Interview with Neil Ferguson: the idealist Kissinger.

1969 1 10 In October, Henry Kissinger left the Harvard campus and went to Washington to serve as the national security adviser of then US President Richard Nixon. The then German Jewish refugee, then historian and foreign policy adviser to Nixon's former opponent, officially took his first step in American politics. Since then, "seeking advice from Dr. Kissinger" has almost become the practice of successive American presidents, even President Trump is no exception. From 1973 to 1977, Kissinger served as Secretary of State during President Ford's term, and obtained the highest political position that an immigrant could obtain.

197 1 year, Kissinger, then national security adviser, secretly visited China.

As for the image of Dr. Kissinger, it is generally recognized that he is a realist, and the balance of power is the perfect realm he pursues all his life. He was vigorous and swift, shuttling between China, the Soviet Union and the United States, fiddling with his "shuttle diplomacy". He became an architect, paving the way for Sino-US relations during the Cold War. Anyway, it has little to do with idealism.

However, the biography of niall ferguson, a professor of history at Harvard University, recently published by CITIC Publishing House, Kissinger: Idealist, subtitled "Idealist", so it is not difficult to see Ferguson's challenge to traditional views. This biography is actually divided into two volumes, the first half of which has been published. It mainly describes Kissinger's life experience from 1932 to 1968, and tells the story of Kissinger's early experience of moving to the United States as a refugee from Nazi Germany and then joining the army, what he saw and heard at Harvard University, and what he thought during the Vietnam War. In an exclusive interview with the newspaper (www.thepaper.cn), Ferguson revealed that the English version of Volume II would take about two years to complete.

Kissinger: an idealist

Ferguson once published an article in the American political media Politics, saying, "If I surprised the readers with the subtitle of The Idealist in the first volume, then the subtitle of the second volume should be Network Man, right?" He said in the article that perhaps Kissinger's success should be attributed not only to his extraordinary intelligence and tenacious will, but also to his outstanding ability to establish and maintain interpersonal networks, which includes not only the maintenance of interpersonal relationships with government members, but also the maintenance of interpersonal relationships with all walks of life.

Niall Ferguson

Ferguson said in an exclusive interview: "Few people can achieve such achievements in forums and politics. Therefore, it is necessary for me to make it clear in my biography that these two periods of Kissinger's life. Although he was not immersed in academic research all his life, he never stopped writing and kept writing after leaving the government. Perhaps it is my own lack of ability in politics. I think his change makes me admire. "

Conduct a special interview

Thesis: Henry Kissinger is usually regarded as a realist. Why do you think he is an idealist in this biography you wrote?

Ferguson: The first volume of this biography mainly tells the first half of Henry Kissinger's life. When I read Kissinger's letters early in writing this biography, I found that he was actually an idealist. I used to think that Kissinger was a realist and a follower of Machiavelli. But in the documents I read, I found that Kissinger was not like this at all.

I think he was an idealist at least in the first half of his life. There are three reasons. The first is that some of his views are highly consistent with idealists in the philosophical sense like Kant. Second, it strongly opposes the appeasement policy towards Nazi Germany in the early period of World War II. This appeasement policy also suffered a fiasco in the 1930 s. Kissinger once said that the behind-the-scenes promoters of these appeasement policies were stubborn realists. The "realist" here is obviously not a compliment Thirdly, Hans Morgenthau was the most famous realist theorist in 1960s. Kissinger's views on the Vietnam War were different from those of morgenthau. At that time, morgenthau thought that the Vietnam War was not in the national interests of the United States, while Kissinger thought that the ideology of hostility to the United States in southern Vietnam should be contained.

I think it's obvious. Throughout Kissinger's life from 1923 to 1968, he is undoubtedly an idealist. Of course, there may be changes in the second stage of his life, but I haven't finished reading this book yet.

