The Trial of Henry Kissinger

Rating:
Summary: Trial of Henry Kissinger
Review: Christopher Hitchens in this well document book, gives an indictment sheet for crimes against humanity committed by Henry Kissinger; the charge sheet is as follows:

1. The deliberate mass killing of civilian population in Indo China.
2. Deliberate collusion in mass murder.
3. Arming and encouraging the government of Pakistan for the murder of over a million civilians.
4. The personal suborning and planning of murder, of a senior constitutional officer in a democratic nation Chile with which the United States was not at war.
5. Personal involvement in a plan to murder the head of a state in the democratic republic of Cyprus.
6. Personal involvement in a plan to kidnap and murder a journalist living in Washington D.C.

It is for these reasons and others, according to Hitchens, that Kissinger has gone to great lengths to cover his tracks, by censoring documents or bequeathing them to the Library of Congress under the condition that they remain sealed until his death. In my opinion the Trial of Henry Kissinger in a court of law may create a precedent for other leaders as Saddam Hussein, Atul Vajpaiee, Ariel Sharon to stand trial for their acts against humanity.

Rating:
Summary: Kissinger's reputation is secure
Review: Christopher Hitchens is a good writer of literary criticism, and it is difficult not to enjoy his characteristic style of worrying away at intellectual sloppiness on the part of those he attacks (e.g. Noam Chomsky's moral evasions on Islamist terrorism). This book, however, displays an intellectual sloppiness of its own, starting from its resort to that most enduring of logical fallacies, the argumentum ad hominem: it really does appear to be the case that Hitchens regards it as a damning indictment that, allegedly, Kissinger's "manners are ... rather gross".

The substance of Hitchens's case against Kissinger is terribly thin gruel. Hitchens makes an unsubstantiated and implausible claim that Kissinger sabotaged peace talks with Vietnam ahead of the 1968 election in order to gain political advantage for Richard Nixon. There is no evidence for this. The peace talks were actually stalled because President Thieu distrusted his Communist adversaries, and with good cause. Hitchens indicts Kissinger for supposedly being instrumental in the coup that deposed the Marxist President Allende of Chile. Again, there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim, and Hitchens goes way beyond the public record in claiming that Kissinger welcomed General Pinochet's repressive regime. Kissinger certainly did welcome the fact that Allende was no longer in power: any democrat would have done the same, for Allende was a totalitarian would-be dictator who cared nothing for democratic procedures and bypassed the Chilean constitution. But Kissinger also insisted - in a memorandum that Hitchens quotes selectively but does not render accurately - that Pinochet improve Chile's abysmal human rights record. That is precisely what an honourable and dedicated public servant in a liberal democracy ought to have done.

In short, the evidence for Hitchens's claims of Kissinger's moral turpitude is just not there. Hitchens seems to sense this paucity, for he is inclined to embroider his case in ways that can only be described as unscholarly. For example, he charges that Kissinger engineered the downfall of President Makarios in Cyprus, and offers as evidence no more than a quotation from Kissinger: "Makarios, the proximate cause of most of Cyprus's tensions...". But Hitchens omits the rest of Kissinger's sentence: ''was also the best hope for a long-term peaceful solution." Overall, the book exudes an unmistakable air of irritation that Kissinger was part of the winning side - our side, the liberal West - in the Cold War, and I believe it is this more than anything that animates Hitchens's vendetta. Kissinger's reputation as an imperfect but sagacious and principled democratic statesman easily survives this attack.

