The greatest diplomat of the 20th century: Henry Kissinger turns 100. Born in Germany, he came to the USA in 1938. As foreign minister, he was the architect of the thaw with China. Nobel Peace Prize 1973. Below Oriana Fallaci’s historical interview from 1972.
This man who was too famous, too important, too happy, whom they called Superman, Superstar, Superweed, who forged paradoxical alliances, made impossible agreements, kept the world in suspense as if they were his Harvard students. This incredible, inexplicable, basically absurd character who met Mao Tse-tung when he wanted, entered the Kremlin when he felt like it, woke the President of the United States and entered his room when he saw fit. This fifty-year-old with wide-rimmed glasses before whom James Bond became a peppery invention. He didn’t shoot, he didn’t fight, he didn’t jump out of moving cars like James Bond, but he advised wars, he ended wars, he wanted to change our fate, and maybe he did. But who was this Henry Kissinger really? […]
His biography is the subject of research that borders on cult, and everyone knows that he was born in Fürth, Germany, in 1923 to Luis Kissinger, a middle school teacher, and Paula Kissinger, a homemaker. It is known that his family is Jewish, that fourteen of his relatives perished in concentration camps, that he fled to London and then to New York together with his father, mother and brother Walter in 1938, that he was fifteen years old at that time was old and his name was Heinz, not Henry, and he didn’t know a word of English. But he learned very soon. While his father was a postal clerk and his mother opened a pastry shop, he learned so well that he was accepted into Harvard, graduating with honors with a thesis on Spengler, Toynbee, and Kant, and then becoming a professor. It is known that at the age of twenty-one he was a soldier in Germany, where he was with a group of GIs selected by a test and judged to be so intelligent as to border on genius that he for that reason ( and despite…) (his young age) they entrusted him with the task of organizing the government of Krefeld, a German city without a government. Indeed, it was in Krefeld that his passion for politics blossomed: a passion he would satisfy by becoming an advisor to Kennedy, Johnson, and then assistant to Nixon. It is no coincidence that he can be called the second most powerful man in America. Although some have argued that it was much more, as evidenced by the joke circulating in Washington at the time of my interview: “Think what would happen if Kissinger died.” Richard Nixon would become President of the United States…».
So the man remained a mystery, as did his unprecedented success. And part of the reason for this mystery was that he was very difficult to approach and understand: he did not give one-on-one interviews, only speaking at press conferences called by the presidency. So I swear I still don’t understand why he agreed to see me just three days after receiving my letter with no illusions. He says it was for my interview with General Giap in Hanoi in February 1969. Perhaps. However, the fact is that after the extraordinary “yes” he changed his mind and decided to meet with me on one condition: not to tell me anything. During the meeting I would have spoken and based on what I would have said he would have decided whether or not to give me the interview. Provided he finds the time. What really happened was on Thursday, November 2, 1972, at the White House, when I saw him arrive panting and unsmiling, and he said to me, “Good morning, Miss Fallaci.” Then he left me, still unsmiling , to his elegant studio filled with books, telephones, papers, abstract paintings and Nixon photographs. Here he forgot about me and began reading on his back, a long typescript. It was a little embarrassing standing in the middle of the room with his back to me while he read the typescript. It was also silly and rude of him. But it allowed me to study him before he studied me.
