[000:00:00;00] the hello and welcome to cross stock where all things are considered on peter lavelle. the quintessential foreign policy genius or one of the greatest mass murderers in history. kissinger might have been bo, and much more. his death was not untimely, but his legacy still haunts us. in many ways, he initiated some of the worst aspects of american foreign policy the to discuss these issues and more, i'm joined by my guess, george w. l. e. in budapest, he is a pod cast or at the goggle,

which can be found on youtube and locals and, and their cash. we have martin j e. as an award, winning journalist and commentator, or a gentleman cross up rules and effect. that means you can jump me anytime you want, and i always appreciate it. all right, george. let's start out with you. in budapest, as i said in my interaction, it wasn't untimely. he did make it to 100 years. i think the as last major trip was last year to beijing, so he was, he had a vote, a very up of filled life to the very, very end. but he also has a legacy. it's an under stipend to say it's mixed. but i would contend that it's not much different than a lot of other secretaries of state sense, but we'll get into that. go ahead. george, as well is the no question. it's a m a mix legacy. however, i think if one thinks about kissinger's, he is in power, as opposed to he is sick of frantic obsequious. he is out of power. most of his

life was really out of. wow, there all the leading and a carrying favors. little, well, the 50 years. but during his, he is a power either those will years of diplomatic accomplishments. some of those we years of major arms control treaties signed is in which the united states managed to extricate himself from the war in vietnam. any look for a while as of the united states would not be able to ever accomplish that. um, but it was with a use of a uh, a house, a productive relationship with the soviet union, a game which seemed unlikely in the decades before, during the 19 fifties and early 96 is and then of course it, you know, disappeared. you know, within a few years of the end of the mix, some kissinger. yes. so when you contrast that with the

accomplishments of the successes, i think it specs up quite favorably. um, you know, it's hard to think of the last couple of decades. what diplomatic accomplishments the united states has a cheese? no, i mean you'll come think of any major treaties of the united states, assign any major diplomatic initiatives. the com for a, i mean, what the recent years of being characterized by the forever was, was that just go on and on forever. and no one can actually even explain what they're about with the rock syria, libya i've got a style, and then you know, you can just go through the list. what are they about and know the president will separate? just a seems intense. i'm bringing any of them to an end. martin it's, it's very interesting is that when you look at the obituaries and even before he died, obviously, i mean they had 50 years stuck about his legacy as

a well. i was in power, a mass murderer, a gross, a violator of international human rights laws, etc, etc. madeline albright, when asked about iraqi children, you know, she said it was something worth the, you know, but they accept it. i mean, but my point is, you can, you can say a lot of things about henry kissinger, but, you know, a, he didn't take the job because he was a st. okay. he was a, a very talented and geopolitical thinker. now we can disagree with some of the things that he did, but to put him in mass murder category like that without and being standing alone. come on, go ahead, mark us. yeah, i think i think it was quite hold on the other to keep necessary. did the growling so good? i mean, i can't think of any states from them since the end of the 2nd level. that still helps the importance on the credos on the, on the under gravitas that he had. i'm used to visiting all sorts of the world leaders. you know that in the last time it's in martin. he worked very hard at it.

okay. i mean, it is what it, it was interesting things that he called debated the, the midst of about himself. no, but better than any one else. go ahead be okay. let me put it in different way. can you imagine i just need the income? i'm of to estimate it. ministration is over in a tour in the world for decades later on. so that will lead to is, you know, quoting his opinion, you know, he was an extraordinary car to, he's hated because of the was because of a number of, um, uh, interventions some which were carried out more directly hands on others web by america just stood by and gave them the link michigan's yeah, yeah. like a strong useful bangladesh. you know? oh, he's team or you know, so we're living in different times and not only will see in the numerous cars so incredibly car was about to it was also an intellect which was something that makes some pretty badly needs. it's oh,

