Diplomacy

Valutazione media 4,17
( su 4.801 valutazioni fornite da Goodreads )
 
9780671659912: Diplomacy

In this brilliant, controversial, and monumental book, former Secretary-of-State Henry Kissinger explains, based on his own experience, what diplomacy is, and why, historically, Americans, from our presidents down to the man in the street, have always distrusted the whole idea. 30 photos. 6 maps. Index.

Le informazioni nella sezione "Riassunto" possono far riferimento a edizioni diverse di questo titolo.

About the Author:

Henry Kissinger was the fifty-sixth Secretary of State. Born in Germany, Dr. Kissinger came to the United States in 1938 and was naturalized a US citizen in 1943. He served in the US Army and attended Harvard University, where he later became a member of the faculty. Among the awards he has received are the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and the Medal of Liberty. Dr. Kissinger is currently Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc., an international consulting firm.

Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.:

CHAPTER ONE

The New World Order

Almost as if according to some natural law, in every century there seems to emerge a country with the power, the will, and the intellectual and moral impetus to shape the entire international system in accordance with its own values. In the seventeenth century, France under Cardinal Richelieu introduced the modern approach to international relations, based on the nation-state and motivated by national interest as its ultimate purpose. In the eighteenth century, Great Britain elaborated the concept of the balance of power, which dominated European diplomacy for the next 200 years. In the nineteenth century, Metternich's Austria reconstructed the Concert of Europe and Bismarck's Germany dismantled it, reshaping European diplomacy into a cold-blooded game of power politics.

In the twentieth century, no country has influenced international relations as decisively and at the same time as ambivalently as the United States. No society has more firmly insisted on the inadmissibility of intervention in the domestic affairs of other states, or more passionately asserted that its own values were universally applicable. No nation has been more pragmatic in the day-to-day conduct of its diplomacy, or more ideological in the pursuit of its historic moral convictions. No country has been more reluctant to engage itself abroad even while undertaking alliances and commitments of unprecedented reach and scope.

The singularities that America has ascribed to itself throughout its history have produced two contradictory attitudes toward foreign policy. The first is that America serves its values best by perfecting democracy at home, thereby acting as a beacon for the rest of mankind; the second, that America's values impose on it an obligation to crusade for them around the world. Torn between nostalgia for a pristine past and yearning for a perfect future, American thought has oscillated between isolationism and commitment, though, since the end of the Second World War, the realities of interdependence have predominated.

Both schools of thought -- of America as beacon and of America as crusader -- envision as normal a global international order based on democracy, free commerce, and international law. Since no such system has ever existed, its evocation often appears to other societies as utopian, if not naïve. Still, foreign skepticism never dimmed the idealism of Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, or Ronald Reagan, or indeed of all other twentieth-century American presidents. If anything, it has spurred America's faith that history can be overcome and that if the world truly wants peace, it needs to apply America's moral prescriptions.

Both schools of thought were products of the American experience. Though other republics have existed, none had been consciously created to vindicate the idea of liberty. No other country's population had chosen to head for a new continent and tame its wilderness in the name of freedom and prosperity for all. Thus the two approaches, the isolationist and the missionary, so contradictory on the surface, reflected a common underlying faith: that the United States possessed the world's best system of government, and that the rest of mankind could attain peace and prosperity by abandoning traditional diplomacy and adopting America's reverence for international law and democracy.

America's journey through international politics has been a triumph of faith over experience. Since the time America entered the arena of world politics in 1917, it has been so preponderant in strength and so convinced of the rightness of its ideals that this century's major international agreements have been embodiments of American values -- from the League of Nations and the Kellogg-Briand Pact to the United Nations Charter and the Helsinki Final Act. The collapse of Soviet communism marked the intellectual vindication of American ideals and, ironically, brought America face to face with the kind of world it had been seeking to escape throughout its history. In the emerging international order, nationalism has gained a new lease on life. Nations have pursued self-interest more frequently than high-minded principle, and have competed more than they have cooperated. There is little evidence to suggest that this age-old mode of behavior has changed, or that it is likely to change in the decades ahead.

What is new about the emerging world order is that, for the first time, the United States can neither withdraw from the world nor dominate it. America cannot change the way it has perceived its role throughout its history, not should it want to. When America entered the international arena, it was young and robust and had the power to make the world conform to its vision of international relations. By the end of the Second World War in 1945, the United States was so powerful (at one point about 35 percent of the world's entire economic production was American) that it seemed as if it was destined to shape the world according to its preferences.