And not only to discover that he is not seductive, being so short and stocky and suppressed by that big ram head, but also that he is not at all casual and not self-confident either. Before confronting someone, he needs to take his time and protect himself with his authority. […] At about the twenty-fifth minute he decided I had passed the exams. Maybe he would give me the interview. […] And by ten o’clock on Saturday, November 4th, I was back in the White House. At nine-thirty I entered his office again to start what might be the most awkward interview I’ve ever had. God, what a pity! Every ten minutes the phone would cut us off and it was Nixon wanting something, asking something, irritable, annoying like a child who can’t stay away from his mother. Kissinger responded attentively and submissively, and my conversation was cut off, making it even more difficult to understand him. Then, just at the climax, as he introduced me to his character’s elusive nature, one of the phones rang again. It was Nixon again and: Could Dr. Drop by Kissinger? Sure, Mr. President. He jumped up, told me to wait for him, he would try to give me some more time, and walked out. And so my meeting ended. […]
God, what a man from the ice. Throughout the interview, he never changed that deadpan expression, that ironic or harsh look, and he never changed the tone of that monotonous, sad, same voice. The recorder’s needle moves when a word is spoken higher or lower. He always stayed quiet to himself and more than once I had to check: make sure the tape recorder was working properly. You know that haunting, pounding sound of rain falling on the roof? His voice was like that. And finally his thoughts too: never bothered by the desire for fantasy, by a bizarre design, by the temptation to make mistakes. Everything was calculated in him, controlled like the flight of an airplane, controlled by the autopilot. […] Kissinger has the nerve and brains of a chess player. Of course you will find theses that also take into account other sides of his character. For example the fact that he is unmistakably Jewish and unmistakably German. For example the fact that as a Jew and as a German, transplanted into a country that still treats Jews and Germans with suspicion, he carries many knots, contradictions, resentments and perhaps a hidden humanity. Yes, I said humanity. They sometimes have such types: in Kissinger it is difficult to find the elements of the character who falls in love with Marlene Dietrich in the film “The Blue Angel”. And he loses himself for her. […]
The interview with Kissinger caused a stir that astounded me as did its consequences. Obviously I had underestimated the character and the interest that lurked behind his every word. Obviously I had downplayed the importance of that unbearable hour with him. In fact, it immediately became the talk of the day. And soon rumors began to circulate that Nixon was angry with Henry for refusing to see him, that Henry phoned him in vain, asked for an audience, and looked for him at the San Clemente residence. The gates of San Clemente remained closed, the audience was not granted, the phone did not answer because the President continued to refuse. Incidentally, the President did not forgive what Henry had told me about the reason for his success: “I have always acted alone.” Americans like that very much. Americans like the cowboy who leads the caravan alone on his horse, the cowboy who enters the town, the village all alone with his horse, and that’s it…” Even the press criticized him for it.
The press had always been generous to Kissinger and ruthless to Nixon. In this case, however, the sides had reversed and every journalist had condemned the presumption or at least the imprudence of such a speech. How dare Henry Kissinger take full credit for what he had accomplished as Nixon’s envoy? How dare he relegate Nixon to the role of spectator? Where was the President of the United States when the little professor came down to the village to settle things Western-style Henry Fonda? Cartoons appeared in the most atrocious newspapers in which Kissinger, disguised as a cowboy, rode toward a saloon. Others featured a photo of Henry Fonda in spurs and a hat, with the caption “Henry the Lonely Cowboy.”
So, exasperated, Kissinger allowed himself to be questioned by a reporter and said that seeing me was “the stupidest thing in his life.” He then claimed that I had falsified his answers, twisted his thinking, spiced up his words, and he did it so awkwardly that I got angrier than Nixon and counterattacked. I sent him a telegram to Paris, where he was staying, basically asking him if he was a gentleman or a clown. I also threatened to release the tape of the interview. Don’t forget, Mr. Kissinger, that it was taped and that tape was available to anyone to refresh their memory and correctness. The argument lasted almost two months, to the chagrin of both, and especially me. I was fed up with Henry Kissinger, his name was enough to make me nervous. I hated him so much I didn’t even realize the poor guy had no choice but to blame me. But of course it would be wrong to say that I wished him all the best and good luck during this time.
The fact is, my anathemas have no power. Soon Nixon stopped sulking about his Henry and the two were cooing like two doves again. Their truce came about.[…] In Stockholm they even awarded him the Nobel Peace Prize. Poor Nobel. Poor peace. […]
– In 1973 Kissinger received the Nobel Peace Prize together with Le Duc Tho, with whom he negotiated the end of the Vietnam War
The WarLet’s talk about the war, Dr. kissinger You’re not a pacifist, are you?
“No, I really don’t think so. While I respect true pacifists, I don’t agree with any pacifists, especially semi-pacifists: you know, those who are pacifists on the one hand and anything but pacifists on the other. The only pacifists I can speak to are those who take the consequences of nonviolence to the extreme. But even with them I speak willingly, just to tell them that they are being crushed by the will of the strongest and that their pacifism can only cause them terrible suffering. War is not an abstraction, but something dependent on conditions. The war against Hitler, for example, was necessary. This is not to say that war is inherently necessary and that nations must wage it to preserve their manhood. I believe that there are principles that nations must be willing to fight for.”
