Skip to comments.Kissinger: U.S., China Can Form 'New Global Order'
Posted on 04/03/2007 1:33:33 PM PDT by Paul Ross
Tuesday, April 3, 2007 7:29 a.m. EDT
Font size=+3>Kissinger: U.S., China Can Form 'New Global Order'
Newsmax, Reporting Reuters.
China's rise as a global power is inevitable and could lead to conflict unless Beijing and Washington can cooperate to create a new global order, former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said on Tuesday.
Kissinger first came to Beijing in 1971, on a secret mission to re-establish Sino-U.S. ties after more than two decades of diplomatic silence.
Since then, economic reforms have turned China into a powerhouse. Beijing is now running a trade surplus with the United States that Washington last year put at $230 billion, and helps keep its rival afloat by buying vast amounts of U.S. debt.
Washington politicians have also sparred with Beijing over issues related to its rapid development from currency controls to military spending and foreign policy in countries like Sudan.
But Kissinger said China's growing political and economic prominence was irreversible, and if the two nations could not cooperate it raised the specter of war.
"When friends and colleagues in the United States talk about the rise of China and the problems it presents to us, I say the rise is inevitable. There is nothing we can do to prevent it, there is nothing we should do to prevent it," Kissinger said.
"When the centre of gravity moves from one region to another, and another country becomes suddenly very powerful, what history teaches you is that conflict is inevitable. What we have to learn is that cooperation is essential," he said in a lecture to the Chinese Academy of Sciences.
Challenges ranging from nuclear proliferation to increasingly tight energy supplies and environmental degradation needed to be tackled together.
"I look at Sino-American relations as a challenge to build a new international system based on human insight, on cooperative action, to avoid catastrophe," Kissinger said.
"Those of you who are students and who will be shaping the world should not think of the other country as adversaries."
Kissinger insisted the world must avoid exoticizing China. When he first came to Beijing, he said, his prepared speech contained a line about reaching a "mysterious country", prompting a challenge by master diplomat Zhou Enlai, then China's premier.
"Zhou Enlai put up his hand and said 'What is so mysterious about China? There are 900 million of us and it is not mysterious to us.' That was an important lesson," Kissinger said.
“Those of you who are students and who will be shaping the world should not think of the other country as adversaries.”
Yea, pass the bong dude. I get the warm fuzzies thinking about all those ICBM’s aimed at the US now.
Oh, yea...aren’t they going through the largest naval build-up in the history of this planet.
Maybe we can just convert all those ships into Love Boats.
Or learning how to live with them. They will never be able to beat us militarily and they need us every bit as much as we need them economically. Having a strong economy keeps their government in charge which is what every corrupt regime desires.
“Those of you who are students and who will be shaping the world should not think of the other country as adversaries.”
We could learn a lot from our friends, the Chinese, about how to keep the serfs in their place using torture and police brutality. China should not be allowed to become a power until they demonstrate the ability to be a civilized nation.
Real tricky substituting 'global' for 'world' there, Henry......
Dr. Strangelove speaks.
“They will never be able to beat us militarily...”
Given a little time, anything is possible.
I believe an US-Asian nexus(be it India or Chinese) will be necessary to control the savages of europe.
Kissinger is and always has been an idiot.
are using our posts to send
“Given a little time, anything is possible.”
Perhaps, but then it’s much more likely that they’ll not “beat” us economically, despite the China hyperbole saturating everything.
More globalist drivel from this old sputtering Rockefeller fool.
And they just happen to be one of the largest importers of Iranian petroleum products.
What I find interesting is the implication by the writer (who I would love to find an email contact for) that Kissinger is saying the center of gravity is shifting to China. What he’s actually saying, and has been saying for some time, is that the center of gravity is shifting from the Atlantic (US-Europe) to the Pacific (US-Asia), and that this power shift in conjunction with China’s rise is what may fuel contention not just with the U.S. at all but with other nations in the region and, pointedly, with Europe in the longer run.
The man is wise and speaks words that should be heeded.
The communist rule in China is but a blip, an historical anomaly. The country is undergoing great change and the people are exhibiting their pent up ability.
China must be carefully treated to allow growth of the natural capitalistic ability of the people and dampen the communistic state control of everything.
