Rating: 
Summary: A Great Historian, But A Bit Too Lengthy and Descriptive . .
Review: Dr. Kissinger seems to know a lot about history, being a smart and intellectual man with the brainpower to write a 1,000 page book. I am reading this book for my Global History class in school, and I think it is a great "outside source," as compared to the school textbooks. Kissinger's Diplomacy makes a great tool to use, as with the textbook, which reinforces knowledge of history. As we go, chapter by chapter, in each the text and Diplomacy, we see how each interprets their ideas, and some of Kissinger's own interpretations. Using Diplomacy, I have seen that I better understand history, from two separate points of view. The only problem I have had with the book is that I found it hard to understand and interpret some of Kissinger's quotes and ideas. The book, I think is meant to be read in a higher level of schooling, such as college, but not in high school. I probably wouldn't have read it if it wasn't for my Global History teacher, but I can't complain because I got my "A+" out of it. Way to go, Dr. K!
Rating: 
Summary: So intriguing you can't put it down
Review: Having recently become very interested in history and politics, I can't say enough about how informative and exciting this book is. It gives even the novice like me an understanding of the events themselves, the reasons why governments acted the way they did, and a context of these events in their time and their benefits to America today. With more books like this we really can learn from our mistakes.
Rating:
Summary: The best book in international relationships
Review: I have been studying international relationships for four years and i have never read such a good book in the subject.Kissinger obviously understands the complex game of intenational politics, interest and power balance in a extremely dificult world. I higlhy recomend this book not only for students but also for any person that would like to learn about the international sistem power didtribution and the most recent history of the Cold Ward, exceptionaly writen by Henry Kisssinger.
Rating:
Summary: Superb Overview
Review: Kissinger has written an absolutely superb overview of the United States international entanglements. After reading this book through twice I use it as a reference book for college. Clear, concise, entertaining writing that isn't bogged down. I cannot praise the book enough. The text is NOT academic and is very readable for all. To clear up the often foggy histories of many of the conflicts we have known or read in text books, read Kissinger.
Rating: 
Summary: Very Insightful But Slow
Review: A well written and developed book with a number of good insights logically put together. However, at the pace it is written it's more like a college text -- kind of slow -- than a good adult read.
Rating:
Summary: A Richly Detailed Diplomatic History of the Great Powers
Review: Former National Security Advisor and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has written a superb book about the diplomatic relations between the Great Powers since the origins of the state system since the Peace of Westphalia in 1648. What is particularly interesting about this book is that the majority of it is written by Kissinger the academic; But three chapters covering the Nixon-Ford years are written by Kissinger the Statesmen. Kissinger tries to place himself within the context of other leaders throughout history, and show he tried to construct a foreign policy based on stratetic interests, and not moral or ideological concerns, which he believes have traditionally hampered US Foreign Policy. He is careful not to overplay his own role however. By far the majority of the narrative discusses other eras, with a special focus on the Cold War. Kissinger also explains his own theory of state behavior: States have overlapping and conflicting interests. Thus a certain amount of interstate war is inevitible. A statesmen should therefore focus on security, best gained through power, while leaving humanitarian and utopian issues aside. But the book is mostly a diplomatic history, focusing on the actions of individual leaders, and as such a compelling read.
Rating:
Summary: An Now Outsider's View Of The Inside Without Going Outside!
Review: A book showing how one can work towards a "We Are One" Diplomacy and a warning that nations must come to their belief, conclusions and actions of becoming a Democracy form of government onj their own, by their own and in their own time. At the same time, I noticed Henry does not talk about the danger he and Richard Nixon set by conducting Diplomacy in complete secrecy. This is important. Because if two men can give away Taiwan just to take the opportunity to open up China regardless of the pros and cons, it is still a dangerous way to operate. It is like Claudius the Roman Emperor who refused to promote his son Britannicus and supported Nero to Emperor assuming in the end the People of Rome would seek the recall of the Senate to rule Rome. However, Claudius's miscalculation was that his good policies and programs actually reinforced the Emperor's rule by the good things he accomplished. In the end, the People and The Senate Of Rome never returned and the Emperors' system continued unabated and evetually corruptible. It shows that although Nixon and Kissenger did a good thing by opening China doing it is secret could cause other President's to follow and mistakes could be made by future incompetent administrations, (Like The Current),using the same tactics without gaining the same quality of goals. The oxymoron can occur when there is a place for secrecy in Diplomacy but not in a Democracy. At the same time, some people and cultures can be very fruitful and content being ruled without a Democratic based government. It is not what I prefer, but it must be recognized and accepted to be a basic truth. Another good book but still second to Struazz-Hupe` views, policies and writings, in my very humble opinion, and very humble compared to such men as both, to say the least!
Rating:
Summary: A useful compendium of diplomatic history
Review: An interesting work about the evolution of diplomatic relations between western nations since the 17th century to the end of the cold war. Kissinger can indeed describe the tidings of political times and explain the reactions of statesmen and peoples to foreign threats, but his opinion is highly biased in asserting the fundamentations of the USA's foreign policies and in his analysis of the cold war. The United States, like their European cousins, aren't just fundamentally driven by ideals in defining their foreign policies: of course that ideals always have some influence (and every nation tends to pounder greatly this matters when dealing with other peoples), but we can't say that american policies toward China, Indonesia and Chile's dictatorships rest solely on ideals. Political and economic interests are always powerful aspects in the minds of statesmen. Yet, even if Kissinger's views of the cold war are highly biased (he tells about the oppression in communist countries, but forgets to tell about american illegal involvement in supporting many of the butchers that conducted civillian slaughters in Latin America and Africa), he can give us a good introspective look on the thoughts of diplomatic negotiators or statesmen and the sequence that events took throughout the last centuries and that lead to the complex post-cold-war world we live today. 25th of August of 1999
Rating:
Summary: Not profound, not ambitious, but interesting
Review: Kissinger is a very talented man. He knows how to develope his idea with plain language, and more important he knows how to make people laugh! But except <The World Restoration>, his doctoral thesis, his books are not academic. Those who want to study serious theories of diplomatic history in it should buy other books. Those who want to study Kissinger should find a lot of Kissingers in it. <Diplomacy> is a book for fun not for study. You can read it in the subway and the bus but not in the library.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating opinion on diplomacy and history
Review: But be aware that opinion does not equal truth. It is obvious that Kissinger (or anybody else for that matter) is not going to speak against his country and its Foreign Service. In his book, Kissinger expresses his viewpoints (which are necessarily biased) on diplomacy from Richelieu's time to the post cold-war world. If you filter the constant references to the high moral values of the United States (which at times border pure propaganda), the book is extremely interesting and insightful, especially when describing the viewpoints of other parties (nonUS). However, don't be fooled to think that the US (or any other country) conducts foreign policy on the basis of moral principles (see US-sponsored dictatorships in Latin America and Asia as an example). I rate it 4 stars because it is a really valuable book, but I withhold one star because Kissinger should either have spoken about the not-so-moral endeavours of the US or not have spoken so much about its alleged moralism.
|
