is suffering an understandable reaction to losing. I think he could play an important leadership role in the Party with respect to foreign affairs. We need it.

I found myself entirely in agreement with your perspective on the international scene -- not for the first time. If it were appropriate or possible, I would love to play a role in connection with your bipartisan committee. Such a committee is much needed.

I have not been to New York since you were at the State House here. I shall try to pay a call when I am next in town.

With every good wish,

The Honorable Henry A. Kissinger
26th Floor
350 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10022

ALAN I. ROTHENBERG

633 WEST FIFTH STREET, SUITE 4000
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071-2007

December 2, 1996

Mr. Bill Colson
Managing Editor, Sports Illustrated
Time & Life Building
Rockefeller Center
New York, NY 10020-1393

Dear Mr. Colson:

I am writing to request a meeting with you to understand SI's animus towards me. I was offended and angered by the recent Scorecard article (Offsides on Rothenberg, December 2, 1996) and shocked by SI's uncharacteristically inaccurate, incomplete and gratuitously mean-spirited reporting. SI fabricated facts (or was misled by the unproven claims of an obviously disgruntled former World Cup employee) to support its apparently preconceived contention that I am a "shameless self-promoter and a smug and shady profiteer."

All the business activities of the World Cup were conducted in sunlight, not shade, and reviewed and approved by its world-class, unpaid Board of Directors. The Board included a number of sports leaders who have been consistently praised by SI in the past, including Peter Ueberroth, Lamar Hunt and Donna DeVarona, as well as several business and political leaders such as Dr. Henry Kissinger, Jay Pritzker, John Nordstrom, William E. Simon, Sr., and Time Warner's own, Ahmet Ertegun. To characterize the Board as my "cronies" is offensive to these men and women and absolutely untrue.

With the consent of the Board of Directors, the World Cup selected the law firm of Latham & Watkins based on competence, experience

Mr. Bill Colson

December 2, 1996

and cost. Latham & Watkins was counsel to the 1984 Los Angeles
Olympic Organizing Committee and is considered one of the
preeminent law firms in the United States. They donated $300,000
of free legal services, and then were paid a reasonable hourly rate
for their work. Their aggregate billing was consistent with an event
of this scale and remained within the World Cup budget. Latham &
Watkins did an excellent job and the World Cup was lucky to have
them involved. Contrary to SI's article, no $10 million reserve has
been escrowed to pay Latham & Watkins. Rather, sufficient funds
have been set aside to resolve outstanding claims.

SI states that the bonus payment I received "siphoned money
originally earmarked for developing soccer in the United States."
The truth is that the original World Cup budget (created prior to my
involvement) projected a $3 million surplus. The remarkable
success of the 1994 World Cup will enable us to fund the U.S.
Soccer Federation Foundation with approximately $50 million for the
advancement of soccer. Furthermore, the compensation I received,
while admittedly a great deal of money, was modest compared to
the _guaranteed_ salaries of the commissioners of the NBA, NFL and
Major League Baseball, and in line with the compensation
_guaranteed_ to ACOG's CEO. The compensation was arrived at
after comprehensive reports from outside accountants and
compensation experts.

I found it surprising that SI chose to criticize a SI alumnus, my son
Brad Rothenberg. Brad joined the World Cup at the age of 27, not
20, at a starting salary of $48,000, not $107,321. The World Cup
Board of Directors was extremely careful to avoid the appearance of
impropriety, and in fact, Brad was among the lowest paid of our
several assistant vice presidents. Brad was responsible for our
SoccerFest Celebration and Legacy Tour, and he did an excellent
job. As his father and former boss, I was and am extremely proud
of him. I understand why his boss at SI, Linda Verigan, thought so
highly of him.

There were many other inaccuracies, half-truths and gratuitously
nasty comments. For example, stating that my face was displayed

Mr. Bill Colson

December 2, 1996

Page 3

on jumbo stadium screens was simply ridiculous. I have dedicated
the last six years to the advancement of soccer in the United
States, not the advancement of Alan Rothenberg. Please judge me
by the role I have played in the 1994 World Cup, the launch of
Major League Soccer and the success of the U.S. National Men's
and Women's Soccer Teams.

I do not understand SI's hostility towards me and my family, and I
would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter with you.

AIR:jbc

RCV BY:

12- 2-96 : 9:46AM :

2012628031→ LATHAM AND WATKINS:# 7

BILL COLSON, December 2, 1996, page 6

"With some $10 million of World Cup funds still being held in escrow to pay Latham & Watkins for pending litigation..."

A reserve has been established to settle various open legal claims, not to pay legal fees.

"In the meantime, he governs MLS, a league in which the champion receives a trophy called--what else?--the Alan I. Rothenberg Trophy."

To honor Rothenberg, the MLS investors named the championship trophy after him.

Soccer's 1996 success is unprecedented in the United States.

* Major League Soccer was successfully launched--exceeding everyone's expectations. Not since the NBA's creation 50 years ago has a new major professional sports league been launched.

* The United States women established themselves as the best in the world by winning the gold medal at the Centennial Games.

* The men's World Cup team has climbed to 16th in FIFA's world rankings and is in the process of qualifying for the 1998 FIFA World Cup in France.

* Soccer drew the following crowds in the United States in 1996 alone:

<table><tbody><tr><td>1. USA-Mexico/ LA Galaxy-Tampa Bay Mutiny</td><td>U.S. Cup</td><td>Rose Bowl</td><td>92,216, sold out</td></tr><tr><td>2. Mexico-Brazil</td><td>Gold Cup</td><td>Coliseum</td><td>88,125, sold out</td></tr><tr><td>3. Nigeria-Argentina</td><td>Olympics</td><td>Athens, GA</td><td>86,117, sold out</td></tr><tr><td>4. USA-Argentina</td><td>Olympics</td><td>Birmingham</td><td>83,810, sold out</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>(record for Legion Field)</td></tr><tr><td>5. Nigeria-Brazil</td><td>Olympics</td><td>Athens, GA</td><td>78,587</td></tr><tr><td>6. Brazil-FIFA All Stars</td><td>FIFA All-Stars</td><td>B. Ruth, NJ</td><td>78,416, sold out</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>(record for sports at Giants Stadium)</td></tr><tr><td>7. Argentina-Portugal</td><td>Olympics</td><td>Athens, GA</td><td>78,212</td></tr><tr><td>8. USA-China (women)</td><td>Olympics</td><td>Athens, GA</td><td>76,481</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>(largest crowd ever for women's sports)</td></tr><tr><td>9. LA Galaxy/Metrostars</td><td>MLS</td><td>Pasadena, CA</td><td>69,225</td></tr><tr><td>10. Brazil-Portugal</td><td>Olympics</td><td>Athens, GA</td><td>68,173</td></tr></tbody></table>

RCV BY:

12- 2-96 : 9:46AM :

2012628031→ LATHAM AND WATKINS:# 8

BILL COLSON, December 2, 1996, page 7

Perhaps more than anyone else, Alan Rothenberg is largely responsible for the success of soccer in the United States. Yet, Sports Illustrated has acted unfairly toward him, and I would like to know why.

I would like to meet with you to set the record straight. This article, which is based solely on the unsubstantiated allegations of an obviously biased source who has a pending legal action and who can only stand to gain personally from the publicity, has no place in the public record.

Please call me so we can set up a meeting very soon.

12-02-1996 5:49PM

12-01-1996 6:51PM

DEC-01-96 SUN 10:17 BLOFELD

FROM J TRECKER 2012628031

FROM MESSING 3105730240

3105735050

P.01

LEAH TUFFANELLI BLOFELD, ESQ.

738 ALMAR AVENUE
PACIFIO PAUSADES, CA 90272
310 450 5740
FACSIMILE: 310 573 5050

December 1, 1996

The Editor
Sports Illustrated
Time and Life Building
Rockefeller Center
New York, NY 10020-1393

Dear Sir:

I was the General Counsel for World Cup USA 1994, Inc. from 1991 to 1995 and am therefore uniquely qualified to comment on your recent article regarding Alan Rothenberg and the relationship between the Organizing Committee and our principal outside counsel, Latham & Watkins.

I am disappointed to say that your "story" appears to be nothing more than a sensationalized character assassination of Alan Rothenberg. As far as I can ascertain, your information is based on the allegations of Michael Hogue, a disgruntled former employee, now trying, somewhat belatedly, to cash in on the success of the World Cup.

Ignoring the many other incorrect items in the article. I wish to set the record straight concerning my choice of Latham & Watkins as primary outside counsel. Latham offered two major advantages to me. First, the firm had unique experience from the only other comparable event staged in the United States in the previous decade: the 1984 Olympics. Second, the firm offered and provided over $350,000 of "pro-bono" (free) legal services. In addition, the firm provided us with a discounted fee arrangement when we used up the pro bono services. Alan Rothenberg did not participate in the selection of Latham. Indeed, he and I never discussed the matter. The Board of Directors reviewed and approved my selection.

