St. Paul (7) listening to Kissinger

Matty B's bar was crammed when Henry Kissinger spoke to participants in the Republicans' International Visitors Programme. He strongly endorsed McCain and offered his thoughts on foreign policy. McCain's advisers are reportedly engaged in an internal debate about the direction of foreign policy. Should McCain lean towards the more confrontational, unilateralist approach of President Bush's first term, or the more recent emphasis on negotiation? McCain made little mention of foreign policy in his acceptance speech. His language about both Russia and Iran has been tough, but his record also includes supporting normal relations with Vietnam at a time when that was anathema to most of his Party. Kissinger's language was cautious but his preference was clearly to put stability ahead of promoting democracy and for America to use her power in a measured way, working with her allies. A few excerpts. The International Community.Different parts of the world are at very different stages of political development. In Europe, you have long-established nation states, with a sense of national identity and capacity to act as a nation, that have decided to give up many national powers to supra-national institutions and a code of law. But this process is not complete and America can't expect the EU to act as if it were a nation. Asia operates a bit like 19th century Europe. Countries have a clear idea of their national identity and act to pursue their national interests.Other regions, notably the Middle East,resemble 17th century Europe. International relations are determined by religion, ideology and by dynastic ambitions and loyalties. So policymakers have to deal with a world in which these utterly different models for the conduct of international relations all exist at the same time.The challenge is to find a way to promote peace and stability in this diplomatic environment. Russia. America and her allies need to resist Russia's bullying of neighbouring states but also understand how Moscow sees the world and recognise that Russia has legitimate national interests. Putin's action in Georgia was unacceptable. Both Georgia and Ukraine should be integrated more into the Western family of nations. Ukraine at least should be admitted tit the EU. But was it sensible to offer full NATO membership? Remember that much of Ukraine had been an integral part of the Russian state for centuries. Can we find a means to offer effective political support without the military guarantees that flow from NATO membership? China. As the Olympic ceremonies showed, China is assertive about her place in the world, proud of her cultural achievements over millennia and determined that other countries should accept her on her own terms. A stable world political and economic system needs China as an active and responsible lead player. Iran. Most countries in the Middle East are creations of the Versailles settlement. Iran is the exception - an ancient nation state with a powerful sense of its identity and its entitlement to a leading role in the region. No problem with that. The problems are over the alignment between Iranian policy and jihadism and the risk of nuclear proliferation. The West has used the word "unacceptable" about Iran's Nuclear programme, but seems now to be unsure of its position. Is an Iranian capability acceptable? If so, what conditions should the US and other countries insist upon? If unacceptable, what action should be taken and what should trigger such action? Can sanctions be made truly effective?The US needs to get together with its allies to work out a common approach and stick to it. The next day, Kissinger told another meeting : "As a nation, we have to understand our reach, but also our limits".