John F. Kennedy declared confidently in 1961 that America was strong enough to "pay any price, bear any burden" to ensure the success of liberty. Three decades later, the United States is in less of a position to insist on the immediate realization of all its desires. Other countries have grown into Great Power status. The United States now faces the challenge of reaching its goals in stages, each of which is an amalgam of American values and geopolitical necessities. One of the new necessities is that a world comprising several states of comparable strength must base its order on some concept of equilibrium -- an idea with which the United States has never felt comfortable.

When American thinking on foreign policy and European diplomatic traditions encountered each other at the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, the differences in historical experience became dramatically evident. The European leaders sought to refurbish the existing system according to familiar methods; the American peacemakers believed that the Great War had resulted not from intractable geopolitical conflicts hut from flawed European practices. In his famous Fourteen Points, Woodrow Wilson told the Europeans that, henceforth, the international system should be based not on the balance of power but on ethnic self-determination, that their security should depend not on military alliances but on collective security, and that their diplomacy should no longer be conducted secretly by experts but on the basis of "open agreements, openly arrived at." Clearly, Wilson had come not so much to discuss the terms for ending a war or for restoring the existing international order, as he had to recast a whole system of international relations as it had been practiced for nearly three centuries.

For as long as Americans have been reflecting on foreign policy, they have ascribed Europe's travails to the balance-of-power system. And since the time Europe first had to concern itself with American foreign policy, its leaders have looked askance at America's self-appointed mission of global reform. Each side has behaved as if the other had freely chosen its mode of diplomatic behavior and could have, were it wiser or less bellicose, selected some other, more agreeable, method.

In fact, both the American and the European approaches to foreign policy were the products of their own unique circumstances. Americans inhabited a nearly empty continent shielded from predatory powers by two vast oceans and with weak countries as neighbors. Since America confronted no power in need of being balanced, it could hardly have occupied itself with the challenges of equilibrium even if its leaders had been seized by the bizarre notion of replicating European conditions amidst a people who had turned their backs on Europe.

The anguishing dilemmas of security that tormented European nations did not touch America for nearly 150 years. When they did, America twice participated in the world wars which had been started by the nations of Europe. In each instance, by the time America got involved, the balance of power had already failed to operate, producing this paradox: that the balance of power, which most Americans disdained, in fact assured American security as long as it functioned as it was designed; and that it was its breakdown that drew America into international politics.

The nations of Europe did not choose the balance of power as the means for regulating their relations out of innate quarrelsomeness or an Old World love of intrigue. If the emphasis on democracy and international law was the product of America's unique sense of security, European diplomacy had been forged in the school of hard knocks.

Europe was thrown into balance-of-power politics when its first choice, the medieval dream of universal empire, collapsed and a host of stares of more or less equal strength arose from the ashes of that ancient aspiration. When a group of states so constituted are obliged to deal with one another, there are only two possible outcomes: either one state becomes so strong that it dominates all the others and creates an empire, or no stare is ever quite powerful enough to achieve that goal. In the latter case, the pretensions of the most aggressive member of the international community are kept in check by a combination of the others; in other words, by the operation of a balance of power.

The balance-of-power system did not purport to avoid crises or even wars. When working properly, it was meant to limit both the ability of states to dominate others and the scope of conflicts. Its goal was not peace so much as stability and moderation. By definition, a balance-of-power arrangement cannot satisfy every member of the international system completely; it works best when it keeps dissatisfaction below the level at which the aggrieved party will seek to overthrow the international order.

Theorists of the balance of power often leave the impression that it is the natural form of international relations. In fact, balance-of-power systems have existed only rarely in human history. The Western Hemisphere has never known one, nor has the territory of contemporary China since the end of the period of the warring states, over 2,000 years ago. For the greatest part of humanity and the longest periods of history, empire has been the typical mode of government. Empires have no interest in operating within an international system; they aspire to be the international system. Empires have no need for a balance of power. That is how the United States has conducted its foreign policy in the Americas, and China through most of its history in Asia.

In the West, the only examples of functioning balance-of-power systems were among the city-states of ancient Greece and Renaissance Italy, and the European state system which arose out of the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. The distinguishing feature of these systems was to elevate a fact of life -- the existence of a number of states of substantially equal strength -- into a guiding principle of world order.

Intellectually, the concept of the balance of power reflected the convictions of all the major political thinkers of the Enlightenment. In their view, the universe, including the political sphere, operated according to rational principles which balanced each other. Seemingly random acts by reasonable men would, in their totality, tend toward the common good, though the proof of this proposition was elusive in the century of almost constant conflict that followed the Thirty Years' War.