Freepers tend to focus on the mainland super communists while ignoring the overseas Chineese who are every ehere and long to deql again with home. Their influence in the process can not be ignored.
History is a process, not an event.
As long as we have nuke subs that roam the ocean we can wipe them out. 100 nuke missiles targeted at their cities, dams, ports and military bases means they cease to be an operating country.
What I am talking about here is the M.A.D. Doctrine that we had with the Russians.
China is an ancient, civilized nation. Unfortunately, Mao destroyed many of the old values, and the current government is still Communist, totalitarian, militaristic, expansion minded, and uncooperative.
Unless and until they get a new government, I don’t see much hope that we can deal with them as friends, especially when they take every opportunity to arm our enemies and undermine our economy—with the unfortunate help of the last two administrations.
I had hoped that perhaps we could work with Russia against China, at least until they straightened out, but that doesn’t seem to be in the cards, either.
It’s a dangerous world. It takes two to be friends, and the Chinese aren’t interested.
...... the center of gravity is shifting from the Atlantic (US-Europe) to the Pacific (US-Asia).....
The western boundry is the Arabian Gulf and the economic, financial and maritime powerhouse that is Dubai/UAE
The eastern boundry is LA, and the new Mexican port.
Did you post that just to have something to say?
True. Whatever else can be said about them, the rulers of China are basically driven by rational self-interest (like the old Soviet leadership, and unlike the Islamic Fundamentalist terror networks).
Wrong then, wrong now. Kissinger’s take on China’s ascendancy is based on similar premises, too, and ignores the same underlying dynamics. China has enormous potential—its people are hardworking and smart, its resources vast—yet that potential can never be realized while the country is led by a privileged cadre of communist autocrats holding fast to a Marxist delusion completely at odds with certain truths about human nature and economic value. Without free exchange of ideas or liberty of expression, such a state can go so far, and no farther. It’s what dictators never grasp—the personal is the political: freedom to think and say what one likes translates to independent decision-making and promotes the primacy of the individual over the collective. The free market is a market of ideas that drive the generation of goods and services, and these ideas don’t come from a top-down collective. Grafting a capitalist branch onto a communist tree won’t work, either, at least in the long term. At some point, the Chinese will need to make a choice. In the meantime, I wish discredited, self-styled oracles like Kissinger would shut up and play golf or something.
“As long as we have nuke subs that roam the ocean we can wipe them out. “
But we gotta have the will to use them.
25 years from now will Democrat/Socialist thinking have so permeated America that we would rather lay down than fight???
We’re almost there now.
IIRC, Kissinger is heavily invested in China.
I’d rather die than accept what Kissenger is laying out.
History is neither a process nor an event. It is a recounting as told by the victors.
China’s recounting of its past has always been one of surpressing those with whom they deal.
And eat their rice.
America has been trading with China for 1000 years, and Europe has been trading with China for 2700 years. Modern America is Europe’s way of trading with China by moving Europe one continent to the west since the Bedouins have pretty much cut off the overland trade routes to the east; it’s obvious that the problem is continuing and will continue forever, so trade from the American west coast has permanently taken the place of trade from the European west coast.
IMHO Marxism is to China what Perry's Black Ships were to Japan - the spur to throw off an outdated feudal system and embrace the modern world, however smoothly it went (not very in either case!).
It seems to me dubious that *any* real good came from its Marxist experience. From what I know of history Chang Kai-shek made a reasonably serious attempt to modernize China (first started by Sun Yat Sen - too bad he died prematurely) but was foiled by the Japanese invasion first and Mao's insurgents later - at this point Chinese Marxism is completely counterproductive - no sane person believes in Marxism anymore - any Chinese who claim they do are hypocrites more interested in the economic benefits of being the decider class...
that said, the world is entering a very, very dangerous period while China's Marxist government morphs into something more stable (and democratic, allowing the new, talented Chinese middle class to have a say in how things should be done), and throws off the last vestiges of real *imperialism* and joins the great economic game which has knitted together most the planet.
China need to learn to tolerate Taiwan at their doorstep just as the US has tolerated Cuba at *its* doorstep - if it learns to, there will be peace. if it doesn't, there will be war.
Id rather die than accept what Kissenger is laying out.
I’d rather it were Kissenger and his ilk that died. They screwed up America for one generation, it’s time they move on.