For your further information, World Cup employed a legal department of seven full time in-house attorneys (none from Latham & Watkins), and utilized several outside law firms in addition to Latham. Your article is an insult to my integrity and completely disregards the years of hard work contributed by World Cup's in-house legal team and other outside counsel, as well as Latham's contribution to the success of the games.

I hope that the next time Sports Illustrated decides to write about legal matters pertaining to the 1994 World Cup, someone will call me, rather than base the article on unreliable sources.

DEC 02 '96 14:52

SCORECARD

GO FIGURE

35

Times this season
(through Sunday) that
NBA teams had scored
fewer than 80 points.

8

Times NBA teams had
scored fewer than 70.

9,000,000

Members of the
Mormon faith that BYU
basketball coach Roger
Reid says blue-chip
recruit—and Mormon—
Chris Burgess “let
down” by signing with
Duke.

3.9

Academic average
earned by Florida State
junior linebacker and
finance major Daryl
Bush, who had the
highest grades on the
College Football
Association's 1996
scholar-athlete team.

4

Consecutive Class AAA
Kentucky state cross-
country titles won by
Rachel Sanford, 13, an
eighth-grader who
runs for Southwestern
Pulaski High.

2

Games missed by Todd
Maroldo, Virginia Tech's
Hokie Bird mascot, after
being suspended for
fighting the Miami Ibis
during Tech's 21–7 win on
Nov. 16.

1990, did all the legal work for World Cup USA.

Rothenberg's hiring of his own firm (which also does USSF's legal work) might not have been illegal, but it was a blatant misuse of power for personal profit. Latham and Watkins admits billing World Cup USA, a nonprofit organization, $2.7 million between November 1990 and December '94. Hogue's attorney Robert Harrison suspects the figure is much higher, citing the nearly $8.6 million that World Cup USA paid out in "professional fees" in 1993 alone.

Rothenberg says his firm supplied “a substantial amount of free services in the beginning” and later a discounted hourly rate. Yet Latham and Watkins’s billing records show an audacious $74,000 for its first month of services, and Rothenberg said in a deposition that the discounted rate was $200 instead of $210.

Hogue's grievance stems from the summer of '92 when, he says, Latham and Watkins issued a contract demanding that Mission Viejo officials increase the size of an already agreed-upon clubhouse by 10,000 square feet. The city rejected the demand on logistical and financial grounds; Hogue denounced the contract and raised objections to Latham and Watkins's involvement in the project. Though the training site was subsequently and successfully completed according to the original plan, Hogue was fired by Rothenberg in December '92. Rothenberg says Hogue wasn't fired; rather, "his job came to an end."

Managing conflicting interests has been a way of professional life for Rothenberg. As a condition of the U.S.'s hosting the World Cup, the USSF promised FIFA, soccer's world governing body, that a U.S. outdoor league would be launched. Major League Soccer (MLS) was one of three groups that bid for approval from the USSF to operate the league, and surprise, the Rothenberg-controlled MLS won out. Then, in August '94, when he was up for reelection as USSF president, Rothenberg ensured victory by insinuating that were he not reelected, MLS would fail.

Rothenberg, 57, is widely respected as the man principally responsible for the '94 World Cup's record profit of $50 million. As chairman and CEO of World Cup USA, he worked 80-hour weeks for two years at no pay—though he was still drawing a salary from Latham and Watkins. Rothenberg's face and titles were displayed on jumbo stadium screens after Cup matches, and he was held in such awe by his employees that no one objected when he gave his son, Bradford, then 20, a salary of $107,321 from the World Cup payroll. Rothenberg himself was well compensated when the Cup finals were over: His cronies on the World Cup USA board voted him a $7.4 million payment, siphoning that sum from money originally earmarked for developing soccer in the U.S.

With some $10 million in World Cup funds still being held in escrow to pay Latham and Watkins for pending litigation, Rothenberg's

bootsy will continue to add up. In the meantime he
governs MLS, a league in which the champion wins
a trophy called—what else?—the Alan I. Rothen-
berg Trophy.

At long last Parker got his college career off the ground

A Sense of Proportion

We have no objection to the New York Giants' g-
ing convicted sex offender Christian Peter a chan
to resurrect his career (SCORECARD, Nov. 25). B
considering the opportunity being afforded t
defensive lineman, isn't it odd that the Giants s
Jeffrey Lange, the fan caught throwing snowba
toward the field during a game late last season,
still banned from Giants Stadium for life?

An Auspicious Debut

It was perhaps appropriate that Richie Parke kicked off his college basketball career with a personal foul. He had spent two years away from organized hoops after a sexual-abuse conviction during his junior year ended a storied high school

18

PATRICK EWING ©1996 NATIONAL FIBER GROUP

LATHAM & WATKINS

Mr. Bill Colson

December 6, 1996

Page 2

Contrary to your article's implications, Latham & Watkins charged an extremely fair amount for the first-rate services we rendered. Indeed, we never heard a word of complaint from anyone about our work, including Mr. Hogue. As for your reporters' claim that a $10 million fund has been set aside to pay additional fees to us, that ludicrous allegation could have been put to rest through the simple courtesy of a call to Alan, me or any of my partners.

Call me naive, but I would have thought that the nation's preeminent sports magazine would have taken the time to check its facts before printing as gospel the false and misleading allegations of a disgruntled former employee embroiled in a nasty litigation. You owe both Alan and this firm an apology.

Very truly yours,
Paul D. Tosetti

Paul D. Tosetti
of LATHAM & WATKINS

12-02-1996 5:49PM

12-01-1996 6:51PM

DEC-01-96 SUN 10:17 BLOFELD

FROM J TRECKER 2012628031

FROM MESSING 3105730240

3105735050

P.01

LEAH TUFFANELLI BLOFELD, Esq.

December 1, 1996

Dear Sir:

Ignoring the many other incorrect items in the article, I wish to set the record straight concerning my choice of Latham & Watkins as primary outside counsel. Latham offered two major advantages to me. First, the firm had unique experience from the only other comparable event staged in the United States in the previous decade: the 1984 Olympics. Second, the firm offered and provided over $350,000 of "pro-bono" (free) legal services. In addition, the firm provided us with a discounted fee arrangement when we used up the pro bono services. Alan Rothenberg did not participate in the selection of Latham. Indeed, he and I never discussed the matter. The Board of Directors reviewed and approved my selection.

Leah Tuffanelli Blofeld, Esq.

From: Squadron Leader D Hill RAF

Military Agency for Standardization (MAS) Air Board
Headquarters North Atlantic Treaty Organization (HQ NATO)
British Forces Post Office (BFPO) 49

Telephone: 0032 2 707 5589

Fax: 0032 2 707 5718

20 February 1996

Dear Dr Kissinger,

MAR 0 4 1996

COMMEMORATIVE COVERS FOR THE LAST ROYAL AIR FORCE (RAF)
VC10 SCHEDULED FLIGHT BETWEEN UK AND WASHINGTON

I am very pleased that you were able to sign the VC10 cover that was produced to mark the end of almost 25 years of RAF scheduled flights to Dulles International. Sir Denis Thatcher has written to me saying how pleased he was to be associated with the cover project, having flown for many days aboard the VC10, accompanying Lady Thatcher when she was Prime Minister. I know also that he was most happy to sign the cover together with yourself.

In autographing the covers together you have demonstrated the strong bond
that America and the United Kingdom have become accustomed to enjoy. For the
RAF and its fellow Services the VC10 has been a symbol of this link for the past
quarter century so your bi-national agreement was entirely appropriate.

The charity work that we perform relies on regular collectors buying the covers and the total profits being donated to charity. Not wishing to destroy our customer base, we price the covers fairly at US$22.50 (£15.00) each. All 200 are sold already and this has raised US$4,500 (£3,000) for the Royal Air Forces Association Sussexdown Hospice.

I realize that you are an extremely busy person and fitting in the autographs
was not easy; however, this makes your help all the more appreciated. Please accept
my thanks for helping our charity venture - you have not only helped us raise a
significant sum but also provided a most interesting philatelic item for the collector.
Very many thanks.

From: Flight Lieutenant Jan Perryman RAF

Royal Air Force Air Movements Unit

PO Box 17271 Dulles International Airport Washington, DC 20041

Telephone (703) 661-6622

Fax (703) 661-8761

Ambassador L Paul Bremmer
5208 Dorset Avenue
Chevy Chase
Maryland 20815

Your reference

Our reference

Date

27 October 1995

Dear Mr Ambassador,

BRITISH ROYAL AIR FORCE - FIRST DAY COVERS

I am writing to ask a favour on behalf of a colleague in the Royal Air Force in the UK. From time to time he produces First Day Covers, the proceeds of which go to a Royal Air Force Charity. He has recently produced a cover commemorating the demise, after 25 years, of the VC10 aircraft on the UK to Dulles route. These covers are highly valued by collectors and aviation enthusiasts alike. The attraction of the covers apart from the artwork is the collectibility and this is derived from the signatures and numbering on the back of the covers.