Rating:
Summary: Electrifying as well as sobering
Review: Christopher Hitchens is a very odd character. Those who denounce him in these reviews as a radical liberal, don't know much about Hitchens' politics, especially in recent history. Having turned very pro-war with Iraq, Hitchens has begun denouncing leftists everywhere you look, mostly with ad hominem remarks. It's all very puzzling and a bit disconcerting. But the relevant point is that Hitchens is not some bitter pacifist. But in this book he shows that he has some sense of history and legality about him as he pieces together one massive case condemning Henry Kissinger for crimes against humanity. The facts are all there. Hitchens doesn't hold back with his verbal assault on Kissinger, but he also doesn't hold back evidence.
The case of Kissinger is still entirely relevant to our political culture and to humanity at large (I.E.: this book is not pointless conjecture like trying to find Jack the Ripper.) Kissinger still wields great influence in policy making and is seen as an elder statesman, a role model. He is everything Macchiavelli ever wanted to be and more. His legacy deserves to be discredited.
This may be Hitchens' most important book.

Rating:
Summary: exposing one of the more prominent government criminals
Review: Christopher Hitchens is among the greatest contemporary polemicists. In this book he is at his best, using his loathing of Henry Kissinger to animate a series of well-supported arguments that indict Kissinger beyond doubt.

Not that there was any doubt before: there has never been any question that Kissinger played a central role in formulating American foreign policy under Nixon and Ford, and by any consistent definition both administrations engaged in extensive human rights abuses and, under Nixon, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Hitchens's contribution is to sum up the charges against Kissinger and to add his efforts to the goal of getting Americans to face their bloody history, which has been effectively blotted out of public awareness.

I won't detail the specifics since other reviewers have already ably done so. But I would like to make two comments. First, this book is not an historical account and carries all the drawbacks of any legal briefing, including a lack of context, unequal time for the criminal to present his case, and limited examination of the motives driving the criminal behavior. But this is not exactly a fair criticism of Hitchens since no good historical account of these events will be possible for perhaps 15 years or more because the American government (and Kissinger with regard to his personal papers) keep key internal documents classified for three to five decades, and sometimes more.

And second, this kind of book, by focusing intently on one high government official, risks assigning blame for American crimes to individual evil rather than structures of power. Unfortunately Hitchens does little to counteract such a conclusion. Certainly Kissinger's individual traits made some differences around the edges, but ultimate blame for the USA's policies must rest on a political culture and an economic system that together lead all top officials to commit atrocities in the perpetual pursuit of dominance for the government and business.

Rating:
Summary: The irony is biting
Review: Christopher Hitchens talks of George Orwell (his own self-styled mentor) in his invited lectures and at the New School in New York where he occasionally teaches, writes of Orwell in his books, and backs Paul Wolfowitz as a matter of Realpolitik on the second gulf war. One waits in vain to read a piece of his that, knowledgable as he is and not one to turn away from a fight, critiques the Pentagon, an institution that houses Wolfowitz (and, among many others, Wolfowitz's boss Rumsfeld) and which simply cries out to be critiqued at the present time -- and precisely on Orwellian grounds. On this matter Hitchens is no longer an expat critic of the American establishment as he was once hailed to be, he is a yes-man. In his silence is a complicit yes to any number of things the Pentagon currently says and does. This makes not only for his current spate of bad critical writing (a gadfly who agrees?), but more to the point it aligns his current thinking with the likes of Kissinger, whom Hitchens sees fit to dispatch with in this book (and rightly so). (***) Hitchens has gone to bed with the Pentagon far too uncritically regarding the second Iraq war, simply because they talk about democracy and wage war against theocracy. Whom did Paul Wolfowitz recently hire as consultant for matters of national security? Henry Kissinger. The irony could not be more biting. I can find no better way to get my point across regarding Hitchens and the distance that he has placed between himself and his own mentor than to put it thus: Orwell would have disagreed with Hitchens on his uncritical choice of partners here. And that matters, especially for a man whose entire intellectual reputation is built upon the notion of political disagreement, or dissensus rather than consensus.