Thesis: The first half of this biography mainly selects four experiences of Kissinger-his early experience as a Nazi German refugee and in the army, his study experience at Harvard University and his experience in the Vietnam War. Why do you think these experiences are important for Kissinger to become Kissinger?

Ferguson: If you don't understand Kissinger as a scholar, then you can't understand Kissinger as a politician. Because in the first 40 years of his life, he appeared in the public eye as a public intellectual. A biography of Kissinger can't just start with 1949, no matter what he wrote or said in the previous 20 years. If you don't understand his experience in Germany from 1920s to 1930s and his experience in joining the army in the United States. This book is also to make people understand why Kissinger became more and more influential after 1949. War experience is also crucial to Kissinger's growth. This war has changed many people, including Kissinger. The war changed the course of his life. This war also made him indulge in studying historical issues involved in international relations in the next few years.

Newspaper: When did you first meet Kissinger?

Ferguson: We have met many times. I can't remember when we first met. But I am sure that when I first met him, I was still teaching at Oxford University. About before 2002, we started to correspond. After a period of correspondence, we began to meet. Although Kissinger and I are getting to know each other better and better, I still want to maintain my independence as a scholar. Because in the end, I want to write his biography, which is his history. Only if you keep this independence can you finish this research. Maintaining this independence is actually quite difficult. But then I felt that biographers and doctors look at patients, and lawyers look at clients the same. However, your responsibility is still not to let friendship affect your professionalism.

Paper: What is the difference between Kissinger's private and public image?

Ferguson: There is indeed a difference between Kissinger and his public image in private. When you study a 95-year-old man, you will understand that the most important feature of human beings is that they are changeable. I got to know young Kissinger and 95-year-old Kissinger through research. The two are very different, just like I am very different from myself at the age of 17. Kissinger's public image has undergone drastic changes, from "Superman" in the 1970s to an evil war criminal in the 1990s. Obviously, no one is a "superman" and no one will be an evil doctor.

Studying Kissinger's life, I realized his complex mood and anxiety as a German refugee. I also understand the dilemma brought by Jewish identity. I think people who oppose Kissinger and criticize Kissinger have overlooked that he is actually very humorous. This is just an old-fashioned humor. Sometimes Kissinger plays a joke, but this joke is always taken seriously. A good example is that Kissinger once said, "It takes a moment to break the law, but it takes longer to break the constitution." Critics of Kissinger often quote this sentence as proof of criticizing Kissinger. But this sentence was actually said by Kissinger when he met with Turkish diplomats. This sentence was actually a joke to open the dialogue deadlock in the context at that time. People still don't understand Kissinger's slightly sharp humor.

Reporter: What do you think is the influence of Kissinger's Jewish identity and the anti-Semitism he faced on the formation of his character?

Ferguson: Compared with the anti-Semitism Kissinger faced, I think great changes have taken place when he first arrived in the United States from 65438 to 0938. In the 1970 s, Kissinger found that Nixon, then president of the United States, sometimes still used language with strong anti-Semitism. But no one will use this anti-Semitic language now, because people who use this language will soon find themselves in great trouble.

However, I don't think he has been freed from the tension of facing anti-Semitism. If your childhood was spent in the shadow of Nazi Germany, then you must give up everything to start a new life in the United States, and then when you join the army at 1944, you find that your grandmother was slaughtered by the Nazis, so you must be very sensitive all your life.

The experience of refugees really deeply influenced Kissinger's character, but I think the experience of joining the army is more important to him. This is because you moved to new york from southern Germany, but you may still stay in the same community. This is because German Jews have rebuilt almost the same communities in the United States. In fact, from 1938 to 1940, Kissinger still lived in such a community. Only after he joined the army did he take part in basic training. Then he crossed the Atlantic, stationed in Europe and joined the infantry regiment. Only in this place far away from his community did he find himself integrated with the Americans. It was also during this time that he met the man who changed his life-Kramer. Kramer told Kissinger, "Don't think about going back to new york to be an accountant. Don't be silly. You are going to Harvard or other schools to become a historian. "

Thesis: In your book, you compare the educational systems of Harvard and Oxford University, and think that the Harvard University attended by Kissinger is more open and diverse. So do you think Kissinger's achievements in the pulpit and politics are inseparable from this feature of Harvard University?