VietnamAnd what about the war in Vietnam, Dr. Kissinger?
“I don’t think you were ever against the war in Vietnam. How could I? Not even before I had the position I have today… No, I was never against the war in Vietnam.”
But don’t you think Schlesinger is right when he says that the war in Vietnam only proved that half a million Americans, with all their technology, were unable to defeat poorly armed men in black pajamas?
“That’s another problem. Whether it’s a problem that the war in Vietnam was necessary, a just war, and not… Such judgments depend on the position one takes when the country is already embroiled in the war and that’s all that matters to figure out the method of getting it out. After all, my job and ours was to further reduce America’s involvement in the war and then end the war. Ultimately, history will tell who did more: those who worked solely through criticism, or us, who tried to contain the war and then ended it. Yes, the verdict is for posterity. When a country is involved in a war, it is not enough to say it must end. We must conclude it with the criterion. And that is very different from saying that going into this war was the right thing to do.”
But don’t you think Dr. Kissinger that it was a useless war?
“I can agree. But let’s not forget that we went into this war to prevent the South from being eaten by the North and to allow the South to stay in the South. And something more… But today I am not in a position to judge whether the war in Vietnam was just or not, whether entering into it was useful or useless. But are we still talking about Vietnam?”
Yes. And speaking of Vietnam, do you think you can say that these negotiations were and are the most important endeavor of your career and maybe your life?
“They were the most difficult task. Often even the most painful. But perhaps it’s not even fair to call it the most difficult endeavour: in fact, it would be the most painful endeavour. Because they involved me emotionally. You see, approaching China was intellectually difficult, but not emotionally difficult. But peace in Vietnam was an emotionally difficult task. As for defining those negotiations as the most important thing I did… No, I didn’t just want peace in Vietnam, I wanted three things. This agreement, the rapprochement with China and a new relationship with the Soviet Union. The problem of a new relationship with the Soviet Union has always been very close to my heart. I would say nothing less than the rapprochement with China and the end of the war in Vietnam.” […]
– Kissinger with Richard Nixon in 1973, the day he was appointed Secretary of State: He was the President’s most trusted foreign policy adviser (Ap photo) The Force
Power is always seductive. dr Kissinger, how fascinated are you with power? Try to be honest.
“I will be. Because when you hold the power, and when you hold it for a long period of time, you end up looking at it as something that belongs to us. I’m sure I’ll feel the lack of power when I leave this place. But I’m not fascinated by power as a tool for its own sake. I don’t wake up every morning and say, ‘Man, isn’t it extraordinary that I have a plane at my disposal, that a car and a driver is in front of me.’ door waiting for me?” But who would have thought that it would be possible? No, I am not interested in such a speech ».
Because there are moments when you listen to her and you wonder not how much she influenced the President of the United States, but how much Machiavelli influenced her.
“Absolutely not. In today’s world there is very little to accept or use from Machiavelli. What I find interesting about Machiavelli is only his way of considering the will of the prince. Interesting, but not so much that it influences me .If you want to know who influenced me the most, I will answer you with the names of two philosophers: Spinoza and Kant.So it is strange that you associate me with Machiavelli.People associate me more with the name Metternich. Which is even childish I wrote only one book about Metternich, which was to be the first in a long line of books on the formation and collapse of the international order in the 19th century, a series that would end with World War I. That’s all. There can be nothing in common between Metternich and I. He was chancellor and foreign minister at a time when it took three weeks from the center of Europe to go from one continent to another. He was Chancellor and Secretary of State at a time when wars were fought by professional soldiers and diplomacy was in the hands of aristocrats. How does that compare to today’s world, a world in which there is no homogeneous leadership group, no homogeneous internal situation, no homogeneous cultural reality?”
– The secret mission to China in July 1971 remains one of the highlights of Kissinger’s career: in the photo he is shown with Mao Tse-tung (Photo Afp)
The popularity
Doctor Kissinger, but how do you explain the incredible fame that has distinguished you, how do you explain the fact that you are almost more famous and popular than a President? Do you have a thesis on this topic?