my free time. time out all the time out. i'm sorry you, you hit a red line and the door to the doorbell. now, one of the things. well, and i feel very adamant about this. so much of the focus on henry kissinger for the success is the george mentioned. it's given the kissinger never given to nixon, and that's on purpose. george. now, in the question, i think peter, you and i have discussed this many times before. it's um, it's a completely a dishonest exercise that was practiced during the next 10 years because much of the media of the tests nicks always had it. and when they saw all these uh diplomatic accomplishments, they were not able to credit mix of all of them. so they have to cultivate the made, but it was kissinger, those brilean, german jewish professor who was have all these fantastic ideas. and in a mix of those, just simple wow, you know, do you, you go ahead and do what you want henrich, but it was simply,

it wasn't true. and you can see from the, the transcripts of the conversation, we've all been publish it, which is next. and that who is the guiding force of a foreign policy? kissinger was a man who implemented the was a nixon who came up with the idea of uh, the opening to china. it was nixon who actually sold it to bring the war to an end by trying to get the soviet union to influence. um, uh, north vietnam, maybe a diesel nickelodeon policy objectives, but simply the comedian, the, and all the way up to now of never a given the next on the quarter a. so either way, in the midst of kissinger is a kind of a, you know, the other side of the point was they could continue disparagement of, uh, a mix up was i think one of the, one of the clever, as the most boss, cited presidents. but maybe in us history. yeah. because martin, almost all the histories of written out the nixon,

arrow written by liberals. so what would you expect? go ahead martin. all right, well i, i still incorrect to the i n s. um i, i was believed that some kissinger was a, i'm in a normal state, charismatic current to my point. i was trying to make that for you. company all set the was the little knowledge, apologies. i just haven't heard me speak as joy is george pointed out it just something that we have talked about so many times. so i apologize. gotta give back the floor to you or i'm talking about characters. that was my point to character so you know how, how many kind of works is, can you, can you think of it a little us, 506070 years? you know, the pounds thought out. that gravitas, that kissinger hobby was able to quote john, but as of well newton's until i part of it to you, but it will do so this, i wasn't aware that it was nixon who was behind the very small moves in the seventy's to, to bring china in from the cold and to, to sideline russia. but he, you know, he also did a huge, so it was one of these great leaders,

great statesman, the boot. that was a great believer in the other. jenny folks never change their mind because in 2019 he advised trump to do exactly this. the same thing was to get close to russia to a met china. but i think um, i think the point is that we haven't had anybody like him, and that's why he's so hated and loved this way. so i polemic so controversial. i don't think he's ever really going to ever get over the legacy, the reputation of the carpet bombing for years in cambodia with lead estimates for vary between 80400000 tests. and also the, the input result of that, which is to actually, you know, simple, it's a, can i originally from sort of, i guess, most supporters and regionally. i think, i think that was one of his greatest blunders possibly ever. and um, you know, i think that's, that's, that's, that's how he's, he's written his legacy. but, you know, moving towards forwarding to today. you know, um, i can't help feeling that we really badly need somebody,

highly articulate. i'm really raised to shop with an intellect in the white house. now as a result of some of these huge um, instructional problems that america and the west has brought upon itself, you know, ukraine and as well for example. and because of, you know, what i wonder if um, if, if, if somebody like kissinger, what about the edge would have had the, the, the impact on this decision making to cut off? what button come pull of? i think the contrast isn't the old days and the days of kissinger where america was extremely bold. it was the super about it had the cloud. you know, america was judge by very much what it did. in fact, it was today, you know, where we're living in a completely different without, in a, in a monkey by the world. way americans no longer the suit that we tend to judge america by what it doesn't do. if i'm mobile, that's what it says. and if the contrast is, you know, today we have an american president who can only cool for seats, fraud,

