>> hi everyone. i'm the senior director of development here. on behalf of our partner politics and proseos thank you o much for being with us tonight and for supporting a nonprofit and an independent bookstore. we also want to thank you for

your understanding for tonight's programpr through virtual format and how much we appreciate you logging on and being here with us. for those of you -- we are a center for art, entertainment ideas in jewish live in washington d.c.. for the past 18 years or mission has been to inspire more meaningful and fulfilling lives through an unexpected mix of experiences and appraise the multifaceted identities of those speakers. it is rare to hear from someone who has witnessed and participated in as much much history as her guest this evening dr. henry kissinger. in 1938 at 15 years old he fled germany with his family in five years later was drafted into the u.s. army. he would go on to become the national security adviser and then secretary of state under president nixon and ford.

a recipient of a bronze star, a nobel peace prize a presidential medal of freedom in the medal middle of liberty dr. kissinger joins us this evening after reaching the milestone of turning 99 years old. he recently released his 19th book leadership -- "leadership" six studies in world strategy which quickly became a "new york times" top seller. as a reflection on world order statecraft and the indispensability of leadership today the book adds to a fast collection dr. kissinger's scholarships on foreign-policy, international affairs and diplomacy. tonight dr. kissinger will be in conversation with andrea mitchellon, nbc news chief

washington correspondent and chief foreign affairs itcorrespondent and as andrea mitchell reports. in the ensuing decades she covered presidential politics with the carter administration andan consequential news across foreign-policycy intelligence ad national -- we are delighted to have her with us tonight. we are putting -- and the chat box. thank you again for joining us and please help me welcome kissinger and andrea mitchell into your homes. >> good evening and thank you so much maria and what a privilege it is to be at sixth and i.

dr. kissinger i can't tell you how honored i am. you at the age of 99 have your 19th book and studies and world strategy and you are -- and statecraft so thank you for being with us in new york. >> it's a joy to have the chance to exchange ideas with you as we have for quite a long period always to my benefit and most substandard glee with you. >> you are very modest because it's always to our benefit to hear you. i wanted to draw on the insights about leadership to better understand the events of the day right now as we gather tonight. president biden has started a

marathon call with xi jinping today for more than two hours in fact his first several months. there it is tension between the two countries. the great distress of beijing and taiwan and the chinese foreign minister to her secretary of stateo that they should not be taking place. you knowha china so well and hae written on china. tell me about the importance of this moment and what you think about the possibility of the speaker of the house going to taiwan. >> it's a moment in which the

third person in line for the american presidency has indicated she might visit taiwan the chinese have issued explicit sets and military components if she carries this out. this is a sad situation. the relationship between china and the united states particularly had a moment when we are also involved in military -- with russia and to manage to be into military

confrontations with twoit major allies in two major countries, it's not an ideal pattern. we need to reflect on how to transcend such a situation. i p support the caring out of this. we cannot call up the visit by a senior american under military threats from the chinese side. >> the chinese leader xi jinping said the president biden today this was his statement of the foreign ministry afterwards the

fire will perish by it. that is a very strong statement up their conversation. >> a strong statement and the threat is carried out between the two most advanced technological countries in the world, testing weapons for which there is no experience in their use which are inherently difficult if not impossible to limit. so i would hope the two leaders will learn from this experience some form of dialogue which creates conditions to which

avwhatever disagreements we have do deal with them on the basis of diplomacy and not a military threat. >> do you think president biden has contributedrr to the tensios by three times most recently in may, saying that the u.s. would defend taiwaniw militarily, whih is a departure from 40 years of strategic ambiguity of arming taiwan, being an ally of taiwan but never saying explicitly that we would go to war to defendd taiwan? >> the united states in my observation has always made clear that we were open to the taiwan issue and it would oppose

or reject -- i think that the shift towards a confrontation goes back to previous administrations and has been accelerated by this administration. i want to make clear their fundamental american interests to protect it event of a technological country but the goal of diplomacy should be to create a situation in which --

[inaudible] >> the president's declarations come at a win xi jinping is approaching the party congress in china is facing considerable challenges. there was a covid lockdown policy, economic slowdown. how do you see xi jinping is a leader going into the party congress? >> this fundamental philosophy of china and the united states that we are a democracy is essentially an autocratic system

more importantly the historic backdrop to the two countries with the united states in a few hundredd years. china has a history of 4000 years. china considers itself at the center of asia. here are two countries with different traditions confronting each other on the basis of their experience in an entirely new

situation and how to manage without threatening world order and world peace. it's a big challenge, the biggest challenge of our. of our period. president xi -- so both presidents are facing domestic situation to add an antagonist to the other side.