Margaret Thatcher, who flew over 1000 hours in the VC10 herself has often been asked to sign similar covers. For this particular cover however, Denis Thatcher has been successfully approached. In keeping with the USA flavour of the cover, we thought that Dr Kissinger would be an ideal signatory. He may himself remember the venerable VC10.

I fully appreciate of course that he will have many demands on his time and will receive similar requests such as these. As a guide, there are 200 covers to sign and this would involve a maximum of an hour of his time. Thank you very much in anticipation.

Enclosure:

1. Example of a first day cover - Air Attache/Airport Manager.

OCT-14-1996 18:27

FROM NITELINE 530 7TH 22 FL

TO

7590042 P.01

October 14, 1996

OCT 15 1996

Dr. Henry Kissinger
New York NY

Dear Dr. Kissinger:

I have been listening to the news in all the major channels after the Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates, and one thing comes across very clearly, all news anchors are pro the Democratic Party and pro Clinton. What makes no sense at all is that they are all positive that Clinton is going to win the elections and are advising Senator Dole from morning to evening not to attack President Clinton's character because doing so Senator Dole will lose the election.

Therefore, I would like to send a note to Sen. Dole because I consider myself one of the voices of "common opinion" and I am sure 80% of the American people are reacting the same way I am. I know you can and have access to send him a note. If enough people write to him with their thoughts I believe it will be a great encouragement for him to make an honest decision to come forward. I saw him over the weekend asking the crowds for their opinion on what he should do. I would like to express to him how we all feel as Americans, as voters and me as a citizen of the world.

I would like to say the following to him, such as you and I discussed previously.

I believe that this is an oxymoronical scheme by the media to make the American people believe that Clinton has already won the election, and they are advising Senator Dole not to do this as it will cost him the election by attacking the President's character.

It was very obvious during the debate that Senator Dole came off as the "Master" and President Clinton as the "student" for the media to try to persuade us into seeing something different. It also was very obvious that in the debate between Gore and Kemp, that Kemp came off as the all-American, honest, open visionary and Gore as a Kindergarden teacher. Again the media trying to confuse the voters continue to tell Senator Dole not to make the mistake of attacking the President personally because he will lose.

s.qxd 05/12/95 15:10

Page 97

Kissinger's Philosophy of
History and Kantian Ethics

GREG RUSSELL

This essay develops Henry Kissinger's early writing on Kant's political and international ethics to illumine the reality and limits of moral choices confronting statesmen and nations in an anarchic environment. His unpublished and largely neglected senior thesis entitled 'The Meaning of History',¹ which contains all the themes basic to his later political philosophy, explores the tension between Kant's political ethics and the German thinker's commitment to inevitable historical progress. In fact, Kissinger's intellectual and ethical perspective on politics took its initial shape as the extension of a coherent philosophy of history. His thesis substantiates a vital connection between the most important philosophical question in Western culture – the goal or purpose of history – and the inner life of the statesman who can never fully escape the necessity of power politics. Unlike Kant, however, Kissinger's philosophy of history considers life as completely immanent – possessing no transcendent meaning and having no final destination. Yet Kissinger was clearly drawn to Kant's example of spiritual inwardness, although he embraced realism as a guide to political action. Even at this early juncture, Kissinger repudiated a central premise of raison d'état – that is, of setting the political sphere apart from the private one for purposes of ethical evaluation.² His dialogue with Kant points to an enduring challenge for the ethics of realist statecraft: reconciling a margin of moral choice for the political actor – finding freedom and choice in this inwardness – with a fatalistic verdict of history as an unending process devoid of ultimate value or purposes.

No attempt is made herein to rely on Kant's categories, or
Kissinger's thoughts about perpetual peace, to judge the extensive
career of the latter as a diplomat and foreign policy architect. Nor is
the object of this paper to argue that Kissinger's understanding of
Kant provides a theory of statesmanship or foreign policy decision-
making. As an exercise in political philosophy, valid in itself,

Diplomacy & Statecraft, Vol.7, No.1 (March 1996), pp.1-000

PUBLISHED BY FRANK CASS, LONDON

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11

Page 98

98

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

Kissinger's appraisal of Kant is far from being an idiosyncratic restatement of the Kantian legacy. Kant's contribution compels the realist, as it compelled Kissinger, to connect the debate over morality in foreign policy to a more far-reaching intellectual framework: the epistemological foundation of moral imperatives; the balance between freedom and necessity in individual and national behaviour; and the nature of historical progress and change as they converge upon republican and autocratic regimes. Coming to terms with Kantian ethics led Kissinger to argue that the tragic choices of statesmen do not devour the freedom and responsibility of moral creatures who are held accountable for their actions in life and death. Every effort has been made throughout this paper to adhere to the actual subheadings used by Kissinger in his organization of Kant's works.

## I. Kissinger and Kantian Philosophy

Kant 'revolutionized metaphysics', as Kissinger explains, 'by insisting that [instead of the mind conforming to external reality] physical objects can only be understood if they conform to certain patterns and rules imposed by the mind'.³ Kant's suggestion is similar to that of Copernicus in astronomy, who,

> finding it impossible to explain the movements of the heavenly bodies on the supposition that they turned round the spectator, tried whether he might not succeed better by supposing the spectator to revolve and the stars to remain at rest. Let us make a similar experiment in metaphysics with perception. If it really were necessary for our perception to conform to the nature of objects, I do not see how we could know anything of it a priori; but if the sensible object must conform to the constitution of our faculty of perception, I see no difficulty in the matter.⁴

Kant also emphasized, however, that reality in its completeness can never be comprehended. We can never attain, through the senses and the intellect, knowledge of the world as it really is, for we can never 'know' through these faculties the things-in-themselves. The task of critical philosophy, as Kissinger points out, is to define 'the forms by which external reality is apprehended by pure reason and synthetic a priori judgments will be possible'.⁵

Kissinger emphasizes that Kant's division of reality into

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11

Page 99

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

99

phenomena (apprehended by pure reason) and noumena (things-in-
themselves known by speculative reason) does not mean that
knowledge of noumenal reality is impossible. Though pure reason is
confined to phenomenal appearances, the noumena may reveal
themselves to man by way of an inward experience. Pure reason can
go no further than making room in its metaphysical scheme for the
ultimate reality which is revealed to man in his theological, aesthetic,
and artistic experiences.⁶ Kissinger observes that Kant's pure reason
illuminates the weakness in the assumptions of both the rationalists
and the empiricists.

If phenomenal reality does not exhaust the totality of man's experiences, freedom cannot be derived from a recognition of naturalistic necessity. If sense experience is confined to the appearances of a [more] profound level of existence, the empirical world can not contain a moral sanction. The experience of freedom in a determined environment is seen to be potentially meaningful after all. ⑩

Kissinger's reference to 'sense experience', tailored as it is to the
transcendental experience of freedom, may be restated in the
following way: If there exists a noumenal reality beyond the
phenomenal manifestations, and insofar as man is noumenal (a thing
in itself) he may achieve freedom, though as a physical phenomenon
he remains subject to phenomenal requirements. Kant's metaphysics,
writes Kissinger, 'serve as the condition for the apprehension of a
morality that gives the profoundest expression to the intrinsic worth
of the moral personality, the transcendental experience which
connects Man with the Infinite'.⁸

Moral Philosophy

Kissinger raises three fundamental questions with regard to the scope
of Kantian ethics. First, what is the nature of the moral law? Second,
how can any content and universality be ascribed to it in the face of
an intensely personal experience of freedom? Third, is morality
expressed by conformity to explicit regulations or by an inward state
that gives meaning to its own proverbs?⁹

As stated in his *Critique of Pure Reason*, Kant rejects the views of
both the rationalists and the empiricists. Objective necessity,
conceived in a naturalistic manner, cannot constitute the essence of
morality insofar as that would deny the direct experience of freedom.
Ethical sensualism is inadequate because it prevents the formulation

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 100

100

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

of a universal rule. Kissinger explains how Kant recovers the
consciousness of universal moral obligation by focusing upon the
constitution of man. If everything in nature is created with a
maximum of economy, then happiness conceived of as desire-
satisfaction cannot represent the purpose of a rational being. Instinct
would suffice for the achievement of pleasure in the hedonistic
sense.¹⁰ But Kant claimed that man is endowed with reason, and
above all practical reason, that issues forth into action and multiplies
motivations. The faculty of rationality, then, must be designed to
implement the moral experience. The consciousness of moral-
responsibility, as Kissinger points out, is inextricably bound up with
the consciousness of freedom; since one knows that one can act
because one is conscious that one ought and thus one knows in one's
self the freedom which, without the moral law, had remained
unknown.¹¹

Kissinger raises an important question at this juncture: How can a
personal experience contain a universal obligation? Just as the
metaphysical dilemma was resolved only with the aid of synthetic a
priori judgements, ‘so Kant gives effect to man’s experience of
freedom by a priori principles that determine the will by their own
inner-necessity’.¹² Moral behaviour is action in conformity with the
idea of law; we act as moral beings when we will to do that which
reason prescribes as our duty. Moral sanctions do not attach to such
laudable qualities as moderation, self-control, or calm deliberation.
For in villains, as Kissinger was not slow to recognize, these very
qualities tend to accentuate evil! It is not the effect of behaviour, its
success or failure, that matters so much as it is the *will* of which it is
the expression. There is nothing that can be called good without
qualification except a ‘good will’.¹³ How then is will determined by
reason?

