WSJ, Wall Street Journal (Feb 24, 2022)
WSJ: "Former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger at a 2020 event in Berlin"
KISSINGER ON USA-CHINA
Kissinger Calls for U.S., China to Remain in Dialogue
By James T. Areddy "Retired U.S. statesman Henry Kissinger called on Washington and Beijing to remain in “permanent dialogue” and adopt “restrained conduct,” according to remarks broadcast Thursday but recorded before Russia’s incursion into Ukraine. Speaking at an event timed to the 50th anniversary of U.S. President Richard Nixon’s visit to China that opened relations between the countries, Mr. Kissinger acknowledged that Sino-U.S. relations are at a weak point. His comments were recorded on Feb. 20, according to the New York-based National Committee on United States-China Relations, a co-organizer of the event, which featured speakers in both countries. Mr. Kissinger didn’t touch on a joint statement Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping signed on Feb. 4 that pledged a new era of cooperation between the countries. As U.S. secretary of state, Mr. Kissinger secretly went to China to negotiate Mr. Nixon’s breakthrough February 1972 visit and forged a joint statement with Mao Zedong’s right-hand man, Zhou Enlai. That pivotal document, known as the Shanghai Communiqué, led to the restoration of U.S. diplomatic recognition of China several years later. “We are meeting at a moment when it is not always one of cooperation between China and the United States,” Mr. Kissinger said in his remarks. “I simply want to say that the safety of the world depends on the two most advanced countries, technological countries, to remain in permanent dialogue and to attempt and achieve settlement of their disagreements in a cooperative attitude. Those are the key issues of our times.” He added, “the key to international order is restrained conduct and peaceful discussion between these two great societies.” Though Mr. Kissinger recorded his brief address days before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, he made no mention of its military buildup along Ukraine’s border, which was by then well known".
KISSINGER ON USA-RUSSIA
The vision of Henry Kissinger, 8 years ago, on Ukraine is very wise and current
(Text 2014)
Subject: Kissinger on Ukraine
How the Ukraine crisis ends
by Henry Kissinger
"The PUBLIC discussion about Ukraine is all about confrontation. But do we know where we are going? In my life, I have seen four wars started with great enthusiasm and public support, all of which we failed to finish and three of which we unilaterally withdrew from. The test of politics is how it ends, not how it begins".
"Too often, the question of Ukraine is posed as a confrontation: whether Ukraine joins the East or the West. But for Ukraine to survive and prosper, it must not be an outpost of either side against the other, it must function as a bridge between them".
"Russia must accept that trying to force Ukraine to become a satellite, and thus move Russia's borders again, would doom Moscow to repeat its history of self-fulfilling cycles of reciprocal pressure with Europe and the United States".
"The West must understand that, for Russia, Ukraine can never simply be a foreign country. Russian history began in what was called Kievan-Rus. The Russian religion spread from there. Ukraine has been part of Russia for centuries and their histories were intertwined before then."
"Some of the most important battles for Russian freedom, beginning with the Battle of Poltava in 1709, were fought on Ukrainian soil. The Black Sea Fleet, Russia's means of projecting power in the Mediterranean, is based on a long-term lease in Sevastopol in Crimea. Even such famous dissidents as Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Joseph Brodsky insisted that Ukraine was an integral part of Russian history and, indeed, of Russia".
"The European Union must recognize that its bureaucratic slowness and the subordination of the strategic element to internal politics in the negotiation of Ukraine's relationship with Europe contributed to turning a negotiation into a crisis. Foreign policy is the art of setting priorities".
"The Ukrainians are the decisive element."
"They live in a country with a complex history and a polyglot composition. The western part was incorporated into the Soviet Union in 1939, when Stalin and Hitler shared the spoils. Crimea, 60 percent of whose population is Russian, became part of Ukraine only in 1954, when Ukrainian-born Nikita Khrushchev awarded it as part of the 300th anniversary of a Russian agreement with the Cossacks. The West is mostly Catholic; the largely Russian Orthodox east. The West speaks Ukrainian; The East speaks mainly Russian".
"Any attempt by one wing of Ukraine to dominate the other, as has been the pattern, would eventually lead to civil war or a breakup. Treating Ukraine as part of an East-West confrontation would scuttle for decades any chance of bringing Russia and the West, especially Russia and Europe, into a cooperative international system".
"Ukraine has been independent for only 23 years; it had previously been under some kind of foreign rule since the 14th century. Not surprisingly, its leaders haven't learned the art of compromise, let alone historical perspective. The politics of post-independence Ukraine clearly demonstrate that the root of the problem lies in the efforts of Ukrainian politicians to impose their will on recalcitrant parts of the country, first by one faction, then the other. That is the essence of the conflict between Viktor Yanukovych and his main political rival, Yulia Tymoshenko. They represent the two wings of Ukraine and have been unwilling to share power".
"A wise US policy towards Ukraine would find a way for the two parts of the country to cooperate with each other. We must seek reconciliation, not domination by one faction.
Russia and the West, much less the various factions in Ukraine, have not acted on this principle. Each has made the situation worse".
"Russia would not be able to impose a military solution without isolating itself at a time when many of its borders are already precarious. For the West, the demonization of Vladimir Putin is not a policy; it is an alibi for one's absence".
"Putin should realize that, whatever his complaints, a policy of military impositions would produce another Cold War. For its part, the United States needs to avoid treating Russia as a deviant so that it can be patiently taught the rules of conduct established by Washington".
"Putin is a serious strategist, on the premises of Russian history. Understanding US values and psychology are not his strong points. An understanding of Russian history and psychology has also not been a strong point for US lawmakers".
"Leaders on all sides must re-examine the results, not compete on positions".
"This is my notion of an outcome consistent with the values and security interests of all parties:
• Ukraine should have the right to freely choose its economic and political associations, including with Europe.
• Ukraine should not join NATO, a position I took seven years ago when it was last discussed.
• Ukraine should be free to create any government compatible with the expressed will of the people. The wise Ukrainian leaders would then opt for a policy of reconciliation between the various parts of their country. Internationally, they should adopt a position comparable to that of Finland. That nation leaves no doubt about its fierce independence and cooperates with the West in most fields, but carefully avoids institutional hostility towards Russia.
•It is incompatible with the rules of the existing world order for Russia to annex Crimea. But it should be possible to put Crimea's relationship with Ukraine on a less tense footing. To that end, Russia would recognize Ukraine's sovereignty over Crimea. Ukraine should strengthen Crimea's autonomy in elections held in the presence of international observers. The process would include removing any ambiguity about the status of the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol."
コメント