Rating:
Summary: Missing the Larger Issues
Review: Christopher Hitchens' slender indictment of former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger can be judged according to its realization of either one of two possible goals. The first, explicit, goal is the narrow one of presenting historical evidence and the relevant clauses of American and international law so as to make the case for Kissinger's trial as a war criminal by US, foreign or international courts. The second goal, implicit in Hitchens' subject matter and arguments, is the broader one of explaining, or at least exploring, what role justice ought to play in Great Power politics and how heads of state ought to be held accountable for their actions. The book realizes the first goal but falls far short of the second--and far more interesting--one.

Drawing on available White House and State Department documents from Kissinger's years in government service, as well as various accounts by others, inside and outside Washington power circles, Hitchens does a skillful job of defining the war crimes in question and demonstrating Kissinger's culpability in them. Here, Hitchens shows his abilities as a journalist and historical detective, as well as his debating skills, deftly dissecting Kissinger's various excuses and evasions concerning his past actions.

Two problems mar this otherwise impressive performance. The first, inevitable, problem is that the sifting of historical data and parsing of laws makes the book a bit dry and dull--exactly what one would expect from a legal brief. The second, far more avoidable, problem is the book's style, made extremely tedious by the buckets of vitriol and self-righteousness Hitchens pours out not only on Kissinger but on far less morally reprehensible figures like Clark Clifford or Daniel Patrick Moynihan (whose writing abilities, as well as character, are attacked in a bizarre aside).

The book's most serious flaw, however, is its failure to address the larger issues involved. Hitchens seems to believe that all key political decision makers ought to be held to the high standards set by international law and human rights codes and tried for their violations of these standards by a body like the International Criminal Court. While this is a worthy goal in principle, its practicality is doubtful. The rule of law within a society presupposes the authority of a unified state, preferably one accountable to the people, behind the law. Only such a common authority can enforce the law and ensure a reasonably uniform application of it. No such authority exists behind international law or the ICC, which are subject to the same old power politics among nations they are supposedly above.

Take, for example, the original war crimes tribunals against the German and Japanese high commands after World War II. Were those men guilty of war crimes? Absolutely--but so were Winston Churchill (for allowing the fire-bombing of civilians at Dresden), Harry S Truman (for authorizing use of the A-bombs) and Josef Stalin (for originally invading Poland, slaughtering Poles and allowing the mass rape of German women at the war's end). The reason those men did not end up at the end of the rope was for the simple, cynical reason that they won and the Axis powers lost. Similarly, Henry Kissinger might someday be prosecuted for his crimes, but such prosecution will represent the triumph of his political enemies, not of justice.

Fair application of international law is a near impossibility, especially since its violation is a sadly routine part of politics and if it ever were rigorously applied not only Kissinger but most of the world's governments would be behind bars. Hitchens failure to acknowledge this problem makes him seem naive and makes The Trial of Henry Kissinger an ultimately unsatisfying read.

Rating:
Summary: America's #1 War Criminal & How He Goes Un-noticed
Review: Ever wonder how Mr. Kissinger hung out with indicted criminals like Nixon, Agnew, Mitchell, Halderman, Erlichman, & Dean, but has kept his imagine pristine, like he didn't know what was happening... pretending he alone was the ONLY innocent one among them? Well, think again.Noteably, Kissinger refuses to ever comment on the declassified information in this book, which directly ties him to genocide and murders in Vietnam, East Timor, Chile, & Cyprus. That this man is walking around free, with the GOVERNMENT documents showing his complicity, is a shame for all Americans. His documented denials, which directly counter his documented involvement, are a pathetic volume of what power can pull off in the USA.I highly recommend the film, based on this book, "The Trials of Henry Kissinger". If these facts were presented about any of you, you'd be in jail for the rest of your life, if not with a lethal injection. But not "Dr." Kissinger. He runs between the shadows and with very weathly & influential friends. He is a true American disgrace!