The human will, torn by desires, requires an imperative – that is, a representation of a ground of action expressed by the word ‘ought’. Kant identified two kinds of imperatives, hypothetical and categorical. A hypothetical imperative is represented as a means to a certain end; it directs the individual to act in a certain way not because of any intrinsic value which that action may have, but because it is the best means to attain a desired objective. Yet the moral law stems from a transcendental experience of an ultimate reality beyond phenomenal appearances. Ethical obligations can be implemented only by the categorical imperative, the maxims of

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 101

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

101

which assure universality.

Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative stems from a conception of the moral law determining the will by its own inward necessity rooted in a priori principles. It states: 'Act as if the maxim of your action were to become by your will a general law of nature'.¹⁴ Kant repudiates the claims of those who justify stealing in exceptional circumstances (for example, a father stealing for his children, a principle approved by the Mohammedan moral code). The moral question is not whether, in this instance, it is right to steal this one time, or, in another instance, whether it is possible to steal under dire circumstances? The question raised by the categorical imperative is: Can I will that all men steal? Can I will that stealing be a universal law? Kissinger notes that the same predicament applies to Kant's example of borrowing with the knowledge that repayment is impossible. The individual can will either course of action but not as a universal law of nature. It is impossible to secure a reciprocal recognition of this volition.¹⁵

Kant's second formulation of the categorical imperative relies on the distinction between the imperative as an end in itself and the hypothetical imperative in which the motivation is simply the means. In the *Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals*, Kant states:

> Now I say that man, and in general every rational being, exists as an end in himself and not merely as a means to be arbitrarily used by this or that will. He must in all his actions, whether directed to himself or to other rational beings, always be regarded at the same time as an end.... Such an end is one for which there can be substituted no other end to which such beings should serve merely as means, for otherwise nothing at all of absolute value would be found anywhere.... The practical imperative will therefore be the following: Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means.¹⁶

This concept expresses the ultimacy of man's moral personality, the apprehension of tolerance which sets limits to one's activity out of respect for the divine in humanity. But how can this categorical imperative, Kissinger asks, furnish a conception of its possibility?¹⁷ Man attempts to achieve morality, but the goal is distant and, intuitively, one feels the impossibility of its attainment. Man longs for

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 102

102

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

the *Summum Bonum* – happiness commensurate with virtue – but no guarantee for a necessary connection exists in the phenomenal world. ‘Duty’, Kissinger writes, ‘seems the only motive that can guide humanity in its quest for morality.’¹⁸

Returning to the distinction between the noumenal and phenomenal world in the *Critique of Pure Reason*, Kant argues that morality – far from depicting an order of nature – has its origins in a mystic attitude within us. The striving for perfection induced by the moral law implies immortality to give effect to an endeavour incapable of being fulfilled in finite time. A divine ground of being becomes the guarantor of the *Summum Bonum*. ‘The transcendental experience’, in Kissinger’s words, ‘overcomes all obstacles offered by the empirical realm.’¹⁹ As another Kantian scholar has pointed out, this idea is not a mere philosophical figment, ‘but one we actually have and express every time we bemoan the fact that virtuous persons seem not to get their just deserts in the world or that the good die young’.²⁰ Indeed, the ideal of practical reason – that is, the ideal of reason insofar as it formulates moral commands within us – provides the basis ‘for ... further beliefs that we must exist as immortal souls, that there must be an afterlife, and that there must be a God from which each receives his or her just deserts’.²¹

Although Kant did not believe that speculative reason could demonstrate the existence of a moral world in which the will of man was free, he believed that the existence of such a world was a necessary postulate for the practical reason of man. The existence of such a world is presupposed in the moral actions of men, when they act as if they were free, as if there were a God, and as if they were concerned with purposes transcending the concerns of time and space.²² While recognizing important differences between Kantian ethics and Christian eschatology, Kissinger points to one formal – if not substantive – identity between the two traditions. The Christian concept of the Kingdom of God lifts man out of the order of nature and into a world where terrestrial striving dissolves in the blessedness of inward peace. In the same sense, Kant understands the biblical command of loving God and loving one’s neighbour as oneself. Pathological love cannot be commanded. In Kissinger’s own words: ‘a feeling of respect for the experience of moral law, a liking to do one’s duty based on an *a priori* conception expressed in the categorical imperative, an approach to man as an end, these constitute the true meaning of ethical love’.²³

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 103

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

103

Kissinger contends that the rationalistic formulation of Kant's ethical philosophy tends to obscure its profound visions. As an example, he cites Jean Paul Sartre's criticism of Kantian ethics.²⁴ The French existentialist claims that Kant's moral philosophy achieves universality at the cost of vitality. The content of the categorical imperative becomes so vague as to lose all meaning. As an example, Sartre cites the case of a young Frenchman torn between the desire of joining de Gaulle's resistance and, thereby, exposing his mother to German retaliation, or staying with his family and abandoning his self-respect. According to Sartre, the categorical imperative offers no answer for this dilemma. Whatever decision the individual makes, he would treat somebody – either himself or his mother – as a means to an end.²⁵

The weakness of Sartre's argument, Kissinger claims, is that he argues 'as if moral philosophy should be a manual of action supplying technical solutions to all the problems of existence'. But the dilemmas of life are not to be resolved by manipulation. Ethical conduct, in order to be meaningful, 'must reveal a personality, not a mastery of causal connections'.²⁶ It is worth recalling at this point that the necessity of the categorical imperative applies only to a specific attitude; its universality presupposes the prior experience of the moral law. The existentialists, Kissinger concedes, are right in their assertion that life involves action. Yet their demand that philosophy should offer absolute certainty tends to deny the uniqueness of the individual. The existentialist emphasis on activity 'reduces man to an atom, buffeted by fate, doomed to whirl in concentric circles until a stable constellation is achieved through an understanding of causal laws'.²⁷ The young Frenchman's ethical dilemma was an aspect of the fatedness of existence, not a refutation of the categorical imperative. In an important passage, Kissinger writes:

> No other person can ever feel the soul's dilemma in the ultimate crisis of life. Man must solve his problems with dignity, but alone. The categorical imperative can guide an attitude only if preceded by a transcendental experience of freedom. But experiences are personal and no outsider can prescribe their content. Love is unique only to the lover. Philosophy can ... never create an ethical system which constitutes a necessity of thought or provides technical solutions for all of life's problems. This is the ultimate basis of human freedom, the condition of mankind's self-transcendence.²⁸

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11

Page 104

104

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

Albert Schweitzer, in *The Philosophy of Civilization*, offers another fundamental criticism of Kantian ethics. Kant's union of ethical and epistemological idealism implies - according to Schweitzer - that the noumenal reality, which reveals itself as the moral law in man, operates as the objective principle in the physical world as well. If actions in the phenomenal world are the manifestation of transcendental reality, then events brought about by causation are no more than parallel appearances of occurrences produced by the intellect under the conception of freedom.²⁹ Freedom and ethics, once again, are relegated to the realm of necessity; 'an immanence rules all happenings, only the apprehension of -which differs, but not its operation'.³⁰ Taking exception with Schweitzer, Kissinger argues that the causality of the physical world represents a mode of apprehending phenomena, not a property of their occurrence. The same point can be made about the experience of transcendence. Part of man's freedom issues in his intuition of an ultimate world order. However, this does not mean that this transcendence is, in fact, the objective representation of noumenal reality and its mode of operation. If noumenal reality is approachable only by meditative inquiry, then the mode of its operation in the physical world must remain a mystery.³¹

Kissinger does find a tendency within Kant to equate man's experience of the moral law with the objective meaning of occurrences, thereby attributing an ethical sanction to phenomenal manifestations. This inclination comes to expression in his philosophy of history. If, on the one hand, 'his *Idea for a Universal History* implies that our moral duty for peace enables us to form a conception of its historical attainability, then the inner relationship [between] the *Critique of Pure Reason* and *The Critique of Practical Reason* is maintained'. On the other hand, 'serious problems are raised...if Kant means that a hidden plan of nature ... compels humanity towards harmony with human volition but a tool of nature's mechanism'.³² The latter interpretation would violate the maxim that necessity can never contain a sanction for moral action. The next section turns to Kant's attempt to equate history and politics with man's experience of morality.

