Wednesday, March 30, 2005
- Beerd Beukenhorst: "Metternich, Kissinger and the Balance of Power". Summary of "Kissinger and Metternich: is the historical parallel valid?", Presentation at LANDELIJKE AMERIKANISTENDAG", Netherlands American Studies Association (NASA), March 18, 2005 (*)
Henry Kissinger has always been very aware of history in shaping his policies. In his academic work at Harvard, before his political life, he became interested in the ideas and policies of Prince Metternich, the great Austrian statesman of the 19th century who shaped the international order in Europe after Napoleon. Metternich became an historical example for Kissinger, and his ideas were influential to him in several ways.
In my presentation I pointed to three realms of influence. First, there is the definition and scope of diplomacy. Second, there is the Metternichean conservatism and ideas about order and revolution which influenced Kissinger. Third, there is the concept of Balance of Power. In this web-summary I would like to emphasise only the third realm, Balance of Power.
In Metternich's world-view there existed a holy concept of order, which could be applied to the relations between states. Each nation should have their ‘natural’ realm of influence, in which it could satisfy its need for power without endangering their neighbours. A vital part of this order was a realistic approach of international relations, where contesting ideologies should be kept out.
Metternich demonstrated this by his approach towards France, which had brought devastating war to Europe after the Revolution. He insisted on handling France as an equal partner during the construction of the peace Treaty of Vienna. Only by shaping an order in which no parties felt resentment or injustice could there be peace in Europe. The century of relative peace after the Treaty of Vienna proved him right.
For Metternich, disruption of the balance of power would mean catastrophe, since it was against the holy order of nature. For Kissinger, preserving the balance was of equal importance, but for a different reason. In his world, a disruption of the balance would mean nuclear war and the end of civilization. It is a good example of how an historical concept isn’t only applicable 150 years later, but can even gain in importance.
Like Metternich, Kissinger tried to approach other nations without the burden of ideology. It was his idea to ‘open up’ China after decades of diplomatic frost, since China should be considered as a ‘normal nation’. He represented the realist school in American international relations, and his realism was European in fundament.
Kissinger's interpretation of détente has two strong Metternichean elements in it. First, by leaving ideology out of the international political arena, a large obstacle between the two fronts in the Cold War was removed. It made the goal of bringing both sides closer together easier. Second, Kissinger believed that the principle of Balance of Power could help détente. Talking with China should result in a more balanced system in Asia, just as talking in Europe should have the same effect there, according to Kissinger.
Was Kissingers historical example useful? That is a question we can never answer, since we don’t know how his policies would be if he didn’t have Metternich as an example. The successes of détente are questioned nowadays, but this discussion is of course heavily influenced by subsequent events, like the Reagan period and the end of the Cold War.
Without judging the value of historical examples, it is a fact that the ideas of Metternich were very helpful for Kissinger in shaping his vision on international relations and he used them for policy-making purposes. And in uncertain times, like during the Cold War, the man with a vision has an advantage.
beerdensas@zonnet.nl
(*) Many thanks to Mr. Beukenhorst, who wrote this piece especially for our site.
Henry Kissinger has always been very aware of history in shaping his policies. In his academic work at Harvard, before his political life, he became interested in the ideas and policies of Prince Metternich, the great Austrian statesman of the 19th century who shaped the international order in Europe after Napoleon. Metternich became an historical example for Kissinger, and his ideas were influential to him in several ways.
In my presentation I pointed to three realms of influence. First, there is the definition and scope of diplomacy. Second, there is the Metternichean conservatism and ideas about order and revolution which influenced Kissinger. Third, there is the concept of Balance of Power. In this web-summary I would like to emphasise only the third realm, Balance of Power.
In Metternich's world-view there existed a holy concept of order, which could be applied to the relations between states. Each nation should have their ‘natural’ realm of influence, in which it could satisfy its need for power without endangering their neighbours. A vital part of this order was a realistic approach of international relations, where contesting ideologies should be kept out.
Metternich demonstrated this by his approach towards France, which had brought devastating war to Europe after the Revolution. He insisted on handling France as an equal partner during the construction of the peace Treaty of Vienna. Only by shaping an order in which no parties felt resentment or injustice could there be peace in Europe. The century of relative peace after the Treaty of Vienna proved him right.
For Metternich, disruption of the balance of power would mean catastrophe, since it was against the holy order of nature. For Kissinger, preserving the balance was of equal importance, but for a different reason. In his world, a disruption of the balance would mean nuclear war and the end of civilization. It is a good example of how an historical concept isn’t only applicable 150 years later, but can even gain in importance.
Like Metternich, Kissinger tried to approach other nations without the burden of ideology. It was his idea to ‘open up’ China after decades of diplomatic frost, since China should be considered as a ‘normal nation’. He represented the realist school in American international relations, and his realism was European in fundament.
Kissinger's interpretation of détente has two strong Metternichean elements in it. First, by leaving ideology out of the international political arena, a large obstacle between the two fronts in the Cold War was removed. It made the goal of bringing both sides closer together easier. Second, Kissinger believed that the principle of Balance of Power could help détente. Talking with China should result in a more balanced system in Asia, just as talking in Europe should have the same effect there, according to Kissinger.
Was Kissingers historical example useful? That is a question we can never answer, since we don’t know how his policies would be if he didn’t have Metternich as an example. The successes of détente are questioned nowadays, but this discussion is of course heavily influenced by subsequent events, like the Reagan period and the end of the Cold War.
Without judging the value of historical examples, it is a fact that the ideas of Metternich were very helpful for Kissinger in shaping his vision on international relations and he used them for policy-making purposes. And in uncertain times, like during the Cold War, the man with a vision has an advantage.
beerdensas@zonnet.nl
(*) Many thanks to Mr. Beukenhorst, who wrote this piece especially for our site.
# posted by Agustin @ 7:26 PM 