Adam Smith, in The Wealth of Nations, maintained that an "invisible hand" would distill general economic well-being out of selfish individual economic actions. In The Federalist Papers, Madison argued that, in a large enough republic, the various political "factions" selfishly pursuing their own interests would, by a kind of automatic mechanism, forge a proper domestic harmony. The concepts of the separation of powers and of checks and balances, as conceived by Montesquieu and embodied in the American Constitution, reflected an identical view. The purpose of the separation of powers was to avoid despotism, not to achieve harmonious government; each branch of the government, in the pursuit of its own interests, would restrain excess and thereby serve the common good. The same principles were applied to international affairs. By pursuing its own selfish interests, each state was presumed to contribute to progress, as if some unseen hand were guaranteeing that freedom of choice for each state assured well-being for all.

For over a century, this expectation seemed to be fulfilled. After the dislocations caused by the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars, the leaders of Europe restored the balance of power at the Congress of Vienna in 1815 and softened the brutal reliance on power by seeking to moderate international conduct through moral and legal bonds. Yet by the end of the nineteenth century, the European balance-of-power system returned to the principles of power politics and in a far more unforgiving environment. Facing down the adversary became the standard method of diplomacy, leading to one test of strength after another. Finally, in 1914, a crisis arose from which no one shrank. Europe never fully recovered world leadership after the catastrophe of the First World War. The United States emerged as the dominant player but Woodrow Wilson soon made it clear that his country refused to play by European rules.

At no time in its history has America participated in a balance-of-power system. Before the two world wars, America benefited from the operation of the balance of power without being involved in its maneuvers, and while enjoying the luxury of castigating it at will. During the Cold War, America was engaged in an ideological, political, and strategic struggle with the Soviet Union in which a two-power world operated according to principles quite different from those of a balance-of-power system. In a two-power world, there can be no pretense that conflict leads to the common good; any gain for one side is a loss for the other. Victory without war was in fact what America achieved in the Cold War, a victory which has now obliged it to confront 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."

American leaders have taken their values so much for granted that they rarely recognize how revolutionary and unsettling these values can appear to others. No other society has asserted that the principles of ethical conduct apply to international conduct in the same way that they do to the individual -- a notion that is the exact opposite of Richelieu's raison d'état. America has maintained that the prevention of war is as much a legal as a diplomatic challenge, and that what it resists is not change as such hut the method of change, especially the use of force. A Bismarck or a Disraeli would have ridiculed the proposition that foreign policy is about method rather than substance, if indeed he had understood it. No nation has ever imposed the moral demands on itself that America has. And no country has so tormented itself over the gap between its moral values, which are by definition absolute, and the imperfection inherent in the concrete situations to which they must be applied.

During the Cold War, the unique American approach to foreign policy was remarkably appropriate to the challenge at hand....

Le informazioni nella sezione "Su questo libro" possono far riferimento a edizioni diverse di questo titolo.

I migliori risultati di ricerca su AbeBooks

1.

Henry Kissinger
Editore: Simon & Schuster (1994)
ISBN 10: 067165991X ISBN 13: 9780671659912
Nuovi Rilegato Prima edizione Quantità: 1
Da
Irish Booksellers
(Rumford, ME, U.S.A.)
Valutazione libreria
[?]

Descrizione libro Simon & Schuster, 1994. Hardcover. Condizione libro: New. book. Codice libro della libreria 067165991X

Maggiori informazioni su questa libreria | Fare una domanda alla libreria

Compra nuovo
EUR 29,37
Convertire valuta

Aggiungere al carrello

Spese di spedizione: GRATIS
In U.S.A.
Destinazione, tempi e costi

2.

Kissinger, Henry
Editore: Simon & Schuster, New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland (1994)
ISBN 10: 067165991X ISBN 13: 9780671659912
Nuovi Rilegato Prima edizione Quantità: 1
Da
Mnemosyne
(New Haven, CT, U.S.A.)
Valutazione libreria
[?]

Descrizione libro Simon & Schuster, New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland, 1994. Hardcover. Condizione libro: New. Condizione sovraccoperta: New. 1st Edition. NEW: CLASSIC: IMPECCABLE: COLLECTIBLE: Stated First Edition w/ full no. line showing 1st printing, handsome new mylar-protected jacket w/ sharp new edges & corners, superb new cover w/ silk-finish navy-blue linen wrapping spine & extending 1.62" onto front & back panels covered in deep-blue paper, immaculate smooth-cut text-block exterior, new sewn binding w/ tight signatures & blue cloth bands at spine-caps, impeccable end-papers on heavy cream-white stock, pristine interior handsomely printed on excellent unblemished paper * 9.50" x 6.36" x 1.88", 1.30 kg, 912 pp. * 30 photographs, 6 maps, Index * In this brilliant, controversial & monumental book, former Secretary-of-State Henry Kissinger explains, based on his own experience, what diplomacy is, & why, historically, Americans, from our presidents down to the man in the street, have always distrusted the whole idea. * Henry Kissinger was the 56th Secretary of State. Born in Germany, Dr. Kissinger came to the United States in 1938 & was naturalized a U.S. citizen in 1943. He served in the U.S. Army & attended Harvard University, where he later became a member of the faculty. Among the awards he has received are the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom & the Medal of Liberty. Dr. Kissinger is currently Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc., an international consulting firm. Codice libro della libreria 006980

Maggiori informazioni su questa libreria | Fare una domanda alla libreria

Compra nuovo
EUR 32,24
Convertire valuta

Aggiungere al carrello

Spese di spedizione: GRATIS
In U.S.A.
Destinazione, tempi e costi

3.