it's very dangerous situation. >> ofse course china has sided with ukraine with russia over ukraine and have that extraordinary meeting with vladimir putin back in february where they signed an agreement. at this stage can china managed to avoid sanctions as it apparently has so far and to support russia isn't it impossible to drive a wedge between china and russia? >> i believe they need to find a diplomatic solution.

and diplomatic measures over time. china and russia made the decision that accelerated the crisis. it may lead to a degree of confidence. what was intended as progress into a war that has now escalated and continues and may escalate. so i believe that it is

necessary for the leaders of the major countries to consider their interests and their values and find a way -- without turning it into a catastrophe. the book that i've written goes into detail but i don't pretend that i know every detail. it's very complex situation. in which i basically support the administration.

it's a different view on how to pretext china's policies. >> you have met vladimir putin 15 times i think. you know him as well as anyone does. what quality made him soes successful in his power and control? >> i have met putin and once a year we reviewed the international situation and he knew i would report what he said and i discussed what i would say to him. this was not a private visit.

my view, putin is that he is a special kind of patriotic threat to has a domestic quality that is held the country and 11 timezones in the large number of -- [inaudible]] and on the other hand it's part of the russian tradition and on

the immediate issues he considers the collapse of the soviet empire in europe as a historic disaster for us and he considers ukraine as part of the anchor for it. the whole area became open to the action of the surrounding countries. he considered it from his point of view that ukraine who joined ethe military alliance.

i thought he was a rational calculator and the idea that he would attack ukraine over territorial issue over its existence and began to set the nature of the european system and the major alliance. so he started a conflict of a magnitude that i never would have thought possible or likely. notice that this would have

indicated that. i was of the view that it was a mistake to try to build ukraine into nato and the independence of ukraine was important to the structure of europe. i agree with the attempt to supportwi it with military assistance. it's like the taiwan issue they should have gotten to that point can be debated but there was no excuse for putin to attack on the scale he did and remove it from the diplomatic field.

>> you said in davos first he said negotiations should ideally begin in the next two months and this was backas in may. for the tensions that will not be easily overcome. the way this war is on it went on to say a believe the dividing line should be -- considering beyond that would not be about the freedom of ukraine but a new war against russia itself. negotiations to go back to the territory that was held before february 24. how is that possible? >> the present situation is that

is occupied about 20% of the ukrainian territory. and that is 20% of the territory beyond where the war started. so then there are some territories beyond that was acquired by russia. it seemed to me the most effective cease-fire would be for russiaia to withdraw to whee the war started. would require a tremendous effort and it's conceivable that somewhere along the line when

the stalemate develops alternative should be, will be considered. my personal recommendation will remain the one that would return to the cease-fire. russia acquires 20% of the ukrainian territory in the period in this period when nato is united in the united states is supporting ukraine militarily. this would be viewed as a strategic setback for the west and we should remember russia has already suffered a huge setback because the fear of a

russian attack on europe with conventional forces which dominated much of the center of europe since world war ii is in a way being dissipated because it shows that if terry -- fairly large single european country with native support could prevent a russian victory. but a satisfactory settlement would require -- [inaudible] >> does rick does ukraine have to regain some the territory recently lost in the donbas in the sea regions before they can hope to try to negotiate getting back to where they started?

>> it's very hard to make a comment on a diplomacy that hasn't started yet. and it'sle conceivable to me tht at some point putin offers cease-fire or maybe somebody else offers a cease-fire. these are not conditions i would. post because they represent a new situation based on a setback with nato and the united states which i think should be avoided. >> how doo you assess president zelensky's leadership qualities? >> an extraordinary phenomenon

and actor who became president from the background that one would expect ukranians to select as the president, who in an hour of crisis has made himself an international spokesman that is accepted worldwide as a major figure. i think he is an extraordinary phenomenon in the face is a very tough task in the transition to peace because defined an outcome that is popular in these military conditions is going to be very complex. het' has brought -- played a

unique role in maintaining the independence of ukraine. >> how do you express nato's ability to stand solidly behind ukraine is a winter approaches, as fuel costs continue to rise and with iran's internal issues into chaos. you have a new leader in germany and you have macron losing the parliamentary majority and the government collapse in italy. it's a really challenging time for your up. >> it's a challenging situation because what is happening all overe the world is in a way different from the hopes that people had. we are facing an situation now n

the world in which there are crises simultaneously in many different parts based on different historic experiences. and so to find aid general solution to is what i hope for, is going to require existential transitional period and extraordinary leadership. >> he writing your book that without leadership institutions are adrift in nations grow and ultimately end in disaster. does that apply to the united states right now? m