## Politics, Law, and War

Much as Kant's metaphysical theory gave meaning to the transcendental experience of freedom, so the categorical imperative

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11

Page 105

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

105

determines man's political duties. The Appendix to *Eternal Peace*
begins with a fundamental assertion:

Morals, when conceived as the totality of absolutely binding
laws according to which we *ought* to act, is in itself practice in
an objective sense. It is therefore an apparent paradox to say
that one *cannot* do [what one *ought* to do] once the
authoritativeness of this concept of duty is acknowledged.³³

The political problem for Kant is simply the ethical problem stated in
practical terms: How can freedom be reconciled in practice with the
like freedom of every other individual? Kant tried to answer this
question in much the same way he approached the moral problem.
'Every action is right', he wrote in the *Philosophy of Law*, 'which in
itself, or in the maxim on which it proceeds, is such that it can co-
exist along with the Freedom of Will of each and all in action,
according to a universal Law'.³⁴ The state functions to promote the
exercise of freedom in accordance with universal law; it is a
mechanism through which the voluntary actions of individuals are
harmonized with the universal law of freedom.

The social contract envisioned by Kant is not an 'actual fact' but
'an idea of Reason'. Insofar as 'no one can prescribe for another as to
what he shall find happiness in', there is no principle based on
happiness that could be universally applied and serve as a guide to the
legislator. The function of the state is not to promote happiness but
to establish the conditions of freedom which 'leave the individual ...
undisturbed in his right to seek his happiness in whatever way may
seem best to him, if only he does not infringe the universal liberty
secured through the law, by violating rights of other fellow-
subjects'.³⁵ Kant explains the origin of the state by a social contract in
virtue of which all, *omnes et singuli*, give up their outward liberty in
favour of the community, to receive it again, converted into civil-
liberty, in their capacity as members of a political organization. In
other words, the individual does not sacrifice himself to a larger
whole; rather, by giving up a savage and lawless liberty, he finds the
whole of his liberty in legal dependence, that is, in the legal state.³⁶

Kant's essay on *Eternal Peace* draws on the categorical imperative
to illumine the ethical character of politics among nations.

We are inevitably pushed to such desperate consequences if we
do not assume that the pure principles of right and law have

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 106

106

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

objective reality in the sense that they can be realized, and hence
that the people within the state and the states toward each other
must act accordingly, whatever may be the objections of an
empirical politics. True politics cannot take a single step without
first paying homage to morals, and while politics by itself is a
difficult art, its combination with morals is no art at all; for
morals cuts the Gordian knot which politics cannot solve as
soon as the two are in conflict.³⁷

In relations between states, the categorical imperative – that man
must be treated as an end, never as a means – makes the attainment
of eternal peace the statesman’s noblest duty. Practical politicians will
always be ready to point out that the moral law rarely coincides with
human volition for its performance. As Kissinger points out,
however, empirical reality can never supply a criterion for motivated
activity in Kant’s scheme. If man denies his transcendental experience
of freedom, then public law is meaningless and eternal peace a
chimera. If, in Kissinger’s words, the moral law constitutes man’s
connection with noumenal reality, ‘then the realm of necessity
appears as a manifestation of the realm of freedom, and no
opposition can occur between theory and practice’.³⁸

Kant's essay, written after the Peace of Basel in 1795, comprises
nine articles for a hypothetical treaty among nations for the assurance
of universal peace. The three definitive articles – the substance of the
draft – embody Kant's conception of the unconditional basis of
peace, 'his recognition that peace implies more than the absence of
war, his affirmation of the supremacy of the moral law in the political
realm'.³⁹ The state of peace – which applies to all three articles – is
not a state of nature. It does not mean simply to live side by side in
tolerable coexistence; it must be established (by cooperation). Mere
coexistence cannot help but lead to outbreaks of violence. Peace can
only be established by establishing lawful conditions. These
circumstances, rather than evolving from the state of nature, must be
created actively, by means of reason. On the strength of reason,
lawful rights and obligations exist even without powers of
enforcement.⁴⁰ The Kantian draft unfolds the principles of legality as
such.

Article I: 'The civil constitution of every state shall be republican'. Kant contends that a true state of peace results, at least in part, from lawful institutions within nations. Yet how, Kissinger asks, is the

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 107

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

107

categorical imperative embodied in social institutions?⁴¹ Just as the moral law contains the objective principle of all actions, so the republican constitution represents the norm of political organization. Republics alone have developed so strong a sense of legality that the consciousness of right may ultimately come to be reliable, even without powers of compulsion. ‘The assertion of man as intrinsically valuable’, Kissinger argues, ‘expresses the transcendental experience of freedom; the principle of dependence upon common legislation reveals the Kingdom of Ends, in which each individual is both subject and legislator’. Kant’s defence of republics testifies to a ‘moral attitude, to a feeling of responsibility towards the rights of others, to a motivation that derives from a conception of the common good’.⁴² A political community built on the categorical imperative achieves ‘a synthesis of liberty expressed in the righteousness of the will and equality exemplified by the universal applicability of its laws’.⁴³

Article II: ‘The law of nations shall be based upon a federation of free states’.

This second article does not call for a world state, or for a universal government, but for a 'federalism of free states' as the realm of international law. Kant rejects a universal peace maintained by superstates. More than once in history, he says, they 'led to the most frightful despotism'. Every state has the lawless desire to achieve 'lasting peace by ruling the whole world, if possible'. Counteracting this evil is the separation of nations by language and religion, which leads first to hatred and war, but then, with 'the progress of civilization and the gradual approach of men to greater harmony', to federalism. Kant did appreciate the one ineradicable difference between civil and international law – the peace among the citizens of a state is kept by the laws of the state, which has the power of compulsion; peace between different states can be established and kept legally, but only without powers of compulsion.⁴⁴

Even though Kant forgoes the idea of world government (a clear 'awareness of political realities', according to Kissinger), he 'can do so ... without sacrificing the independent validity of his moral maxims, since his first definitive article has ... assured the conformity of the state to the categorical imperative'.⁴⁵ Now a general basis for peace can be created apart from the incidental existence of empirically favourable conditions. Eternal peace is the emanation of man's moral personality expressed through the medium of a

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 108

108

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

republican constitution. Peace will be won if the ethos of the representatives and their constituents – the peoples who must share the information and make the judgement – rises to a higher level (that is, one that brings the courage and self-sacrifice for freedom and for the right).⁴⁶

Article III: 'The law of world citizenship shall be confined to terms of universal hospitality'.

Kant's conception of man as an end involves the encouragement of contacts among nations, but it also implies a denial of the right of conquest. The globe represents the common possession of mankind. Kant developed this notion of world citizenship only in one point. Men cannot disperse indefinitely, because the surface of the earth is limited. They must suffer other men to live beside them and use their land rights as a possible basis for commerce. This presupposes the right of hospitality, which provides a basis for intercourse and trade between natives and newcomers. Kissinger cites here the role of the categorical imperative, inasmuch as the 'Law of Nations must ... guarantee the treatment of all foreigners as ends, while preventing the exploitation of the indigenous population'.⁴⁷ The idea of cosmopolitan law is not fantastic. Each man – through his own experience of the moral law – is responsible to humanity for his will gives universal maxims, for good or evil.⁴⁸

## II. History and Ultimate Values

The essay on *Eternal Peace* continues the symmetrical edifice of Kant's philosophy. The *Critique of Pure Reason* affirmed the possibility of the experience of freedom, and his moral philosophy gave it transcendental meaning. In Kant's philosophy of history, the moral law which lifts man above himself is revealed as the normative principle governing political events. No conflict between theory and practice is here conceivable. As Kissinger notes, the categorical imperative represents practice in the objective sense.⁴⁹ Humanity's moral longings divulge history's meaning, because only through the experience of freedom does man apprehend the unity which produces all phenomena. Peace, for Kant, represents a command of the 'moral law derived from formal a priori considerations independent of any empirical conditions. While humanity's aspirations may disclose the meaning of history, the idea that such a

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 109

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

109

meaning could be translated easily into precise moral acts in a
turbulent political arena commanded Kissinger's dissent.

In fact, Kissinger explains how Schweitzer's criticism of Kantian
ethics (that is, equating man's experience of the moral law with the
objective meaning of occurrences) is founded in the *Idea for a
Universal History with Cosmopolitan Intent*. Kant identifies three
possible ways for apprehending historical events: as the unfolding of
a plan (either natural or divine) by which man develops from the
lowest state of animality to the highest level of human freedom; as
the accidental constellation of power relations which may over time
achieve a pattern of stability; or as an incomprehensible alteration of
strife and truce that leads to hopeless resignation about peace.⁵⁰ Kant
embraces the first alternative. If the consciousness of phenomena
requires the formulation of synthetic *a priori* judgements, and if the
moral law derives its validity from *a priori* criteria of universality,
then history can be conceived only on the basis of an *a priori*
principle that reveals its immanence. This principle, as Kissinger
asserts, 'operates outside the range of human volition and structures
the apprehension of events by its own inward necessity'.⁵¹ Yet how is
one to reconcile man's experience of purposiveness with the meaning
of political events?

