[ad_1]
Former diplomat Henry Kissinger, as chief architect of the US-led campaign to Communist China more than 40 years ago, could be forgiven for considering with some dismay the current tension between the two countries. But the truth is that, although Sino-US relations have been at their lowest for years, Dr. Kissinger remains optimistic that the two will not be hit in a way that will upset the world order.
However, both sides need to rebalance their views, in the same way that their leaders sought to explain their thinking and understand each other well enough 40 years ago, said Dr. Kissinger, 95, who is widely considered one of the main strategic players. thinkers in the world.
When he knocked on China's door as Washington's envoy on his historic trip to Beijing in 1971, his mission was to begin the strategic shift in the Cold War equation between the United States and the Soviet Union at the time, and to bring China back into the international order.
"We knew very little about China, but they knew a lot about us because the Chinese negotiators had read everything I had written," said Dr. Kissinger laughing in the Capella Ballroom Singapore, where he spoke yesterday at the inaugural Bloomberg ceremony. New Economy Forum.
This secret visit by Dr. Kissinger, a national security adviser, paved the way for President Richard Nixon's trip the following year, where he met with Chinese leader Mao Zedong and then established diplomatic relations.
China's economic power has grown steadily since then, and while Nixon and Mao have sought to find common ground despite the wide disparity, Sino-US relations have deteriorated as the two major powers fight for domination.
"The challenge is to maintain a fundamentally cooperative relationship despite the inherent differences in approach due largely to the evolution of technology and, in part, to the differences in philosophical approaches adopted by the United States. United and China, "said Dr. Kissinger, also Secretary of State of the United States from 1973 to 1977.
"I think that it is essential that China and the United States explain what are the objectives that they feel they should reach and what are the concessions not to ask, and the concessions that each is willing to do it and not get lost in the details before knowing where you want to go. "
A fundamental difference between American and Chinese thought, he said, is that if there is a problem, Americans believe that there will be a short-term solution, while the Chinese think that the problems are never completely solved and that each solution is a ticket for a new set. problems.
"I think that if the world order is defined by the continuation of the conflict between the United States and China, it will sooner or later become uncontrollable," he said.
"Some disagreements are inevitable, but the goal must be that the two countries recognize that a fundamental conflict between them will destroy any hope of establishing a world order and will entail a considerable risk of conflict. that this goal can be achieved and is quite optimistic about its realization ".
An adaptation is needed on both sides: Americans must learn that not all crises are caused by bad will and that there is a difference between educating people and learning to cooperate with them.
China, which did not have the impression of having an equilibrium relationship such as it has always been the dominant country in the region, will have to recognize that there is now a balance of power.
Dr. Kissinger is one of more than 400 business and government leaders who gathered in Singapore for the first Bloomberg New Economy Forum, hosted by media mogul and former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
On Sino-US relations
Dr. Henry Kissinger met yesterday with Bloomberg's editor, John Micklethwait, at the Bloomberg New Economy Forum in Singapore. Here are some excerpts:
Mr. Micklethwait: So you see that the speed with which China has evolved is somehow the cause of some of the current tensions?
Dr. Kissinger: China has become a significantly new player that can compete with the United States in various fields. We are therefore obliged to keep each other awake. The challenge is to maintain a fundamentally cooperative relationship despite the inherent differences in approach, largely driven by the evolution of technology and, in part, by different philosophical approaches to the challenges between the United States and China.
Q: Where do you see the common goals? You spoke a little earlier about different philosophies. Maybe you can talk about commonalities and differences.
A: An inherent problem is that, overall, Americans think that if there is a problem, there is a short-term solution and it needs to be addressed. The Chinese, on the other hand, think that the problems are never completely solved and that each solution is a ticket for a new set of problems.
So, once we recognize that there is a difference of perspective, I think that if the world order was defined by a permanent conflict between the United States and China, it would risk sooner or later to become uncontrollable, which was the story of the breakup of the First World War. in Europe. And some disagreements are inevitable. But the goal must be that both countries recognize that a fundamental conflict between them will destroy all hope of a world order and expose it to a high risk of conflict. And I think that goal can be achieved and I am actually quite optimistic about its achievement.
Q: Do you think that the Chinese understand the world order that you have described in your latest book, that there is an idea, that it is necessary to have some balance in the how is the world managed?
A: The Chinese have not had to establish equilibrium relations with others since they have gone through most of their history as the dominant country in the region. But one of the challenges of their adjustments is to recognize that … Evolution can not be forced, it must be understood. I think both parties will have to learn to adapt to their story.
Q: What adaptation of their history do Americans need to learn?
A: Americans must learn that not all crises are caused by bad will and that there is a difference between educating people and learning to cooperate with them.
[ad_2]
Source link
