http://www.counterpunch.org/carlkiss.html



September 4, 2001

I Wonder Who's Kissinger Now?

By Carl Estabrook

When I was an undergraduate, a mediocre academic named Henry Kissinger taught
a seminar that was attended by my late friend Perry Bullard, a fellow of
infinite jest, who delighted in reciting for us at dinner Kissinger's
pomposities and ponderous platitudes on politics. Perry particularly enjoyed
the graduate assistant who aped Henry's mannerisms -- black suit, black
attache-case, and black horn-rimmed glasses -- and followed him about, the
two of them looking Perry said like a small family of penguins. But he also
said, altering Shelley a bit, "I met Murder, as it were: / He had a mask like
Kissinger."

(Perry, after exiting the military to which he was indentured by a Naval ROTC
scholarship -- and in which he "rigged" Russian ships in Haiphong harbor, by
flying as close as possible to their superstructures -- remained a scornful
critic of the activities of the Kissingers of the world. He was for many
years a liberal gadfly in the Michigan legislature, representing Ann Arbor.
During the war, he sent me a saffron-robed Buddhist monk from Vietnam; but
that, as they say, is another story.)

As national security adviser and secretary of state in the Nixon and Ford
administrations (1969-77), Kissinger oversaw a murderous American foreign
policy, particularly in Latin America and in southern Asia, from Israel to
Vietnam and Indonesia. "Foreign policy is not missionary work," he is
reported to have said as he delivered up a no longer useful population (in
this particular case, Kurds) to be slaughtered.

Kissinger still enjoys the media's fawning regard as a "foreign policy
expert": he wrote complacently at the outset of his government "service" that
an expert was someone who articulated the consensus of the powerful. Such an
expert in power is a minion of dominant social groups and commits crimes in
their name. Kissinger's crimes are cataloged in the recent book, _The Trial
of Henry Kissinger_ by Christopher Hitchens, who finds him "expert in all
those paltry skills of the courtier."

*In Vietnam, after the US was compelled by business and popular pressure in
1968 to negotiate and end the regular bombing of North Vietnam, Kissinger and
Nixon shifted the bombardment to Laos and Cambodia and extended the war
throughout the Nixon administration.

*In the Middle East, Kissinger undermined the international consensus for a
settlement in the early 1970s by supporting Israel's intransigence, the
result being the 1973 war and the wretched situation that continues to this
day.

*In Chile, Kissinger engineered the overthrow an elected government in 1973
and installed the dictatorial Pinochet regime. (During the coup, the CIA
turned over to Pinochet's torturers a classmate of Perry's and mine, Charles
Horman, a independent journalist who knew about US involvement; he was in
fact tortured and killed, as were thousands of others.) Kissinger defended
these enormities by announcing that the "contagious example" of a social
democratic Chile would "infect" not only Latin America but even Europe:
Chileans had to be murdered to teach Italian voters that democratic social
reform wouldn't be allowed.

*In Indonesia, Kissinger presided over a massacre of Timorese from 1974 on
that was proportionally more devastating than Pol Pot's contemporaneous
murders in Cambodia.

Today, for a new generation, the ideological disciplines -- principally the
worst joke amongst them, "political science" -- programmatically misrepresent
the politics of Kissinger's time. A fatuous new book by an academic called
Larry Berman -- _No Peace, No Honor: Nixon, Kissinger, and Betrayal in
Vietnam_ -- argues that if Kissinger had only had more resolve, the US could
have kept its Latin American-style dictatorship in South Vietnam. (He doesn't
seem to realize that the US war was always against the people of South
Vietnam: three-quarters of the firepower the US used in the Vietnam War was
expended on the South, an amount equal to twice what the US used in all of
World War II -- because the South Vietnamese refused to accept the government
we'd picked out for them.)

It is necessary to examine the historical record accurately and recognize the
Kissingers and the Pinochets, the Kennedys and the Reagans, as the war
criminals they were. It has been rightly said that if the principles of the
Nuremberg War Crimes Trials of 1945-6 had been enforced in the US, every
President since then would have been hanged.

But there is more evil in the world than can be accounted for by private
malice. If that were not so, evil would be much easier to deal with: we could
identify the evil people, line them up, and shoot them. But that's been
tried, with at best indifferent success, showing that the theory is wrong: in
fact, we're all in this together. There are, unfortunately, two, three, many
Kissingers in Washington today, and only the better angels of our nature can
successfully oppose them, by refusing to accept the murderous policies
pursued by both political parties, to please their corporate masters.


Reply via email to