Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has again come out in favor of negotiations to end the war in Ukraine in an article for The Spectator titled “How to Avoid Another World War.”
Kissinger said that he “repeatedly expressed my support for the allied military effort to thwart Russia’s aggression in Ukraine” but that he thought there was room for negotiations.
“The time is approaching to build on the strategic changes which have already been accomplished and to integrate them into a new structure towards achieving peace through negotiation,” he wrote.
Kissinger angered Kyiv and hawks in Washington back in May when he suggested Ukraine should cede Crimea and territory the Donbas separatists controlled before the February 24 invasion to achieve peace. In his essay, Kissinger suggested a similar idea, although he said Ukraine could no longer be neutral and must be aligned with NATO.
“Ukraine has acquired one of the largest and most effective land armies in Europe, equipped by America and its allies. A peace process should link Ukraine to NATO, however expressed. The alternative of neutrality is no longer meaningful, especially after Finland and Sweden joined NATO,” Kissinger said.
The former secretary of state suggested referendums could be held to settle disputes over some of the territory Russia has captured from Ukraine. “If the pre-war dividing line between Ukraine and Russia cannot be achieved by combat or by negotiation, recourse to the principle of self-determination could be explored. Internationally supervised referendums concerning self-determination could be applied to particularly divisive territories which have changed hands repeatedly over the centuries,” he wrote.
Kissinger said the goal of peace in Ukraine should be to secure Kyiv’s “freedom” and to “define a new international structure” that Russia could eventually join. He said he disagrees with the idea that Russia should be “rendered impotent by the war,” a common view among hawks in Washington.
“For all its propensity to violence, Russia has made decisive contributions to the global equilibrium and to the balance of power for over half a millennium. Its historical role should not be degraded,” Kissinger wrote.
Ukrainian officials insist they can defeat Russia, but Kissinger recognized that even if Moscow’s conventional capabilities are weakened, it still has a vast nuclear arsenal. “Russia’s military setbacks have not eliminated its global nuclear reach, enabling it to threaten escalation in Ukraine,” he said.
While Kissinger is known as a hawk due to his infamous role in leading the secret US bombing of Cambodia as President Nixon’s national security advisor, he has long called for a more friendly posture toward Russia since the end of the Cold War. In 2014, shortly after the US-backed ousting of former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, Kissinger warned that if Ukraine were to “survive and thrive,” it must function as a “bridge” between Russia and the West.
Kissinger’s new call for peace in Ukraine comes as the prospects of negotiations to end the fighting are bleak. Ukrainian officials still maintain that their goal is to drive Russia out of all the areas it has captured in Ukraine as well as Crimea, while Russia insists it is not leaving the territories it has annexed. The US and NATO are also making plans to support Ukraine’s military for years to come.
Kissinger, the realist, nails it. Given the massive (what’s more than massive? insane?) amount of materials, monetary support given to Ukraine it does present a formidable armed presence. Zelensky et al have succeeded in conniving their de facto way into NATO. Nothing indicates NATO will stop, or wants to stop. War is the health of NATO. Russia, OTOH, has 6000+ nukes. At some point they’ll use them. This is not a black and white situation. Politics are part of human, complex interactions. Negotiate now.
Kissinger gives “realism” a bad name.
It is not total embrace of cynical evil, which is what he is.
It is a balance of power that is aware of the interests and concerns of others.
Switzerland and Sweden were realists in WW2, and benefited from that.
Russia called for negotiations last December. Turned down or ignored by the West. Russia began negotiations with Z in April, 2022. The West sends Boris from the UK to scuttle the negotiations. At the end of the Cold War, Russia wanted to join the Western Alliance, be a partner. NATO along with U.S. and U.K. said no. Always no, no, non, while bringing in nations into NATO, moving East. WE now have a one trillion dollar “defense” budget (plus more off books for special ops). My G-d in Heaven!
Russia can not negotiate with an untrustworhy partner dedicated to destroying their country by military or political means.The US has broken or withdrawn from every deal they have ever made.The US is apparently content to destroy Ukraine in order to break Russia. That country survived 25 Million to Hitler and the Nazis. They will probably survive the US unless it goes completely Nuclear.The rest of the world will not.
“WE now have a one trillion dollar “defense” budget”
Zionists were planing to recover it from Russia as reparations and indemnity
Nobody is listening, Congress and the blob are so full of hawks it’s literally an echo chamber of the MIC.
That attitude certainly has an element of truth, but is also a self fulfilling prophecy. When is the last time you tried to constructively engage with your reps on what matters, to shift their position towards something better?
“When is the last time you tried to constructively engage with your reps on what matters, to shift their position towards something better?”
Last week. And then Sanders lost his balls.
Two months ago, and he’s still one of the most dovish in congress. Yippee!
Consistently.
And the response I receive is a form letter.