and garza. and that's really only can do and you know, and hope to the rest of our listeners and, and he's, but of course that's not the case. until and george, it is, i think it's a remarkable leadership in the west right now is it's, it's an outcome of an id ology. the reproduces itself, i mean, you know, and to me blinking is no accident and he is representative of the professional managerial class. there are no nothings there, just accredited george? yes, i think so. um. there's also other aspect of it i think that, um, in the case of um, the mix and kissinger was a world in which the united states have to accommodate itself to a serious rival power. and that tends to focus american mines. yep. and they have to, uh, move towards um, making peace because they, the, the,

the possibility of the disruption and american defeat was it was something that was really comfortable if we get a, what has happened since the human to pull a moment just the victory of the be a business to united states interpretation of the cold. well, we want, well the of the top dog, no one can arrive of us as a thing, and i said you can do whatever it wants. and that's why so there's, there's no measure. there's no check on anything that the united states, as i said it can do, essentially pursue policies of destruction, destruction because same hate, this is a, this is k of we're going to just dump everything on somebody else on does not have to pay for it. you know, we do libya. okay, well we have with real good up age. okay, well we go to a mess there day. not our problem that the europeans deal with a war in uh, syria. okay, no, no problem. let me like your b 120 years in afghanistan, not the exact it's when he is. how many people are we in talk about vietnam, but, i mean,

the united states was enough to understand the longer then he was the in pain in vietnam, in mc discounts on the moment of john. lyndon johnson's escalation might be a $65.00. it's basically a, is an, as good as i was 20 is a rock. it honestly just building era. and then when was it doing? it's just basically preventing any other power emerging on the desktop or do i say i have to go to a hard break and after that hard break, we'll continue our discussion on the legacy of henry kissinger. stay with archie the the,

the tax just for the 1st month of for the semester class. and like i said, your last will probably, that's something i've been doing in school just to read in the goals and it's a full of them in my own way this to the football. shy, right. i'm like, i'm assuming the issue with the the, the pretty much the this is this

the a welcome act across stock were all things are considered. i'm peter lavelle. this is a home addition to remind you, we're discussing the legacy of henry kissinger. the let's go back to martin america. you already brought up the subject in, in the, the, what's going on right now is we speak of thinking about the legacy of henry kissinger . and let me the, the shuttle diplomacy that he conducted as a, during the night after the 197073 war it's very interesting. you have people like blinking the want to repeat it. and henry kissinger pulled something up, blinking never will cause no one takes them seriously. doesn't take the administration seriously much to the detriment to the reputation of the united states,

but no one else go can make the claim. and i think maybe it's open to debate, but it was under the kitchen just tenure, a secretary of state where the united states started, the tilt no longer is some kind of a mediator. but on the, on the became a israel's international lawyer. and that is a trend, obviously that has continued much to the detriment of palestinians. and in dallas, of the westbank land, the reputation of the united states. and actually the security of israel, you of the, i think you can make the argument a lot of that. but then that the significant trend started under giving you a it pre dates, kissinger and the relationship with israel, but the intensity of it and it has remained to the present thoughts. so i suppose, i mean, the idea of that particular time in that particular juncture was that we need israel more vanessa. you know, israel needs to be a partner in the middle east. what was that was there in the cold that was during the cold war?

yeah, essentially that mixed up with us pledge of this. what do you, what do we get of this special relationship with as well? and he said is, well, we didn't know, don't read that much. i mean, is it the reason why we have that relationship is, is right, largely because of a hold of course, which is an extraordinary thing to say. i wonder if, if um, if, if, because it was in the room when you said that, you know, but, but i think we were living at different times. and, um, we, we either the, we don't have that. the america doesn't have that cloud. and even though the edge anymore to, to the leverage that it once had when, during cause and just as, and i made the point full of that, you know, in the, in the old days of kissinger, america foreign policy, did it actually impact it? and now we're living in a period of american for long term policy being very much something of a narrative and narrative which isn't really taking that seriously. and the, you know, the consequences is the way very confused about what our role is now in the west and what we should be doing around the world. interestingly, you talked about, i've got a, some country very close to my heart. you know, when america pulled out, i think

