Introduction
In the summer of 1975, without President Nixon to guide the foreign policy ship as he did earlier in his second term, Secretary Kissinger embarked on a national speaking tour. In the year before the next election Kissinger tried to redefine and explain the benefits of detente to a public that was increasingly opposed to the seemingly failed tactic. The collapse of the formerly American-backed South Vietnam to the Communists and with Soviet influence growing in Latin America, many were coming to see detente as a weak and ineffective policy that provided no checks on Communist aggression. Here in this excerpt of a speech given July 15, 1975 in Minneapolis, Kissinger makes the case that detente is about human rights, and more specifically, the freedom from fear of nuclear weapons (to borrow a maxim from FDR).
In the summer of 1975, without President Nixon to guide the foreign policy ship as he did earlier in his second term, Secretary Kissinger embarked on a national speaking tour. In the year before the next election Kissinger tried to redefine and explain the benefits of detente to a public that was increasingly opposed to the seemingly failed tactic. The collapse of the formerly American-backed South Vietnam to the Communists and with Soviet influence growing in Latin America, many were coming to see detente as a weak and ineffective policy that provided no checks on Communist aggression. Here in this excerpt of a speech given July 15, 1975 in Minneapolis, Kissinger makes the case that detente is about human rights, and more specifically, the freedom from fear of nuclear weapons (to borrow a maxim from FDR).
"...The incredible destructiveness of modern weapons has transformed international politics. We must maintain our military strength. But we have an obligation, in our own interest as well as the world's, to work with other nations to control both the growth and the spread of nuclear weapons.
In our relations with the Communist power's we must never lose sight of the fact that in the thermonuclear age general war would be disastrous to mankind. We have an obligation to seek a more productive and stable relationship despite the basic antagonism of our values.
Thirty years of economic and political evolution have brought about a new diffusion of power and initiative. At the same time, interdependence imposes upon all nations the reality that they must prosper together or suffer together. The destinies of the world's nations have become inevitably intertwined. Thus, the capacity of any one nation to shape events is more limited, and consequently our own choices are more difficult and complex.
To deal with this agenda we require strength of purpose and conviction. A nation unsure of its values cannot shape its future. A people confused about its direction will miss the opportunity to build a better and more peaceful world. This is why perhaps our deepest challenge is our willingness to face the increasing ambiguity of the problem of ends and means....
We no longer live in so simple a world. We remain the strongest nation and the largest single factor in international affairs. Our leadership is perhaps even more essential than before. But our strategic superiority has given way to nuclear balance. Our political and economic predominance has diminished as others have grown in strength, and our dependence on the world economy has increased. Our margin of safety has shrunk...."
In our relations with the Communist power's we must never lose sight of the fact that in the thermonuclear age general war would be disastrous to mankind. We have an obligation to seek a more productive and stable relationship despite the basic antagonism of our values.
Thirty years of economic and political evolution have brought about a new diffusion of power and initiative. At the same time, interdependence imposes upon all nations the reality that they must prosper together or suffer together. The destinies of the world's nations have become inevitably intertwined. Thus, the capacity of any one nation to shape events is more limited, and consequently our own choices are more difficult and complex.
To deal with this agenda we require strength of purpose and conviction. A nation unsure of its values cannot shape its future. A people confused about its direction will miss the opportunity to build a better and more peaceful world. This is why perhaps our deepest challenge is our willingness to face the increasing ambiguity of the problem of ends and means....
We no longer live in so simple a world. We remain the strongest nation and the largest single factor in international affairs. Our leadership is perhaps even more essential than before. But our strategic superiority has given way to nuclear balance. Our political and economic predominance has diminished as others have grown in strength, and our dependence on the world economy has increased. Our margin of safety has shrunk...."
Questions
- What two obligations of the United States does Secretary Kissinger illustrate?
- According to Secretary Kissinger, in a nuclear age, what new obligations does the United States have?
- How does Secretary Kissinger explain that all the world's nation's destinies are intertwined?
- What does Secretary Kissinger list as the biggest challenges in our nation meeting its obligations?
- What historical factors might have influence Secretary Kissinger to say that America's "margin of safety has shrunk?"
Reference Sources
Engel, Jeffrey A., Mark Atwood. Lawrence, and Andrew Preston, eds.America in the World: A History in Documents from the War with Spain to the War on Terror. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2014. Print.
Speech by Henry Kissinger, "The Moral Foundations of Foreign Policy," to the Upper Midwest Council, Minneapolis, July 15, 1975, Department of State Bulletin, August 4, 1975, 161-68.
Engel, Jeffrey A., Mark Atwood. Lawrence, and Andrew Preston, eds.America in the World: A History in Documents from the War with Spain to the War on Terror. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2014. Print.
Speech by Henry Kissinger, "The Moral Foundations of Foreign Policy," to the Upper Midwest Council, Minneapolis, July 15, 1975, Department of State Bulletin, August 4, 1975, 161-68.
RSS Feed
