The Odd Couple:Nixon and Kissinger

[cal04]

Visionaries or cynics? Peacemakers or warmongers? Few individuals in recent times have provoked as much controversy as Richard Nixon and his partner in foreign affairs, Henry Kissinger. Admirers laud the two men for dramatically easing the cold war and sensibly recognizing the limits of American power to shape the world. Critics castigate them as Machiavellians who undertook reckless policies in the third world, often throwing American power behind brutal tyrants in elusive quests for international stability.

Robert Dallek argues for another possibility: the two men were visionaries and cynics at the same time. On first consideration, this is an unremarkable conclusion. And yet “Nixon and Kissinger: Partners in Power” makes a valuable contribution to the study of American policy making during the turbulent years from 1969 through 1974. Partly, it does this by transcending the stale polemics that have surrounded the study of Nixon and Kissinger. But its more significant, if not wholly convincing, achievement is to connect the unevenness of their policy-making performance with the ups and downs of their peculiar personalities. “The careers of both Nixon and Kissinger,” Dallek asserts, “reflect the extent to which great accomplishments and public wrongdoing can spring from inner lives.”

(snip)
Superficially, Nixon and Kissinger, who served first as Nixon’s national security adviser and then as his secretary of state, had precious little in common. The president, son of a California grocer, identified with the hopes and grievances of middle America and bristled with resentment against East Coast sophisticates. Kissinger, a German-born Jew, rose to prominence as a pathbreaking scholar of international politics at Harvard and reveled in his acceptance among the political and intellectual elite.

But fundamentally, Dallek shows, the two were remarkably alike. Both wanted desperately to leave a deep imprint on history. Both were ruthless pragmatists who disregarded decorum, principle and sometimes the law to get what they wanted. And both were insecure loners who distrusted, deceived and abused just about everyone, including each other. For these troubled men, Dallek writes, politics offered “a form of vocational therapy” — an arena where they could exercise control and find approval.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/13/books/review/Lawrence-t.html?ref=books

[Bozita]

1. Dallek was on with Charlie Rose last night

A fascinating half-hour.

Video available at:
http://www.charlierose.com