In
1971, Henry Kissinger, then National Security Advisor to the United States,
travelled secretly to China and initiated a process of establishing diplomatic
relations between the two countries. Officially, he was on his tour of Asian
countries of Vietnam, India and Pakistan that was to terminate in Pakistan at
Rawalpindi. After arriving at Rawalpindi, however, feigning ill-health,
he disappeared for rest for a goodly twenty four hours. And his team
likewise ‘retired’ to a hill station in the foothills of Himalayas.
Actually they were already in Beijing, parleying with Chinese Premier Zhou
Enlai, working with him on the terms of reference of their engagement and
perhaps making preparations for the visit of the American President to China.
The Cold War Setting
This
historic visit shocked the world and laid the foundation of Sino American
relationship. Significantly, the visit came at a time when China
had been caught in the entrapment of its own home-grown recipe of “Continuing
Revolution”, a mantra devised by Mao who was at once a romantic poet, a
traditionalist strategist and a Marxist revolutionary. If the cold war was all
about the two colliding and conflicting ideologies between the United States
and the Soviet Union, one wonders why in late sixties and seventies, the
stormiest days of the cold war, the communist China and the capitalist United
States were trying to seek each other. The cynical answer lies in the overall
geo-political considerations and especially the growing feeling of insecurity
in the minds of the Chinese Statesmen about the Russian designs in
Asia. It was also no coincidence that this relationship came
to be forged at a time when China was increasingly becoming weary of desolation
and spiritual pain brought about by Mao’s Cultural Revolution. Mao and
his team found this relationship a source of great
security especially in circumstances where her neighbour and ideological
ally Soviet Union was trying to encircle China and continue
encroachment on her borders: directly and systematically on China’s northern
border and indirectly through neighbouring countries of North Korea and Vietnam
on the Southern border.
In
his recent book, “On China” Henry Kissinger has chronicled the story of forty
years of Sino American relationship and captured some dramatic
moments of this history. This is not only a book of history and diplomacy but
also an informal narrative of Kissinger’s personal encounters with the powerful
top Chinese Statesmen. Few books, if any, would match the immediacy and
authenticity with which Kissinger tells the story of these historic moments.
The privilege that Henry Kissinger enjoyed is perhaps unique in the history of
diplomacy. For over forty years Kissinger has been strutting on the scene that
is embellished by a frightening array of great statesmen: eight American
Presidents and four generations of top Chinese statesmen.
Sino--American Relationship and Rise of China
Ironically,
Mao viewed this strategic relationship with the United States as an opportunity
to end China’s isolation, buy peace and grow economically stronger and end her
encirclement. Mao had already admitted to Edgar Snow, American journalist through whom he was initially trying to establish contact with the US
statesmen, that his Cultural Revolution had run haywire and that he was looking
for new strategies to come out of it and consolidate the gains of Communist
Revolution. Although, it was Deng Xiaoping who in the post-Mao period initiated
great economic reforms and showed great pragmatism in marrying Chinese
Communism to market capitalism, it is questionable if China would
have been able to achieve all she did without this beneficial relationship
with the United States!
This
growing relationship with the US proved immensely profitable to China. It ended
China's twenty years' isolation, increasingly brought her in the
community of nations, redirected the rabidly aroused energies of Cultural
Revolution into constructive channels of economic growth and hurtled her on
the global scene as the most powerful economy after the United States.
Relationship between China and
United States was always uneasy and it got worse during the Korean War of
1950, during the subsequent war in Vietnam, and during the three
occasions leading to Taiwan Strait Crisis when China tried using force against
the Nationalist government in Formosa. Although Kissinger’s visit
helped in establishing a special relationship between the two countries in
1970s during the cold war, this broad understanding was also uneasy and it got
worse at some points of time, such as during the Taiwan
Strait Crisis and the period following the Tiananmen Square Tragedy in which
the Chinese Government crushed and suppressed the student revolt in 1989.
And even today differences continue on two counts viz. highly undervalued
Chinese currency that allows China to appropriate all the world economy in its
favour and the unresolved issue of place of Taiwan.
Differences in Approaches and Perceptions
Kissinger
offers a wealth of information, political, historical and cultural, relating to
engagement of the West with China and narrates interesting encounters with his
counterparts from China and from elsewhere as his narrative unfolds the story
of over forty years. And through these anecdotes and stories the real faces of these
statesmen that generally lie hidden behind their carefully guarded masks peep
out, sometimes hideously and at other times humanely. However,
Kissinger’s book has a running theme of continuing contrast between the
West--especially America-- and China as regards their perceptions, their
paramount concerns, their world -views and the systems of their deeply rooted
beliefs and fears that shape their foreign policies and their strategies.