Kant utilizes the argument, developed in the *Critique of Judgment*,
that a teleological principle must inhere in nature as a condition for
the regularity of phenomena. Amid the general absurdity of human
affairs, Kant looks for a natural purpose 'which would make a history-
according to a determinate plan of nature possible for creatures who-
act without any plan of their own'.⁵² Kant's principles for
understanding history are summarized by Kissinger along the-
following lines. Since history is governed by a 'teleological causality',
the natural faculties of all creatures are destined to unfold completely
according to their end. The goal of man as the only rational creature
is the development of his reason. At the same time, existence involves
strife and disharmony, and man is presented with a series of
problems. The natural environment imposes these difficulties on man
in order to force him to create his own happiness and virtue. Man's
faculties develop through the antagonism of society and the struggle
between nations.⁵³ 'War, so great an evil as it is, is also the motive that
leads men to exchange the raw state of nature for a civil state.'⁵⁴ The
emergence, only after many disappointing errors, of a just civic
constitution will testify to the proper disposition of the will. The

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 110

110

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

convergence of nature and ethics may be gleaned from the following
passage:

Man wants concord, but nature knows better what is good for
his kind; nature wants discord. Man wants to live comfortably
and pleasurably, but nature intends that he should raise himself
out of lethargy and inactive content into work and trouble and
then he should find means of extricating himself adroitly from
the latter.⁵⁵

In Kissinger's words: 'The ceaseless preparation for conflict, the feeling of insecurity engendered by armies, the ravages of never-ending strife, all teach humanity what reason alone should have indicated without all this suffering'.⁵⁶ The unfolding of events will force the emergence of a republican constitution, even if moral precepts are to no avail.

Schweitzer's criticism seems confirmed if the meaning derived
from the categorical imperative is identical with the design of nature.
Since ethics become meaningful only if they can affect noumenal
reality, a dangerous confusion of the ethical and the natural arises.
Kissinger's concern is that this tendency in Kant's thought represents
an 'attempt to wrest certainty from the fatedness of life, [and] to
conjure phenomena to escape the transitoriness of existence'.⁵⁷ By
contrast, the categorical imperative universalized a personal relation
to the ultimate reality which underlies the world of phenomena. This
implied that the noumena are approachable only by way of a direct
experience of the moral law. In other words, 'their operation in
phenomena cannot be decided by pure reason, nor ... affirmed by the
teleological judgment'.⁵⁸ Kissinger's claim is that the transcendental
intuition of freedom does not necessarily reveal the objective mode
of noumenal operation but only its relationship to man. The
'transcendental Self' attaches to a higher world order through a
vision that is essentially incommunicable; the categorical imperative
represents its only meaningful principle when it issues into action.

The *Idea for a Universal History* derives the sanction for its
political maxims, not from the determination of the will by the moral
law, but by the proper evaluation of technical requirements. Kant's
vision of universal reconciliation, as Kissinger explains, is predicated
upon the revolt of the frustrated soul against the dark uncertainties
of constant warfare.⁵⁹ Discord can produce harmony, but only
through an analysis of its conditions, not from a conception of duty.

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11

Page 111

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

111

Morality follows from experience, 'instead of the categorical imperative supplying norms the approximation to which reveals the moral content of an action'.⁶⁰ Kissinger cites the following passage from the Guarantee of Eternal Peace:

> The problem of establishing a state is solvable even for a people of devils, if only they have the intelligence though this may sound harsh. [Kant then formulates a hypothetical question on the proper balancing of selfish tendencies.] Such a problem *must* be solvable. For it is not the moral perfection of mankind, but merely the mechanism of nature, which this task seeks to know how to use in order to arrange the conflict of unpacific attitudes in a given people in such a way that they impel each other to compulsory laws and thus bring about the state of peace in which such laws are enforced.... In short, we *can* say that nature wants irresistibly that law achieve superior force. If one neglects to do this, it will be accomplished anyhow, albeit with much inconvenience.⁶¹

Of importance here is that a mechanism *replaces* the categorical imperative as a motive force; freedom is relegated to a mode of causality.

Kissinger entertains the objection that 'Kant formulates this teleology, as a thought one adds to, but does not really find in nature'.⁶² This, he contends, is a distinction more apparent than real. The tentativeness of a hypothesis applies only to its conclusions, not to the possibility of solving the problem. Its very expression speaks to the efficacy of the endeavour. The hypothetical nature of Kant's teleology 'cannot hide the fact that he considered a conception of specific purposes in the mechanical course of nature both possible and necessary'.⁶³ Kissinger concedes that the tentativeness of the formulation engenders unsettled debate about the specific purpose which Kant finds in history. The hypothesis, however, cannot affect 'the basic argument of this [Kissinger's] discussion, that an ascription of any purpose is neither necessary nor possible, if Kant's original analysis is valid'.⁶⁴ If the inexorable unfolding of events automatically produces the proper ethical disposition of the will, then the experience of freedom becomes meaningless and the categorical imperative becomes a mere technical problem. In another essay, Kant rejects the argument that the categorical imperative and its contribution to peace can take any account of accidental political developments.

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 112

112

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

The maxim about theory and practice which has become common in our wordy and deedless times causes very great damage if applied to moral questions. For the canon of practical reason is involved in this realm. Here the value of [a given] practice depends upon its appropriateness to the theory on which it is based. All is lost if empirical, and consequently accidental, conditions of the execution of the law are made conditions of the law itself. Then a practice which is valuated in relation to the probable result of previous experience is accorded the right of determining the theory itself.⁶⁵

Another way to resolve this difficulty, as Kissinger advises, is to draw the inference that the physical world contains a limiting condition to the universal applicability of the categorical imperative. In the *Metaphysical Foundations of Morals*, Kant writes: 'It is our duty to act according to the idea of such an end which reason commands [namely peace] even if there is not the least probability that it can be achieved, provided its impossibility can not be determined'.⁶⁶ Carl Friedrich contends that Kant's qualifying clause represents a fundamental condition of his political ethics, an important connecting link between the realm of freedom and the realm of necessity: 'No one was more clearly aware ... of the necessity of testing hypothetical judgment by experience than Kant'.⁶⁷ In the Appendix to *Eternal Peace*, for example, Kant insisted that only what is possible can be morally required, and he recites the dictum of the law *ultra posse nemo obligatur*. This is precisely the reason, Friedrich says, for the importance of showing the possibility that in peace-making, as in other human affairs, we learn by doing.⁶⁸ Fact and norm are hereby reconciled, the course of history an affirmation of man's aspirations.

Kissinger finds Friedrich's solution only partly satisfactory, much of the argument depending upon what Kant meant by a proof for impossibility.⁶⁹ Friedrich takes the position that the applicability of Kant's moral maxims depends on their attainability in the empirical realm. Yet Kant never insisted on a proof of the feasibility of the moral law. Kissinger believes this contradiction can be resolved 'if we consider that Kant was quite aware of the fact that an absolute proof of impossibility is out of the question'.⁷⁰ A strict proof of impossibility in the empirical world, and particularly in the political realm, is unrealistic since it would require a grasp of all possible causal

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11

Page 113

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

113

connections. Moreover, Kant repeatedly asserts that the possibility of
the categorical imperative is given in its very conception. If the
experience of the moral law reveals a glimpse of the noumena which
underlie all visible workings of nature, then what obstacle can the
physical world possibly provide? A related observation by Kant on
the field of constitutional law makes the point:

there exists a concept which may be expressed by the words
constitutional law. If this concept has binding force for men
who are pitched against each other through the antagonism of
their freedom, [perhaps we can further assume that] this
concept has objective practical reality without our considering
what good or ill may result; for the knowledge of these results
is based purely on experience. If this be so, then constitutional
law is based upon principles a priori since what is right can not
be taught by experience. A theory of constitutional law exists
with which practice must agree in order to be valid [from a
moral standpoint].<sup>71</sup>

The contrast between Kant's critical philosophy and his teleological
philosophy of history cannot be resolved by treating the latter as a
demonstration of the moral law. The categories are forms that
explain the process of cognition; the categorical imperative
reconciles a personal experience of freedom - and moral obligation -
with universal applicability. The precise content of both the
categories and categorical imperative depends, however, upon
subsequent experience. The conception of a definite purpose in the
unfolding of events goes beyond these limits. Kant's teleological
framework for historical understanding, Kissinger contends, 'does
not reveal a method for apprehending phenomena, but prescribes
their essence'.<sup>72</sup> The material principles of peace or a just constitution
are not analogous as an *a priori* principle to either the categories or
the moral law. Rather the values of peace or republicanism (which
also implies lawful external relations) 'constitute the instantiation of a
general principle, not a necessary mode of historical apprehension'.<sup>73</sup>
As a specific purpose (since it does not represent a truly *a priori*
principle), the formulation may be repudiated by any other
postulation of hypothetical goals.