And why is not strange to hear Kissinger touting more “global order” BS - that totalitarian dictatorships and and a democratic Republic can lie down in the green grass of bliss with each other? ‘Cause a leopard never changes his spots.
The world will be much better off WITHOUT any system of a “global order” because it will be more honest in admitting our honest differences, instead of submerging them under some “order”, which is no more than an attempt to dismiss those differences as invalid.
If Kissinger had been honest, he could have just as easily have said: “screw your Constitution, your freedom, your rights - they are not really important”.
No...just me committing a typo, missing a bracket!
But just because they aren't using our posts to send messages....doesn't mean that the CFR and Trilateralists aren't keeping tabs on us, however!
(If only for grim amusement...watching the SHeeple shake their electronic fists at them....)
The Chinese need to focus on making cheap products for Americans to consume. Their military budget amounts to toilet paper in relation the US military budget. They are our servants, so they need to stop the pocket knife rattling, make like a few factories and shut it. I need cheap chinese crap, not tedious hypotheticals, from has been strategists.
You don’t believe this?
Bump! Absolutely correct. And I second your further sentiments in full.
Kissinger was dissed all during the Reagan Administration because of precisely this. Reagan promised Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum that he would keep Kissinger out of his administration...and he did, E.g.:
Of the many times I met with Ronald Reagan, I count as the most important my visit with him on March 28, 1980, in his Los Angeles office. I directly asked him, "You did promise, didn't you, that you would not reappoint Henry Kissinger or give him any role in making our policy toward the Soviet Union?" Reagan replied, "That's right; I did."Bush hasn't, and I think the results are already "in" as to which one had the vastly more effective foreign policy....
Reagan kept his word to me and to America, both in the backroom negotiations during the 1980 Convention and throughout his two terms in the White House. Reagan reversed the Kissinger policy of accepting second-place to the Soviet Union and adopted the goal of victory over Soviet Communism.
I disagree. In the future we will move from europe to asia. Our interest in western europe is near finished.
sorry, I reversed it.
Your trade deficit dollars at work.
I’ve never been a Kissinger fan, but he is right on with this regarding China becoming a superpower.
The economic power is growing at rates that seem excessive, until you look at the population and potential of rising working and middle class. We can’t stop it. It’s actually in our best interest that it become economically strong.
On the military side of things, they are no match for us but they are gaining technology by leaps and bounds and one day they will be able to compete with us in the Taiwan Straits. It may take 20-30 years but it is coming for our future generations.
They need our consumer market to buy their products. We still have some leverage. It will take time for them to become a responsible nation on the international scene, but once some of these commie hardliners die and become replaced with economic reformers, they could actually be a responsible actor on the int’l scene. We need to trust but verify, but they may not be the big enemy that some think they are - in time.
Before you get on board with China, remember that private property doesn’t exist in that nation nor does the rule of law.
I’m in with India... but then I’m just stating the obvious... we are merging with Asia.
They shouldn’t be allowed? They are already a power and are getting more powerful all the time. There isn’t a damned thing we can do about that. Personally, I’m pretty happy about some of the changes China has undergone in the the last several years. They are becoming more of a capitalist society. Their markets are opening up more. They’re allowing their people more and more freedom, becoming a little more democratic. They still have a long way to go, but these are positive steps in the right direction.
I think Kissinger is making some sense. You are free to disagree.
At current, uncorrected trends, yes.
But they are correctable. Hence, his claims of "inevitability" are egregious and proveable errors.
As Deng Xiaoping said...
"Tell your President we do not have this type of relationship."
“Washington can cooperate to create a new global order”
‘New global order” Come on Henry. beating the drums for China again? You obviously wish to see China dominate the entire Asian Pacific region, just like you thought it was OK to ignore the rise of Russia as a dictorial world power. We do not wish to have another confrontation like that drawn out affair. We wish to see less influence of China in the Far East, not more, and an end to the Chinese syphoning off our industries one by one. The next destination of plants and services for relocation is China, bypassing the labor markets south of our border. If this keeps up indefinitely our industrial base will eventually disappear. Even the company I was with when I retired, who have manufacturing operations in Mexico, are now looking for partners in China to produce finished product at a lesser cost than is available in countries in this hemispere. They currently buy a host of product components from sources in China.