>> of basic point is that every society is in a kind of transition from t the past to te future which is not yet -- and to help guide them, the people in the direction that will enable them to fulfill their potentialities. the united states at this moment faces a challenge along these lines because in order to make this transition one has to have faith in one's society and then one leader and when a society is extremely divided and if their

different views about the future and indeed about the validity of the use of -- too much of the energies instead of moving to a better future. this worries me about the united states today. >> i want to ask you about richard nixon and one of the six liters you profiled. his leadership on a lot of domestic policies that are often overlooked, a lot of domestic issues that i was coveringth bak

then as a local reporter but on foreign-policy extraordinary leadership on the middle east laying the groundwork for middle east talks and of course china. is there any way you can understand the event that led to his resignation up all of those leadership qualities that you are part of and that you witnessed? >> i'm is the name of the leader you are referring to. >> i'm speaking of richard nixon. how does he reconcile some of his domestic and foreign policies and extreme successes and foreign policy that you are so much a part of. and that led to his resignation.

>> nixon had a great strategic sense and a deeply. patriotic commitment of american process -- prospects but he had an element of personal security that he thought were protecting him. which in practice were wrong. it was a tragedy and i can say this because it's an example of -- i had never met nixon when he appointed me as security adviser which is the third most important job i think in the government. i've never met him.

i had been a close personal friend and close cooperate with nelson rockefeller who opposed nixon into presidential primaries. nevertheless he offered me that position and when i asked rockefeller at that time i did not accept it right away which was extremely and wrong because the president of the united states had responsibilities to try to help. anyway i told nixon i needed to

to -- and rather than dismiss me he said you could take a week which i didn't take. i went to see rockefeller and rockefeller said has it occurred to you that richard nixon is taking a much bigger chance on you than you on him? and that was wonderful advice. of course i accepted his decision and so whatever i learned about nixon i learned through experience with him and i was at his side through many

crises. i have seen many presidents. it was an almost unique and very special. i describe some of his weaknesses and also the actions that in my judgment were in the interest of the country. >> how d compare his resignation was what we are now learning about president trump and what he did before and after the january 6 and we don't know a thing yet but the current investigation?

>> they are don't really want to get too much into technicalities but it's important to remember the watergate crisis which involved -- he never challenge the system. he accepted the conclusions of the system. there were some people in the administration who made heroes of themselves by claiming that they were preventing him from doing that. i never saw the slightest sign of it. he accepted the system. it crushed him and he suffered greatly as a result and also from recognizing that he had made a mistake and that he was

wrong in involving himself in what came toat be known as the watergate crisis. >> back in 1960 on january 6, 1961 he didn't challenge the john f. kennedy election. he stood as vice president and certify the electoral college withoutob objection. >> he was afraid that such an act woulday divide the country. >> without getting into the personality of donald trump how do you view this whole question of not accepting the decision of the voters andd perpetuating the claim?

sooner this is now before the congressional committee and i think the american process will work with it and the 24 election will be the answer. >> president biden recently faced a lot of criticism for going to saudi arabia and meeting with the crown prince after saying saudi arabia during the campaign said saudi ore will -- saudi arabia should be a pariah. i think there's a conflict american interests and values. >> this is in the nature of the

culture of the active saudi crown prince and it was deeply wrong. the challenge to the american president he needs to act in the basic interest of the united states and in effect situations like this. you are dealing with somebody who is a testament to the president to navigate this. he should be careful what assertions he makes that could

complicate what may turn out to be the overriding national interest. i have sympathy. saudi arabia is aou key country. >> the balance between values and interests which arises in part out of the fact that values are absolute to some extent.

that is one of the challenges it faces him. i thought the leaders i discussed in the book have found a good balance. it created balance. [inaudible] >> right now the president has made a decision in the last 24 hours that he is announced to try to do a prisoner swap for this celebrated basketball player brittney griner, griner and american businessman paul whelan both being held

wrongfully in russia and trade someone that they are my and once such is bout. is there fear that russians will take more americans as hostages are bargaining chips and what kind of a decision is that to treat to agree with the prisoner swap by the president? >> it's one of those anguishing decisions. in principle you don't want to establish a situation in which you encourage -- to a decision you would not otherwise make.