Rating:
Summary: Kissinger the War Criminal
Review: For those who think this book is post-Vietnam polemics, you should dig further: Kissinger can no longer travel to several countries because of the desire of the judicaries in those countries to have him answer some questions about his murderous reign during first a distracted (Nixon) and next a novice(Ford) president. Kissinger should, indeed, be strapped to a metal bench with Auguste Pinochet, both naked to the skivvies, in a concrete block house in the most humid area of South America--not Chile necessarily---while a Boes CD player screams "Those were the days, my friend, we thought they'd never end,...." fed nothing but anchovies with no water, shocked occasionally with a cattle prod whenever they attempt to excuse their miserable lives, the only genocidal practioners extant. And anyone who doesn't turn the telly off in disgust and shame whenever K is asked his opinion on an international event should be made to watch.

Rating:
Summary: Pressing the Case
Review: Henry Kissinger left Paris early on a recent trip. Some contended that the early departure stemmed from the Belgian government's eagerness to confront Kissinger for alleged "crimes" in the overthrow of the Chilean government of President Allende culminating with the legally elected leader's assassination. European interest has dramatically intensified in recent months regarding an expressed need for Kissinger to be compelled to explain his actions regarding Chile and other controversial matters. The controversial former U.S. secretary of state seeks to quell such inquiries through a nervous silence, hoping such concerns will dissipate through the passage of time.

Into the scene comes Christopher Hitchens, who makes a case in this book for Kissinger standing trial for past foreign policy conduct. He makes the case for Kissinger's involvement in the overthrow and assassination of Allende in Chile, but does not stop there. Hitchens also presents his reasons why Kissinger should be held accountable for a coup and an assassination in Bangladesh, and for the deaths of East Timoreans seeking freedom and incurring widespread loss of life at the hands of Indonesian President Suharto's forces. Hitchens also implicates Kissinger in the 1974 Cyprus tragedy and also hones in on actions in which he was involved as Nixon's special national security operative and secretary of state during the Vietnam War. He cites Telford Taylor, an American prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials, as stating that U.S. policy was subject to prosecution by invoking the prevailing Nuremberg criteria, relating to ferocious bombing assaults which Taylor and Hitchens believe violated the Geneva Codes.

Hitchens presents his case with compelling vigor, asserting that, in a world where the United States is seeking vigorous prosecution in the World Court against Slobodan Milosevic and his cohorts for criminal conduct in the former Yugoslavia, a Henry Kissinger should also be held accountable for his activities.

William Hare

Rating:
Summary: Pressing the Case
Review: Henry Kissinger left Paris early on a recent trip. Some contended that the early departure stemmed from the Belgian government's eagerness to confront Kissinger for alleged "crimes" in the overthrow of the Chilean government of President Allende culminating with the legally elected leader's assassination. European interest has dramatically intensified in recent months regarding an expressed need for Kissinger to be compelled to explain his actions regarding Chile and other controversial matters. The controversial former U.S. secretary of state seeks to quell such inquiries through a nervous silence, hoping such concerns will dissipate through the passage of time.

Into the scene comes Christopher Hitchens, who makes a case in this book for Kissinger standing trial for past foreign policy conduct. He makes the case for Kissinger's involvement in the overthrow and assassination of Allende in Chile, but does not stop there. Hitchens also presents his reasons why Kissinger should be held accountable for a coup and an assassination in Bangladesh, and for the deaths of East Timoreans seeking freedom and incurring widespread loss of life at the hands of Indonesian President Suharto's forces. Hitchens also implicates Kissinger in the 1974 Cyprus tragedy and also hones in on actions in which he was involved as Nixon's special national security operative and secretary of state during the Vietnam War. He cites Telford Taylor, an American prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials, as stating that U.S. policy was subject to prosecution by invoking the prevailing Nuremberg criteria, relating to ferocious bombing assaults which Taylor and Hitchens believe violated the Geneva Codes.

Hitchens presents his case with compelling vigor, asserting that, in a world where the United States is seeking vigorous prosecution in the World Court against Slobodan Milosevic and his cohorts for criminal conduct in the former Yugoslavia, a Henry Kissinger should also be held accountable for his activities.

William Hare