Throughout
the book Kissinger unceasingly keeps reverting to the tension
generated by different approaches employed by the two partners in
seeing realities and comprehending issues. He goes back to the history of the
engagement of the West with China during the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries and highlights the abyss that separated the two. Kissinger traces the
history of the contrast between the two fundamental approaches right from the
time of visit of Lord George Macartney, British ambassador, to the court of
Chinese Emperor in 1793-94 during the Qing dynasty. The British
ambassador presented many advanced machines, equipments and other
gifts to the Emperor with an intention to highlight the advanced and rising
industrial civilization of the West and drive home the point of western
superiority. The Chinese merely looked to them as some different things
available with the visitors and considered as natural to receive these gifts as
coming from an inferior race and “barbarians”, unmindful of the collapsing
eastern order and western ascendancy. This chasm between China and the world and
especially between China and the US recurs in Kissinger’s book from the
beginning to the end and he keeps arguing that statesmen from both the camps
must save this relationship from these differences.
Kissinger
comments with great perspicacity on major differences in approach and
perception between the two nations and shows how it impacts
relations between the two world powers and how great an ambiguity it
creates in their relations. First, the US, and in general the West see
diplomacy as transactional in nature and as distinct from war and use of force.
They make fine distinction and allow diplomacy to run its full course.
They view diplomacy as a series of moves or reactions or counter-moves to
corner the opponents and score a sort of moral victory or a public showdown.
Force is resorted to only when the diplomacy fails. The Chinese have a more
traditional and holistic approach that is more strategic in nature and where
the response may combine diplomacy and use of force to achieve the
desired result or a configuration. Moreover, Chinese traditional approach to
the foreign policy and international relations is a steady-state universe where
all pieces and all neighbours and countries fall in their own places and remain
in equilibrium.
Second,
and more importantly, the Chinese view the internal affairs of a nation and its
foreign policy as distinct from each other and would not bother about what
happens inside a country or how the governments behave with their citizens. The
foreign policy of the United States, on the other hand, is, in addition to
geo-political considerations, determined by the fundamental values of Human
Rights and Political Democracy. Americans come to this issue with a missionary
and evangelical zeal and do not eschew use of force where they feel that human
rights are at stake or where democracy and political rights of citizens are
involved. To the Chinese, use of western values (or for that matter any values)
in determining relationship with a country is anathema and they suspect that
the West is merely trying to impose their own values on others. This controversial issue of “democratic values in foreign
policy” acquires further urgency for the United States because the American
public opinion is very strong about it and no government wants to antagonize
the public opinion in democracy. Again it is interesting to see that
these differences arise primarily because there is a fairly mature democracy in
the United States, and statesmen are not free to make foreign
alliances against public opinion.
Lastly,
at least theoretically, the west and the United States would regard all nations
as equal; though in reality when people sit across the table to negotiate, they
sit consciously with power equations at the back of their mind. The Chinese,
however, often treat themselves as the “Middle Kingdom”, the centre of all
civilizations and regard others as their tributaries; and this sense is often
consciously lent to discussions and deliberations outsiders have with them.
Kissinger
also repeatedly refers to the Chinese national fear that often impacts its
policy towards foreigners and international relations. In the collective psyche
of the Chinese people the memories of the horrors of colonialism
are still very fresh. They know that the collapse of central power
led to invasion by the outside powers in her territory. And
hence to them their own security is more important than respecting some lofty
and subjective values.
While
commenting on these differences, however, Kissinger is more
balanced. He does not regard Chinese approach as any more flawed than the
American. Very wisely and with understanding he states that
Americans should show more understanding and patience with countries that have
culture different from theirs. Although he sees problems with the
American approach of mixing up human rights and democratic values every time
every time America deals with the foreign countries, he sees the Chinese views
also as an extreme view. The ideal and just approach according to him should be
somewhere in between these two.
Tiananmen Square
and Fang Lizhi Controversy
However,
despite these differences of perception and approaches to resolving issues, the
Sino American relationship survived many hurdles and challenges mainly because
the statesmen on both the sides understood each other well and kept private
communications open. Kissinger mentions many examples of this behaviour on part
of statesmen on both the sides.