Henry Kissinger
Editore: Simon & Schuster (1994)
ISBN 10: 067165991X ISBN 13: 9780671659912
Nuovi Rilegato Prima edizione Quantità: 1
Da
Mima Mia Books
(Boston, MA, U.S.A.)
Valutazione libreria
[?]

Descrizione libro Simon & Schuster, 1994. Hardcover. Condizione libro: New. Condizione sovraccoperta: New. 1st Edition. 1ST PRINTING Language: eng. Codice libro della libreria 3J-141-F

Maggiori informazioni su questa libreria | Fare una domanda alla libreria

Compra nuovo
EUR 31,79
Convertire valuta

Aggiungere al carrello

Spese di spedizione: EUR 3,43
In U.S.A.
Destinazione, tempi e costi

4.

Henry Kissinger
ISBN 10: 067165991X ISBN 13: 9780671659912
Nuovi Rilegato Quantità: 1
Da
AMAZINGBOOKDEALS
(IRVING, TX, U.S.A.)
Valutazione libreria
[?]

Descrizione libro Hardcover. Condizione libro: BRAND NEW. BRAND NEW. Fast Shipping. Prompt Customer Service. Satisfaction guaranteed. Codice libro della libreria 067165991XBNA

Maggiori informazioni su questa libreria | Fare una domanda alla libreria

Compra nuovo
EUR 33,17
Convertire valuta

Aggiungere al carrello

Spese di spedizione: EUR 3,42
In U.S.A.
Destinazione, tempi e costi

5.

Kissinger, Henry
Editore: Simon & Schuster (1994)
ISBN 10: 067165991X ISBN 13: 9780671659912
Nuovi Rilegato Quantità: 2
Da
Murray Media
(North Miami Beach, FL, U.S.A.)
Valutazione libreria
[?]

Descrizione libro Simon & Schuster, 1994. Hardcover. Condizione libro: New. Codice libro della libreria P11067165991X

Maggiori informazioni su questa libreria | Fare una domanda alla libreria

Compra nuovo
EUR 40,70
Convertire valuta

Aggiungere al carrello

Spese di spedizione: EUR 2,56
In U.S.A.
Destinazione, tempi e costi

6.

Kissinger, Henry
Editore: Simon & Schuster, New York, NY, U.S.A. (1994)
ISBN 10: 067165991X ISBN 13: 9780671659912
Nuovi Rilegato Prima edizione Quantità: 1
Da
rarefirsts
(Charlotte Hall, MD, U.S.A.)
Valutazione libreria
[?]

Descrizione libro Simon & Schuster, New York, NY, U.S.A., 1994. Hardcover. Condizione libro: New. Condizione sovraccoperta: New. 1st Edition. First Edition, with correct number line sequence, no writing, marks, underlining, or bookplates. No remainder marks. Spine is tight and crisp. Boards are flat and true and the corners are square. Dust jacket is not price-clipped. This collectible, " NEW" condition first edition/first printing copy is protected with a polyester archival dust jacket cover. Beautiful collectible copy. GIFT QUALITY. Codice libro della libreria 002643

Maggiori informazioni su questa libreria | Fare una domanda alla libreria

Compra nuovo
EUR 48,53
Convertire valuta

Aggiungere al carrello

Spese di spedizione: EUR 5,96
In U.S.A.
Destinazione, tempi e costi

7.

Kissinger, Henry
Editore: Simon & Schuster
ISBN 10: 067165991X ISBN 13: 9780671659912
Nuovi Rilegato Quantità: 1
Da
Cloud 9 Books
(Wellington, FL, U.S.A.)
Valutazione libreria
[?]

Descrizione libro Simon & Schuster. Hardcover. Condizione libro: New. 067165991X New Condition. Codice libro della libreria NEW6.1796554

Maggiori informazioni su questa libreria | Fare una domanda alla libreria

Compra nuovo
EUR 61,81
Convertire valuta

Aggiungere al carrello

Spese di spedizione: EUR 4,28
In U.S.A.
Destinazione, tempi e costi