“Yes, but I won’t tell him. Because it doesn’t agree with most people’s thesis. The thesis of intelligence, for example. Intelligence is not that important in the exercise of power and is often not even needed. Like a head of state, a man who does my job doesn’t have to be very smart. My thesis is completely different, but I repeat, I will not tell you. Why would I do this while I’m in the middle of my work? just tell me yours I am sure that you too have a thesis on the reasons for my popularity.”
I’m not sure dr. kissinger With this interview I am looking for a thesis. And I can’t find it. I suppose success is at the root of everything. I mean, like a chess player, she got two or three moves right. China first. People like people who play chess and eat the king.
“Yes, China was a very important factor in my success. And yet that is not the main point. The main point… But yeah, I’ll tell you. How much do I care? The main point arises from the fact that I have always acted alone. The Americans like that very much. Americans like the cowboy who leads the caravan alone on his horse, the cowboy who all alone with his horse enters the town, the village, and that’s it. Maybe even without a revolver because he doesn’t shoot. He acts simply: he is in the right place at the right time. In short, a western.”
I understand. They see themselves as a sort of Henry Fonda, unarmed and ready to fight for honest ideals. Lonely, brave…
“Not necessarily brave. In fact, this cowboy doesn’t have to be brave. It’s enough for him and he needs to be alone: to show others that he enters the city and does everything alone. This romantic, amazing figure suits me perfectly because being alone has always been part of my style, or my technique if you will. Along with independence. Oh, that’s very important in me and for me. Finally faith. I’m always convinced that I have to do what I do. And people feel it, they believe it. And I want you to believe me: when you move someone or win them over, you must not cheat them. It can’t even be calculated and that’s it. Some believe that I carefully plan the public consequences of my initiative or effort. They think this worry won’t let go of me. Rather, the consequences of my actions, I mean the judgment of the public, have never tormented me. I’m not asking for popularity, I’m not looking for popularity. If you really want to know, I don’t give a damn about popularity. I’m not at all afraid of losing my audience, I can afford to say what I think. I play on the authenticity in me. If I let the audience’s reactions bother me, if I just move with a calculated technique, I wouldn’t achieve anything. Look at the actors: the really good ones don’t just rely on technology. They act simultaneously following a technique and their conviction. You are real like me. I’m not saying it should stay like this forever. In fact, it can evaporate as quickly as it came. But for now it is there.”
Are you telling me you’re a natural man, Dr. Kissinger? My God: Leaving Machiavelli aside, the first character she is associated with is that of a cold mathematician controlled to the point of agony. I may be wrong, but you are a very cold man, Dr. kissinger
“In tactics, not in strategy. In fact, I believe in human relationships more than ideas. I use ideas but I need human relationships as I have shown in my work. After all, what happened to me didn’t happen to me by accident? Wow, I was a completely unknown professor. How could I say to myself, “Now I’m manipulating things to become internationally famous”? It would have been sheer madness. I wanted to be where things are happening, yes, but I never paid a price to be there. I never made any concessions. I’ve always been guided by spontaneous decisions. You could say: Then it happened because it had to happen. You always say that when something happened. That’s never said about things that don’t happen: the history of things that didn’t happen was never written. In a way, however, I am a fatalist. I believe in destiny. I am convinced, yes, that we have to fight to achieve a goal. But I also believe that there is a limit to the struggle that man can undertake to achieve a goal.”
I understand dr kissinger I have never interviewed anyone who avoided questions and precise definitions like she did, resisted attempts by others to intrude on her personality like she did. Are you shy, Dr. Kissinger?
“Yes. Enough. But on the other hand, I think I’m very even-tempered. See, there are those who portray me as a tormented, mysterious character and others who portray me as an almost cheerful guy who’s always smiling and always laughs. Both pictures are inaccurate. I’m neither one nor the other. They are… I won’t tell you what they are. I won’t tell anyone.
(Washington, November 1972)
Excerpts from “Interview with History” by Oriana Fallaci (Rizzoli): The volume brings together some of the journalist’s most famous interviews, including those with Golda Meir, Yasser Arafat, Indira Gandhi, Willy Brandt, Giulio Andreotti.
First edition Rizzoli 1974
©2023 Mondadori Libri Spa / Rizzoli