Ferguson: I think the biggest difference between Harvard and Oxford's education system is that in the first two years of Harvard, you can learn more extensive and diverse fields, and then you will decide what you want to specialize in. But at Oxford University, you can only study your major when you are admitted.

Kissinger studied chemistry and philosophy at Harvard. So his academic background is more comprehensive. If in a parallel universe, Kissinger finally decides to stay in England and then go to Oxford University on his way from England to new york, then I don't think he will embark on the later life path. Those people in Oxford are very different from those in Harvard. In Oxford, Eliot is not so likable. Recently, I was reading a book review about Kissinger's first book written by A.J.P Taylor. His evaluation of Kissinger is quite negative. He said: "This is not the history written by Kissinger. It's just a packaged political article. " I think that if Kissinger were in Oxford, he would be influenced by different intellectuals and he would not have a successful career in the future. This may sound incredible. Those who joined Oxford in 1950 were hardly Jews, let alone those in power. Think about it, like Isaiah Berlin or other Jewish intellectuals. These people are immersed in the world of philosophy and stay in the first stage of their careers. These people have never left Oxford University. I think if Kissinger went to Oxford, he might be a scholar all his life. Kissinger will never be Britain's foreign secretary in any parallel universe, but in America, if you are a refugee, you may eventually become the US Secretary of State. Until recently, the son of a Pakistani immigrant had the opportunity to become the home secretary of Britain. Although this rising path is possible now, it is absolutely impossible in the 1950 s.

Thesis: Kissinger studied Bismarck and Charles de Gaulle during the Vietnam War. What do you think made Kissinger know these two people? Is this the turning point for Kissinger to change from Kant's idealist to Machiavelli's realist?

Ferguson:1960s, Kissinger made more and more achievements in policy making, and less and less academic research. During this period, his last academic research was The Biography of Bismarck, but it was not completed. Only one isolated article was published. I think when he wrote Bismarck's biography, he was also studying Charles de Gaulle. Kissinger thought Bismarck was a genius, but he also saw Bismarck's cynicism. Bismarck was a realist. Kissinger and his ideas have a great conflict, which makes Kissinger feel very confused. This conflict lies in Bismarck's foreign policy based on his cynicism. I think this is also the reason why Kissinger failed to finish this biography. This cynicism is in great conflict with the inherent tendency of young Kissinger, which is what I call "idealism".

On the other hand, Kissinger had to face a problem-Vietnam in the 1960s. This problem cannot be solved by idealistic methods. This is because Vietnam was in chaos. Think of Charles de Gaulle, think of Bismarck, think of Vietnam. Kissinger came to his own conclusion: idealism alone can't solve any problems. Kissinger believes that sometimes you have to be like Bismarck, and you have to take realistic actions to solve problems. I think this is the beginning of his changing his mind. He completed this transformation when he joined the government on 1969.

In the second volume of this biography, I will describe how he repeatedly compromised with Nixon. Nixon was undoubtedly a Machiavellian president. In such a compromise, Kissinger went further and further on the road of realism. I think the central strategic thinking of Nixon administration, including opening to China, is a Bismarck-style policy. This is a balance of power strategy with the Soviet Union.

Once such a policy is determined, you have to deal with many things well. Although some things will make Kissinger feel unhappy, Kissinger must accept such unhappiness. I also drew a clear line here. Kissinger has never been a complete cynic like Bismarck. This is because for Kissinger, under certain moral constraints, the two evils are the lesser. Kissinger emphasized in his speeches at 1974 and 1975 that this choice was not immoral, on the contrary, it was carried out under moral constraints. Of course, this is just some inspiration for me now. I haven't finished the second book yet. Maybe my mind will change then.