Kant, in Kissinger's estimation, ultimately fails in attempting to
expand the philosophy of history into a guarantee for the
attainability of the moral law. The mechanism of nature offers no

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 114

114

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

reliable assurance for the implementation of freedom. The claims of freedom and necessity can only be reconciled through an inward experience. In Kantian terms, the noumena that produce appearances are perceived through a personal experience only, and this accounts for man's essential loneliness in the face of the fatedness of existence. For Kissinger, this predicament 'also makes possible the concept of the dignity of the individual whose will gives universal maxims despite his insignificance as but a spec in a determined system'.⁷⁴

### III. Kissinger and the Responsibility of the Statesman

The study of history evokes in Kissinger a dual feeling of inevitability coupled with inward doubt. The inevitability results from the contemplation of completed actions, from the unfolding of events which the mind orders into a causal sequence. The uncertainty is 'an assertion of the specificity of the individual, a demand by the soul for freedom'.⁷⁵ Necessity, which constitutes an attribute of external reality, can offer no guide to action. Phenomena always appear inevitable. The meaning of life, as Kant grasped, is an inward state. He derived his ethics from a transcendental experience, from a vision of ultimate reality. Admittedly, Kant's *Idea for a Universal History* tends to equate the realm of necessity with the gifts man inherits in the realm of freedom. But this inconsistency, Kissinger concludes, 'is submerged in the transcendental experience of the moral law, which alone suffices to validate all historical striving'. Kissinger depicts the depths of the experience in the following terms:

> [Man's freedom] does not derive from the phenomenal world, for this knows only necessity. It is not produced by rational reflection, for it provides the condition for the determination of the will by reason. It must constitute a mystic attitude ... an inward state that feels the cosmic in the Universe. There are moments in every person's life, when the tensions fall away and the unity of all creation appears as a sudden vision.... This is Spinoza's intellectual love of God, the total apprehension of the divine immanence, the resignation that gives peace, the bliss that elevates man above himself. This is why the Greeks considered the good and the beautiful as a unity; the good as a testimony to the Divine in action; the beautiful as an intuition of the Ultimate in contemplation.⁷⁶

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 115

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

115

Kissinger points to a paradox in human freedom, whereby the very recognition of necessity enables man to transcend the inevitability of his environment. Critics may well wonder how a recognition of necessity can imply freedom? Perhaps this logic could lead to the multiplication of restrictive measures simply to increase liberty? Kissinger responds by saying that these objections mistake the objective necessity of the phenomenal world for the inward necessity of a recognition of limits. The sanction man gives to 'the necessity felt as a reality transcending [his] existence' testifies 'to a personality, to the unique which man imparts to the inevitable'. Ethical freedom for Kissinger, as for Kant, reveals the reverence of a soul and exhibits a realization that one is man and not God. The feeling of reverence fosters tolerance, 'the respect for the dignity of the individual [as well as] the apprehensions that set boundaries to one's endeavors'.⁷⁷

Kissinger denied that the will-to-power forms the basis for this inward liberation. At best, 'as in Hobbes, it may derive maxims of prudence for self-preservation. But ethical activity does not derive its maxims from the struggle for survival'.⁷⁸ The proper domain of ethics entails an inward conviction of choice – that is, the necessity of setting limits to one's actions, the feeling of humility which does not claim its hopes as the decisive pattern of reality. At the same time, the transcendental experience of the moral law leaves the question of purposes in history undecided. 'Life is suffering. Birth involves death. Transitoriness is the fate of existence.... The generation of Buchenwald and the Siberian labor camps cannot talk with the same optimism as its fathers.'⁷⁹ Dante expressed a similar thought on the pilgrim's journey towards inner peace:

> Master, I said to him, now tell me also: this Fortune, of which thou hintest to me, what is she that has the good things of the world within her clutches?

> And he to me: O foolish creatures how great is this ignorance that falls upon ye! Now I wish thee to receive my judgment of her. He whose wisdom is transcendent over all, made the heavens and gave them guides so that every part shines on every other part, equally distributing the light; in like manner, for worldly goods he ordained a general minister and guide to change betimes the vain possession from people to people and from one kindred to another beyond the hindrance of human

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 116

116

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

wisdom: Hence one people commands, another languishes obeying her sentence, which is hidden like the serpent in the grass.

Your knowledge can not understand her: she provides, judges and maintains her kingdom as the other Gods do theirs. Her permutations have no truce; necessity makes her be swift. This is she who is so much reviled, even by those who ought to praise her, when blaming her wrongfully and with evil words. But she is in bliss and hears it not.⁸⁰

Kissinger's defence of moral choice as the precondition of human freedom calls into question the role of transcendent principles in political ethics. Kant predicated his moral philosophy on the possibility of a dimension to life that transcends both nature and history. Kissinger's idea of transcendence is ripe with ambivalence. Certainly his inclination to the metaphysical is evident from his belief that freedom can only be won if man stands outside the cultural traditions of naturalism and pragmatism. His notion of self-transcendence is rooted in a vision of man who must always deal with empirical reality in the context of a vision or a will to create a new reality. This theme led him, in *A World Restored: Europe After Napoleon*, to analyse Metternich's failure to surmount history, as well as the need for statesmen to go beyond bureaucratic and technical solutions to life's problems.⁸¹

Yet Kissinger's spirituality is far from traditional. While he depicts man's aspirations as a reflection of the soul, he also suggests that one should not insist on immortality as the price for giving meaning to life. There is, then, an anthropocentric quality to his philosophy, one that clashes with a more conventional religious outlook on redemption and salvation. Nor does Kissinger accept the Greek idea of the universe as a rationally ordered cosmos. History is an unending process, that infinite abyss that Metternich and other eighteenth-century rationalists failed to calculate.

Kissinger's sense of transcendence ultimately points in two directions. One interpretation – developed by Peter Dickson in *Kissinger and the Meaning of History* – holds that Kissinger's formal ethic is so transcendent (deriving from man's 'mystic relationship to the Infinite') that it virtually disappears as a force directing man's creative energies. Kissinger, Dickson argues, cannot escape relativism and historicism. His vision of man as an historical being – finite and

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 117

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

117

doomed to die – undermines man's relationship with the natural order and with God. Moreover, Kissinger's historical consciousness betrays any concept of purpose or progress in the lives of men and nations.⁸²

Dickson's verdict is incomplete, however, without considering how Kissinger's perspective on transcendence serves as a judgemental restraint rather than as a controlling end-in-view. The prudent statesman, capable of distinguishing between the misery of politics and the realm of universal ethical norm, is less apt to commit the sin of the fascist mind: the equation of political and military success with moral superiority. 'Freedom', Kissinger writes, 'derives not merely from an inward state but from an experience that has come to a recognition of limits.'⁸³ These limits begin with the recognition that man is not entitled to play God, that there must be a tolerance of human diversity, and that there is a need to set boundaries to one's striving. Only then can there be a positive intuition in the concept of the dignity of the individual.

Kissinger's concern for the destructive and constructive components of the human will formed the intellectual core of his tragic perspective on politics and history. For the statesman to rely upon the moral purity of an individual is to abandon the possibility of restraint, insofar as 'moral claims involve a quest for absolutes, a denial of nuance, a rejection of history'. Similarly, dependence upon the continued good will of another sovereign state is demoralizing, 'because it is a confession of impotence, an invitation to irresponsibility induced by the conviction that events cannot be affected by one's will'.⁸⁴ The interval between the defeat of Napoleon in Russia and the Congress of Verona (1822) points to the fundamental distinction between the conqueror (Napoleon) or the prophet (Alexander) on the one side and the statesman (Metternich or Castlereagh) on the other; 'between the identification of conception and possibility and the insistence on the contingency of the individual will; between the effort to escape time and the need to survive in it'. A concluding passage from *A World Restored* illustrates why the clash between the statesman and the prophet – whose claims can be as dissolving as those of the conqueror – is a tragic and necessarily inconclusive contest.

'And the statesman is confronted with what must always upset his calculations; that is not balance which inspires men but universality, not security but immortality.... While the

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 118

118

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

conqueror attempts to equate his will with the structure of obligations and the prophet seeks to dissolve organization in a moment of transcendence, the statesman strives to keep latent the tension between organization and inspiration; to create a pattern of obligations sufficiently spontaneous to reduce to a minimum the necessity for the application of force, but, at the same time, of sufficient firmness not to require the legitimization of a moment of exaltation.⁸⁵

In a 1974 interview with columnist James Reston, Kissinger described himself more 'as a historian than as a statesman'. As a historian, he remains 'conscious of the fact that every civilization that has ever existed has ultimately collapsed'. History constitutes a record 'of efforts that failed, of aspirations that weren't realized, of wishes that were fulfilled and then turned out to be different from what one expected'.⁸⁶ Little surprise, then, that Kissinger should begin his most recent work, *Diplomacy*, with a tribute to the dilemma described by George Bernard Shaw: 'There are two tragedies in life. One is to lose your heart's desire. The other is to gain it'.⁸⁷ As a historian, Kissinger lives with a sense of the inevitability of tragedy. 'Each generation', he said, 'lives in time, and even though ultimately perhaps societies have all suffered a decline, that is of no help to any one generation, and the decline is usually traceable—to a loss of creativity and inspiration and therefore avoidable.'⁸⁸ 'No longing is completely fulfilled', he wrote in his undergraduate thesis at the age of 26. 'Nothing is more difficult for Americans to understand than the possibility of tragedy', he stated 25 years later. Nothing is more alien to Kissinger than the kind of optimism that assumes that all problems are soluble, if only the right formula is found.⁸⁹

At the same time, however, Kissinger recoiled from blind submission before the tragic element in history. He reminds his readers that abstention from evil does not affect evil in the world, but only destroys the faculty of choice. As Albert Camus said, not to choose, too, is a choice. As a statesman, Kissinger was compelled to act on the assumption that problems must be solved. One can talk endlessly about the 'balance of power' or 'legitimacy' or the 'impact of personalities', and yet as every new case arises 'that knowledge will be empty if one does not understand what the elements of power are, how legitimacy is conceived, and what the impact of structure on events can be'. Foreign policy, 'a form of art and not a precise

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 119

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

119

science', requires an intuitive feeling, which can be partly taught from history but which is partly indefinable'.⁹⁰ In a conversation with Walter Laqueur just two years after leaving the Ford administration, Kissinger alluded to the statesman's dilemma in striking a balance between capability and intention.