a general as ask isn't just about what went wrong and you said look to simply this, you know, we, we had no real clear idea. but what we're trying to achieve in this kind of stuff, you know, and i think um, but the, that, that was quite to the a person and pointed moment, you know, for a lot of people to, to, to, to, to heat the point that probably the west shouldn't be meddling in things. it doesn't understand him. do we really understand the complexities of the middle east on what the israelis are trying to do and is rep? probably not. you know, but a and a is document actually was interesting because by contrast the america didn't have a very clear policy. it is policy very, very obviously it was to make sure that not one country and the region ever followed suit and became an example like what the numbers trying to do to, to be an autonomous. what is the most common estate? it was just autonomy, you know that there was a paranoia by kissinger. nixon and others are that times that, you know, the countries has done up to us and just say,

we don't need to trade. we don't need a new idea. energy just leave us alone. that was enough to spot extrude her a reaction of paranoid, which really led to them the vietnam war. it was all about, you know, stumping out this one example is one country that stood up to have it, but it was also within the context of the rivalry with the soviet union and, and, and the address of it was one of the main drivers, george um, you know, again, you know, you, you can take the henry kissinger stamp on the middle least, i think it gets indelible. and, you know, i, you know, i don't know what he said in the last years of his life, about american foreign policy. visa be israel. but just that it was martin is mentioned, i mean, what does the us get out of it? because in many ways, i mean if you live in, henry kissinger wrote many books. he wrote a book called diplomacy, which i'm a very sharp critic of guessing germany ways, but it's an absolutely brilliant book. it's

a premier for geo politics and but you know, he wasn't always a geo political thinker. as he was a neo con, that we would say probably today, thoughts on that? i think so. yeah, i think if, if one thinks about the um, the middle east, um and you know, there was clearly a rivalry within the uh, the mix of industry shouldn't between the, the state department led by uh, william rogers and then, and henry kissinger and the state department still maintains the what more traditional at that time us approach to them as lee is which was even handedness. the arabs of friends, it was, i mean the united states have been involved in the arab well since and i think said when to damascus for goodness, say exactly next on went to damascus and they just didn't really have that view. um, a good guess, since it was much more pro is right and you're absolutely right. i mean,

you did begin to see that the, the role of the united states us to act as a kind of a, a diplomatic, a representative of the united states. but that was the, the pressure all the soviet union, that was a fear um, within the next administration, that if this goes on, this conflict goes on, then the soviet union will get a beach in the, in the middle to use the arrows again, the time to to the soviet union, the say, hey, you know, we, we need your help, you know, with the arrow. so we're going to deal with this problem is, right? so there was a pressure on washington to bring these conflicts to an end. and that's why there's, this pressure is now gone, i mean, the motor just don't care. and i think this is really the problem with these differential was because there it is just don't care. there isn't a sufficient pressure on the only united states to do anything to bring these conflicts to it in. so if you imagine what's going on now, israel and gaza, you know, the buys and people say, well, you really have to be careful about the civilian casualties. we, i just, just,

you know, we don't, we're, when we're not happy, we do killing so many children and that's it. nothing else? the only one i, i think you've had this been the in taken place in the next and kissinger. it's a much better. there was much tougher pressure on this uh, this, ronald reagan, i'm a called the begging and said knock it off. it was there and love it on. didn't knock it off. exact happened exactly, a biker to do it by the absolutely do it. any, those are the, this has been the glue case, was the reason presidents, you know, they could easily bring his way over here, easily pressure as well, to uh, to come to a conference stable and work something out, smell an insoluble problem. but they've been reluctant to do it. now martin it's, it's really interesting when we think about kissinger's relationship with, with it israel and us relationship with israel. he was no scientist though. okay. and i think it's, it's, they help the couch, it in terms of what,