I found this quite helpful to better understand what reps find persuasive and what steps they are most able to take when asked. https://blumenauer.house.gov/services/effective-advocacy
Same here. I wrote a very nasty letter to my retired Marine General congressman, loaded with my normal amount of “F” bombs, and got a form letter back thanking me and telling me my concerns would be looked into.
Yeahhh Wars…mine always tells me he’ll “keep my views in mind” 🙄
They are to the right of actual hawks. They are scaring guys like the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, guys who realize they can’t do these wild fantasies.
“They are to the right of actual hawks.”
Yes – neocons. A special form of intellectual creep.
“For all its propensity to violence, Russia has made decisive contributions to the global equilibrium and to the balance of power for over half a millennium. Its historical role should not be degraded,” Kissinger wrote.
Just a little historical tidbit….
What a lot of people may forget (or may not even be aware of) in this era of Crimean War Two, is that the defeat of Russia by an Anglo-Franco-Turkish alliance in Crimean War One (1853-56), led Russia to support the Union during the American Civil War as a counter to British hegemonism. Tsar Alexander II “The Liberator” (so called for freeing the serfs) was also an admirer of Lincoln “The Emancipator.” And folks in San Francisco were grateful when a Russian naval squadron arrived off their coast to protect them from Confederate corsairs threatening that city.
How interesting!
What a great point, to call this current conflict “Crimean War Two”, with reference to the “British Hegemon” then, and in the context of Pat Buchanan’s book “The Unnecessary War”, that the same “hegemon” drove WWI, and set forth the geopolitics of the 20th century, unto today, and also Jonathan Cook’s recent book about post 70’s plan of the West’s deliberate plan to create chaos in the MIddle East and Central Asia, quoting from public statements in Israeli press, from the direct Hebrew, and edited for publication in english for western consumption, provides the real mentality driving not only this “Crimean War Two”, but also, the Iran-Iraq War of the 80’s, our invasion of Iraq of the 90’s, the “blowback” that Ron Paul speaks of about 9/11, our invasion
of Afghanistan, 20 years of war there, and the second invasion of Iraq, and the hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, millions of refugees from Syria and Iraq, and thousands of our soldiers dying. Ukraine fits the same pattern, and the only benefit are to those who seek “hegemon”
Crimean war 1853-1856 was also quite a geopolitical event. It was not about Black Sea only. The other battles happened in Baltics and in Kamchatka. If The West would win the battle in Kamchatka, now, the size of Russia could be much smaller. Russia-China treaty 1858 was direct result of the defeat of The West in Kamchatka. Otherwise Russia could be pushed out from the region.
The Western Powers are not agreement capable. Russia has zero trust in any agreement the US makes. Hence only a military defeat and surrender is possible. Gee i wonder who it will be that surrenders……………..
Kissinger is jyst making noises to try out a face saving. solution using. essentially a maximalist approach.
He is right about achieving strategic goals — US diminishing Europe as a factor. US/UK alliance has managed to diminish German-French Europe. French part of tge equasiin was mistly a ballast, a dead weight dragging German industry down. Now that German people were foolish enough to get Greens bear power, YS/UK will grab this opportunity to decisevelly crush iuts industry. With it, hundreds of German businesses in Russia suffered damage, and trade wuth China degrades. With energy cut-off — Germany’s futurs is bleak. Yes, Kusdinger is rught. US achieved strategic goal. Sweden and Finland are jounung NATO as Germany is finished. Finland had a nuclear power plant deal with Russia, and is forces to scrape it. Sweeden is finished for the same reason. If Germany could not achieve economic and political autonomy — what are their chances? Time to
bow to the Emperor.
And to oush his luck -/ Ukraine in NATO. He knows that Russia has made its red lines clear. And Russia did not go through the process of annexation of four regions if there was any possibility of peaceful solution. There was nine, Kiev made it clear — it wants the territory but not the people.
Any negotiation is rendered meaningless. Ine cannot play games with populatiin. NATO is essentially affirming Hitler’s concrpt of sovereignty — my sovereign territory, my rules. And if any segment of populace is not desirable, keep the land, expel the population.
For that reason Russia changed its approach. And if there is no change in Ukraine’s posture — either in the treatment of population or neutral status, the war continues.
Kussinger may be reacting to the events in Middle East and the wholesale shift in the region towards Russia -China led SCO and BRIKS. He must be aware that US/Europe Ujrainian navel-gazing has brought about tge freedom to rapidly change structures that under nirmal circumstances would not have been possible.
US may have canubaluzed German industry, but if the conditions persist — the backlash will start. But how to end the cinflict with Russia turning in slow motion Ujraine self-destruction in personel, No amountt of fancy weapins can remedy that. Just look at Bakhmut for oroof. At this pount offering to Russia Crimea and Dinbas cannit cut it. Even if Zaporozhie and Khersin are added — but with Kuev in NATO — this will not be acceptable. For simple reassin — security.
His article displays the actual maximalist approach now controlling in DC, the fantasy of overthrowing not just Putin but the whole system, breaking up Russia, and selling off the resources to Western control a la completing the Yeltsin years.