and a period in which i was in office it was stated as a principle that we would not negotiate about hostages and i don't remember every event but i wouldn't be surprised if an actual case arises. it may not give way to humanitarian feelings about the victim but a question of principle. shouldn't be done. but i wouldn't, if faced with the actual situation, compared

with exchange. it should in principle say we don't negotiate in hostage situations. i don't remember any event that we did not do it at some point by substituting humanitarian values as a question of principle. as a principle it should not be done. there are individual cases. >> in each case with health

considerations and the like. a lot of participants want to ask questions so let's go to questions from people tonight. what possible scenarios do you perceive that could unfold in the coming weeks in the conflict in ukraine and can wait expect a negotiated solution? >> if you look at the situation now there are three possible outcomes. one is the advance of a stalemate and the other is a ukrainian victory.

each of them have their own complexities. a stalemate is on one level a set-back for nato. if the argument if the ukrainians win ended the russians are defeated in ukraine insists on continuing the war until it'sth regained territory that it had been previously lost at the outset opens up the prospect of escalation from the russian side.

there are so many possibilities but in my view within the next six months issues are going to crystallize towards one or the other in what i would hope is that the government and its various allies come to the decision and considering for the peace of the world. they ought to have an option in mind of what the best american

democratic policy would be. >> we have a question for mark in new jersey. how do t you view the leadership qualities of chris jeff and brezhnev compared to president putin and could put and work with these populist leaders in today's world? how do you compare the soviet leaders of khrushchev and brezhnev? >> they are the product of a society from world war ii. about which there was a belief

towards the end of that period in the brezhnev period there were elements of weakness and therefore they were in and remain very strong. putin -- he should have understood.

so putin [inaudible] whenever we made it clear that the soviet pressures would lead to actual american --. >> a graduating student in d.c. want to know what are some of the skills and experiences a leadership has two preserve the future with chinese presence in the international landscape? >> it is a huge challenge for

our society to develop the confidence in the skills that are needed and the historical experience is not apply to the current situation. technology is developing and capabilities to understand the impact becomes much more difficult. on the other hand our educational system does not teach t history to the extent tt needs to be characteristic.

if you don't have this how they haveve the restraint so there ia tendency towards intimidation. and the possibility of creating a -- is a big challenge for us. >> we have a question from -- in berkeley. you have any advice for undergraduates on leadership and diplomacy? >> somebody asked this. study history, study history,

study history. history shows you a situation and how leaders took successful actions. >> a question from andrew in bethesda. based on your historic engagement in latin america in europe's latin american relations what prospects do you see for u.s. leadership on democracy and human rights issues in the current state of the region? and specifically with regard to brazill argentina. that's a lot but what do you see as being the prospect for u.s. role. they have a summit on democracy

in los angeles recently. >> latin american countries in my experience under -- undergo more germanic ships than almost any other part of the world and one reason for that is they are are -- of power politics. they never have to pay a direct price from european and domestic american -- and i want to tell

your listeners i haven't studied it to the same extent that european-american and so they have the same problem that everybody has in creating a domestic structure in which people believe. experience has been so different in what they feel they can do. beyond what some other countries would do. >> a question from how diplomacy has changed in decades.

it seemed to be more data-driven these days and you have to study more about economics and trade and tariffs and cyber security compared to when you are practicing as secretary of state. >> when i was secretaryof of ste i thought life was tough. frankly was easy. there was one big difference which is that the opposite party which was the democratic party said that national interest requires it and they wouldn't necessarily do it. there was a difference between the parties and the degree of

cooperation in each other. in the meantime also the educational values have become more focused on advancement and less on the conceptual society so we have a big task to fix this and to improve this. but i have great faith in this country and i am very hopeful that we will fight our way through this dispute because we

are the key to the evolution of the world. >> i think that's an optimistic note to end our conversation on. and people participating tonight can continue. leadership in world strategy and learn more about the wisdom of henry kissinger at the young age of 99. what are you going to do next dr. kissinger? >> i thank you for the way you conducted this. >> it was indeed my pleasure and although the people participating really value your vision and your experience of thank you all so very much and i think amelia has joined us.

>> thank you so much the doctor henry kissinger and andrea mitchell for being with us and to everyone who bought been for joining us tonight.

>> peter navarro thank you for beinwi