Tiananmen
Square tragedy was such an event that strained the relationship between the two
countries to the utmost. In 1989, while world communism was going through serious crisis, China also faced its share of rumblings. It started with the death of Hu Yaobang,
the general Secretary of the Party till 1986, and a political liberal voice
that believed in political reforms. His death was the occasion for politically
charged mourning. It became an event around which rallied all the dissidents
and critics of the communist party. Soon the students in Beijing and other
cities voiced their frustration with corruption, inflation and lack of
political freedom. What had started as a demonstration soon became a challenge
to the government with the demonstrators and students occupying the Tiananmen
Square in Beijing, just across the seat of the Chinese Government. Although the
government was confused initially in the light of the international attention
the event had received, it soon, after about six weeks’ hesitation, cracked on
the students, and the Tiananmen Square was cleared by army.
The
whole world strongly condemned the violent suppressing of the students’
agitation in Beijing. The public opinion throughout the world, and especially
in the United States, was very strong and President George Bush was under great
pressure to take action against China for violation of Human Rights. Bush did
not want to take any action because he knew that China had always been a good
friend and had cooperated with the United States on security issues on a number
of occasions. Still Congress imposed some punitive measures on China. Chinese
could not appreciate this as they thought that this was China’s internal affair
and hardly a matter of international debate.
Thus
again the Tiananmen Square brought in sharp focus the different approaches and
different world views of these two big powers. This issue was exacerbated
further by Fang Lizhi affair that strained the relations between the countries
further. Fang Lizhi, a physicist and a former member of the Party took refuge
in the American embassy in Beijing in the wake of reprisals that followed the
clearing of the Tiananmen Square. Earlier, in the same year there had erupted a
controversy over Fang Lizhi getting an invitation at the Dinner at American
Embassy when George Bush, the American President was visiting China. It was
really a diplomatic gaffe on part of the embassy then; however, in the wake of
the Tiananmen reprisals the American embassy gave shelter to Fang Lizhi and his
wife. The Sino American relations post-Tiananmen came to depend on
final solution to Fang Lizhi affair. And ultimately at the highest level,
and after much behind-the-scene-private-working, Deng, at the suggestion of
Henry Kissinger, agreed to allow Fang Lizhi leave China on
condition that he would not make much noise and embarrass China. But in exchange
of this gesture that showed China in a more positive light
post-Tiananmen, Deng also secured reversal of sanctions and other measures
against her from the United States.
These
examples show how both the countries were eager to continue relationships
despite vast differences between their perceptions, approaches and values.
Future
of Sino American Relations
Sino
American relations developed during cold war and sustained despite fundamental
differences, and this was mainly due to compulsions of the cold
war. Now with cold war over and Soviet Union sufficiently weakened, one
may ask what the future of the Sino-American relationship is. This question
needs to be seen not only in the context of a weakened Soviet Union, but also
in the context of a vastly strengthened China, whose formidable economy is
becoming a subject matter of global discussion. It also needs to be seen from
the perspective of a fast tiring out United States who finds its manoeuvring
and its missionary policing of the world a lot irrelevant and self-defeating.
What is the future of the Sino American relationship in this scenario?
Or will they compete with each other as the US and the USSR competed
militarily? Will they be able to remove mutual fears and apprehensions and
co-operate in the new emerging world order?
Henry
Kissinger devotes last pages of his book to a comprehensive discussion
on these issues. He appears fairly ambivalent, if not pessimistic.
He feels that although so far China and America have sailed
safely together, their relationship in future may not always be that smooth.
He feels that the cultural, historic and strategic gaps in the perception
pose formidable challenges for even the best-intentioned and most far-sighted
leadership on both the sides. And hence he feels that both the countries would
have to work very hard together to steer clear of the disturbances.
Despite
this masterful discussion where Kissinger presents various strands of this
issue, one still wonders why his discussion again and again fails to rise above
the considerations and details of strategies, advantages and realities of
politics. This is the language of the professional diplomat, the view of a
cynical and continuously doubting scholar who, although he has a grand view of the
history yet misses the spirit that governs the peace and understanding among the
comity of nations and the behaviour of
statesmen who preside over
the destinies of people. Statesmen do listen to professional
diplomats and their concerns, and they should. However, history shows that
at critical juncture and at defining moments, some statesmen rise much above
their own self during their engagements. During such moments they listen
carefully to the dialogue the history holds with the present, the grand
dialogue that one period holds with another, and also the dialogue that is
suffused with existential wisdom. These are the moments in which
universal peace and harmony is born.
Kissinger
has captured such moments in his book, especially, in the formative period of
this relationship. We should wonder why he fails to invokes such moments while
discussing the future of Sino American relationship.
enlights the fact that,in spite of differeces about internal matters ,two extreme ideologists can build mutual relation if there is economic benifit to
ReplyDeleteboth you countrys,. satish ,you have reviewed kissinger nicely.dr sudhir karmarkar nasik