what george just said. i mean, he thought about it as a g of political again. but, and, and the problem to solve these would be the cold war. he put all those pieces together, that's what made him quite brilliant in his own way. but ever since then, you know, we, we had that we have that history of from 1973 to the present with israel. but it's much more in a couch than design just a terminology in paradigm because it certainly wasn't the, it wasn't particularly sympathetic to jews and the soviet union, a body put together a number of piece plans for the israelis and palestinians. so we shouldn't forget that. but again, i come up some of the point different times a very different times. you know, when you look at what you get, scandal, the nice and cushioned just paranoia of one individual journalist, public opinion, then i think it's probably even more important than it is now. i mean, it was certainly a different attitude towards press international media. and both nixon and kissinger took the press very,

very seriously. and i wonder if that would be the same case if nixon was in a position today. no. looks kissinger's idea. i think you wrote it, one of these books are part of which one, but he's, i'm paraphrasing you said that your foreign policy is very much something about how you have to have the power behind the policies. and i think he was basically saying the on 1st and the on gloves is really what dr. american foreign policy to. so it's not the case today now, you know, and i need the contrast to that is the role of acetic statement that i'm a made in 2015, you know, backing away from the red lines, threat to syria and against us. do you know where, you know, we have this thing, which probably kissinger finds out, say, repulsive, cold, soft policy, you know, which is a sort of you for this and for we no longer impel. no, no, no, according to shows. so different, very, very different days for kissing joe. but just pick up joe, just point, i think probably, kissinger nick,

some would have been more sensitive said sensible. i'm thinking of the french was story, since people are sensitive to the outcry from people via the press, then this, today's administration, i mean and, and i think it would have acted on it. so i think under kissinger we may well, lot of cease for coming to the seats for enforced. well, that's the key will inform me of it, every se, every time we had something like this, an american president would demand a ceasefire. this is not happened now rapidly run out of time. george, when we um, we have to give kissinger credit for, for his out of office years. he had the kissinger associates became a very wealthy man. he remained very relevant and germane international politics. tony blair is imitated him. everybody else h. kissinger created a paradigm. and every one of many, many people follow this footsteps. george? absolutely. it is a power that, i mean, he did it the moments his uh years in office ended. he moved to new york,

set himself up in a lavish um apartment and began cultivating a very wealthy people. they also cultivated a close, also socialized, see the, the, the dinner party is that, and this became the, you know, only a very important ingredient on his life. and he flatted the flap of all kinds of leaders. wherever it is, you know, he was, he was what he liked to be flattered to any loved to be for the 2. and that's why he continued to get invitations. you know, the people that listen to all is great, great statesmen. i mean that's what he put his bandages into. and i think he abused it because i think he could have used these. he is much more productively. he could have been a good advice of 2 presidents as a, in the instead, he wanted to go on being invited to the wi fi right now. i have a question. i have a question to both of you right before we end here. but at the end of the day, george, for as he was sick, he wanted to be he wanted to represent the quintessential consensus. yes or no? absolutely. that's. that's what we was martin. yes,

i think so. i'm thinking george will change that ended really quick. you've got 20 to go to a good shepherd study that i can probably because that's what i think that goes to his personality. he never, never wanted to be outside of the main street of a conventional opinion. okay, gentleman, that's all the time we have one to think on george and martin. i want to thank our viewers for watching us here. are to see you next time. remember, cross stuck rules. the,

[000:00:00;00] the, the only thing is focus on spunk, exclusive, valuable audits, is still with me. so can you just send through stage 3, which is the,

is to not just use removing sales and guessing sucks. so there's only if i ever get, i used to be honest, can you just the the

the the the at least $700.00 palestinians killed in just 24 hours as these will expand. its a tax on sovereign guides, a web, thousands of civilian speak. shelton, as we felt strongly as are we in northern gather that we are also doing so now in the southern parts it will be with no less strength and that the idea of flight is a tax equal to or stronger than bose and southern gather. as usual now launches operations in every part of the enclaves,