The prospects of avoiding world war are “bleak”, something I have warning about for years. Hawks are convinced they will win; doves have their doubts. History shows that vanquished had confident hawks. In WW III there will be no victors only vanquished.
https://patternofhistory.wordpress.com/
It is the last line in the article that has the most significance. The US and Nato are pledging to support Ukraine until the end of time with weapons that the civilian populations are going to pay for in social and financial costs. This is not good for anyones future. The demons of war,death and loss of prosperity will kill us all if this nonsense is not stopped.
Well, well, well. Looks as if someone is attempting to redeem himself. Better late than never.
That train has left the station long ago. Russia’s winter offensive will determine negotiations. Russia no longer trusts NATO being a vassal alliance taking its marching orders from war hawks in the U.S.
“He said he disagrees with the idea that Russia should be “rendered impotent by the war,” a common view among hawks in Washington.”
But Hank, no war otherwise.
The most important thing in Kissinger’s column is his attribution to neocons in DC now running the war of the plan to destroy Russia, to break it up politically.
This makes sense of their willingness to drive Russia toward China — they mean to eliminate Russia as an independent nation and so leave China standing alone while the West exploits the resources of the former Russian space.
It is not a failure to consider balance of power, it is an all or nothing grab for hegemony.
The most important sentence in Kissinger’s piece is: “ The preferred outcome for some is a Russia rendered impotent by the war. I disagree.”
Here Kissinger acknowledges as did Lloyd Austin when he spoke about “weakening” Russia that the neocons and their allies now in power are not in the biz of building a democratic and independent Ukriane but rather destroying Russia.
And the killings in Ukraine are “worth it” (to use Albright’s phrase) just as the killings in Yemen are “worth it” to keep the Saudis happy and combat China’s growing influence in the Middle East.
Why would Russia agree to this? It’s absurd.
Kissinger isn’t calling for a negotiated peace — he’s calling for Russian concessions. Why would the winning side make concessions? Just further proof that Russia is winning this war against NATO.
99 year old Kissinger’s plan is a non-starter.
“He said he disagrees with the idea that Russia should be “rendered impotent by the war,” a common view among hawks in Washington.”
Hopefully it’s having the ironic effect …. The whole post-modern, post truth Neocon/Neolib mania needs desperately to be defeated and eliminated. Perhaps Putin is the chosen instrument of destiny … ?
henry kissinger is 99 years old.
are you sure that he actually wrote that?
At least he approved that. He is 99 but he is much cleverer than most of the congressmen.
Others here have already said it. There is no basis whatever for the Russians to trust anything the US submits as a basis for any agreements – of any kind – about the status of Ukraine, about NATO, about US-Russia relations, in short – nothing.
I’m inclined to agree OB but….. Facing the possibility of another World War, it seems to me that everyone is obligated to try and do what can be done to avoid such a cataclysm…
I guess I’ve watched “my government” screw over too many adversaries – and friends – to believe we are capable of ceasing to chase every car that drives by. But I do hear you.
Ditto that Ob….
Good analogy.
Kissinger is trying to save Kiev neo-Nazi regime from unavoidable collapse. The collapse of Kiev regime means also a great geopolitical defeat for neocons. Many American politicians failed to appreciate this Kissinger’s effort. Most of US political elite, unlike Kissinger, are living in a fantasy world; they are fooled by their own propaganda.
“In his essay, Kissinger suggested a similar idea, although he said Ukraine could no longer be neutral and must be aligned with NATO.”
In May he said Ukraine must remain neutral and act like a buffer zone while being beholden to neither Russia nor NATO. Did he fall on his head since that time?
He is trying to get off that kill list they got going. Since May, he is on it.
No, land was GIVEN to the very small southern entity called Ukraine for administrative purposes, first by the czars and then by Kruschev in his bid to become the next Soviet dictator.
Kissinger’s formulation is meant to make it sound like these are territories that vacillate between wanting to be Ukrainian or Russian. But they have always been Russian. While there were Ukrainian-speaking peasants in the countryside the cities, the mines, the schools, the military etc were all built by Russians.
But, if that false language is what it takes to be able to advocate referendums, so be it. Kissinger knows that Ukraine’s economy took a deep dive in 2015 after the Democrat-financed coup, and that the territories now liberated by Russia will 100% vote to be Russian. Donbass is completely Russian and has seen 14,000 civilians murdered, 100,000 driven from their homes, by Kiev’s artillery over the years, and now. Crimea has been Russian longer than California has been American. Crimea was taken from the Crimean Khanate that kidnapped White women and boys from Russia and Poland to sell them to the Ottomans as sex slaves. Then it became a prosperous Russian region. They, like the people in Bakhmut, have a lot of relatives in other parts of Russia. Crimea held a referendum to belong to Russia all the way back in the 1990s.
Everyone knows they will vote for the prosperous Russian state, not the Ukie regime’s basket case.