The statesman has to make a whole series of judgments that he cannot prove while he is making them. He has to deal with other units ... that are not necessarily subject to his will, and he therefore has to strike a balance between the capabilities of parties and their intentions. A statesman can escape his dilemma by assuming that the other party is always benevolent. If his judgment should turn out to be wrong, however, he may have produced something irretrievable. Consequently, one of the purposes of statesmanship must be to seek to restrict the significance of the other's intentions by one's own actions.⁹¹

The overwhelming challenge to the statesman is the pressure of time. The analyst runs no risk. If his conclusions prove wrong, he can write another treatise. Kissinger here echoes the remarks of Edmund Burke in his 'Speech on the Petition of the Unitarians'.

A statesman differs from a professor in an university; the latter has only the general view of society; the former, the statesman, has a number of circumstances to combine with those general ideas, and to take into his consideration. Circumstances are infinite, are infinitely combined; are variable and transient; he who does not take them into consideration is not erroneous, but stark mad, - *dat operam ut cum ratione insaniat*, he is metaphysically mad. A statesman, never losing sight of principles, is to be guided by circumstances; and, judging contrary to the exigencies of the moment, he may ruin his country forever.⁹²

As a scientist creates a new nature out of his knowledge of the forces of nature, so the statesman creates a new society out of his knowledge of the nature of man. In this unsolvable contrast between what he needs and wants and what he is able to obtain, the statesman is the prototype of social man himself; for what the statesman experiences on his exalted plane is the common lot of all mankind. Suspended between his spiritual destiny which he cannot fulfil and his animal nature in which he cannot remain, he is forever condemned to

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 120

120

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

experience the contrast between the longings of his mind and his actual condition as his personal, eminently human tragedy.⁹³

The tension the statesman confronts between organization and inspiration, between power and moral principle, was evident in Kissinger's rationale for *détente*. On the one hand, the foreign policy of the Nixon administration 'challenged American exceptionalism and its imperative that policy be based on the affirmation of transcendent values'.⁹⁴ America's domestic experience had led it to the belief that involvement in power politics is not inevitable, but only a historic accident, and that nations have a choice between power politics and other kinds of foreign policy not tainted by the desire for power.⁹⁵ On the other hand, Nixon and Kissinger 'perceived the world as composed of ambiguous challenges, of nations impelled by interest rather than goodwill, and of incremental rather than final changes – a world ... that could be managed but could be neither dominated nor rejected'. This was a world in which no clear-cut terminal point beckoned, and where the solution to one problem was more likely an admission ticket to the next. Traditional American values remained important, as Kissinger insisted, but they could not be translated into an agenda of immediate, final outcomes. American idealism 'would be needed to provide the inner strength for America to move through ambiguity to a world that was, everyone hoped, better than the one before, but never finally finished'.⁹⁶

The competing claims of stability and justice permeate Kissinger's vision of America's foreign policy role in an increasingly multipolar world. In the final chapter of *Diplomacy*, he points out that the rejection of history extols the image of a universal man living by universal maxims, regardless of the past, of geography, or of other immutable circumstances. American policy-makers, often emphasizing universal truths rather than national characteristics, generally prefer multilateral approaches to national ones: the agendas of disarmament, nonproliferation, and human rights rather than essentially national, geopolitical, or strategic issues. He concedes that a country with America's idealistic tradition cannot base its policy on the balance of power as the sole criterion for a new world order. Yet that concession does not obviate the responsibility of American leaders to 'learn that equilibrium is a fundamental precondition for the pursuit of [their] historic goals'. America must now master 'the transition from an age when all choices seemed open to a period

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 121

KISSINGER'S PHILOSOPHY

121

when it can still accomplish more than any other society if it can only
learn its limits'. The Wilsonian goals of America's past – peace,
stability, progress, and freedom for mankind – will have to be sought
in a journey that has no end. Above all, Kissinger warns that
Americans must not mistake innocence for self-indulgence.

World leadership is inherent in America's power and values, but it does not include the privilege of pretending that America is doing other nations a kindness by associating with them, or that it has a limitless capacity to impose its will by withholding its favors. For America, any association with *Realpolitik* must take into account the core values of the first society of history to have been ... created in the name of liberty. Yet America's survival and progress will depend as well on its ability to make choices which reflect contemporary reality.⁹⁷

The relative weight to be assigned to each of these priorities defines both the challenge to, and the stature of, the statesman. What must be avoided at all costs, however, is the pretension that choice has no price, or that no balance needs to be struck. The unending quest for meaningful choices in a tragic world in which the only certainty is risk is a statesman's lot. 'Men become myths', Kissinger wrote in *A World Restored*, 'not by what they know, or even by what they achieve, but by the tasks they set for themselves'.⁹⁸ Hans J. Morgenthau appreciated, perhaps more than most of Dr. Kissinger's American colleagues, the statesman's dilemma in all its awesome starkness:

> We have no choice between power and the common good. To act successfully ... according to the rules of the political art, is political wisdom. To know with despair that the political act is inevitably evil, and to act nevertheless, is moral courage. To choose among several expedient actions the least evil one is moral judgment. In the combination of political wisdom, moral courage, and moral judgment, man reconciles his political nature with his moral destiny. That this conciliation is nothing more than a *modus vivendi*, uneasy, precarious, and even paradoxical, can disappoint only those who prefer to gloss over and to distort the tragic contradictions of human existence with the soothing logic of a specious concord.⁹⁹

University of Oklahoma

ch05russ.qxd 05/12/95 15:11 Page 122

122

DIPLOMACY & STATECRAFT

NOTES

1. Henry A. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History: Reflections on Spengler, Toynbee, and Kant', (B. A. Honors Thesis, Harvard University, 1951).

2. See the discussion by Hans J. Morgenthau in *Scientific Man vs. Power Politics* (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946), pp.175-87.

3. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.273.

4. *The Critique of Pure Reason* in extracts from the *Philosophy of Kant*, ed. John Watson (New York, 1894), p.3.

5. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.273.

6. Ibid., p.275.

7. Ibid.

8. Ibid., p.276.

9. Ibid., p.270.

10. Ibid., p.279.

11. Ibid. See also John Hallowell, *Main Currents in Modern Political Thought* (New York: Henry Holt, 1950), p.242.

12. Ibid.

13. Ibid., p.280.

14. *The Philosophy of Kant*, ed. Carl Friedrich (New York: Modern Library, 1949), p.170.

15. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.281, n.1.

16. Quoted in Immanuel Kant, *Perpetual Peace and Other Essays*, trans. Ted Humphrey (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1983), p.10.

17. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.281.

18. Ibid., p.282.

19. Ibid. Norman Kemp Smith argues that in later life Kant considered this an overly theoretical proof of God's existence and asserted, instead, that God-speaks directly through the categorical imperative. See Smith's *A Commentary to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason* (New York: Macmillan, 1918), p.608.

20. Ted Humphrey, 'Translator's Introduction', in *Perpetual Peace and Other Essays*, pp.10-11.

21. Ibid.

22. Hallowell, *Main Currents of Modern Political Thought*, p.244.

23. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.283.

24. Ibid., p.284.

25. Jean Paul Sartre, *Existentialism* (New York: Philosophical Library, 1947), p.28.

26. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.285.

27. Ibid., p.287.

28. Ibid., p.286.

29. Albert Schweitzer, *The Philosophy of Civilization* (New York: Macmillan, 1950), pp.185-6.

30. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.287.

31. Ibid.

32. Ibid., pp.262-3. For Kant's implication of 'inexorability', see *The Philosophy of Kant*, ed. Carl Friedrich, p.453.

33. Ibid., p.457.

34. Immanuel Kant, *Philosophy of Law*, trans. W. Hastie (Edinburgh, 1887).

35. Quoted in Hallowell, *Main Currents of Modern Political Thought*, pp.248-9.

36. Guido de Ruggiero, *History of European Liberalism* (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1927), p.219.

37. *The Philosophy of Kant*, ed. Carl Friedrich, p.469.

38. Kissinger, 'The Meaning of History', p.290.

39. Ibid., p.293.

40. Karl Jaspers, 'Kant's*Perpetual-Peace*, in Jaspers, *Philosophy And The World* (Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1963), pp.88-9.