怀念啊，基辛格《大外交》，通俗易懂，比历史书好看。好书，赞一个。

亨利·艾尔弗雷德·基辛格，当代美国著名外交家、国际问题专家，1973年诺贝尔和平奖获得者。曾任美国尼克松政府国家安全事务助理、国务卿，福特政府国务卿。


1923年5月27日生于德国费尔特市的一个犹太家庭，1938年因逃避纳粹对犹太人的迫害，随父母迁居纽约。在30年代的希特勒大屠杀中，基辛格至少有13个亲戚被送进了毒气室。对此，基辛格的传记作者之一沃尔特·伊萨克森评论说，基辛格的几乎所有个性特征——他的哲学悲观主义、他的信心与不安全感的共存、他的因自己易受伤害而觉得空虚、以及他的因渴望赞誉而显得傲慢——都可以追溯到那场历史灾难。基辛格到美国后，他父母把他送进了华盛顿高级中学读书。这所学校有5000学生，其中犹太人很多，当时基辛格的最大愿望是毕业后做一名会计师。

但是，美国卷入第二次世界大战这件事却改变了基辛格的命运。1943年他加入美国籍，不久应征入伍，在美国陆军服役。在军队中，他有幸遇到了同是德国裔的列兵克雷默尔，后者成为发现基辛格的第一个伯乐。在他与基辛格的初次交谈中，克雷默尔就认定基辛格是一个天生的奇才。1944年9月，基辛格所在的部队—美军第84师被派赴欧洲战场。第二年初，他们开进了德国。由于克雷默尔的建议，基辛格被调到师部担任德语翻译，军衔也从列兵提升为军士。在二战的最后几个月，他从第84师调到第970反谍报部队，并被任命为陆军中士参谋。1945年3月，基辛格还被任命为接管德国被占领城市的官员。在其任职期间，基辛格表现了卓越的行政能力，并克服了对德国人的报复心理而谨慎地使用了自己的权力。

战争结束后，基辛格回到了美国。1947年9月，他根据《士兵权利法案》获得奖学金并进入哈佛大学政治系学习。在哈佛读书期间，基辛格荣幸地得到了威廉·埃利奥特做他的导师。埃利奥特毕业于英国牛津大学，是哈佛的一个传奇人物，为黑格尔的信徒。他教授给了基辛格一套完整的保守主义政治哲学，并成为发现基辛格的第二个伯乐。1950年，在埃利奥特教授的指导下，基辛格完成了他的本科毕业论文，题目为《历史的真义—关于施本格勒、汤因比及康德的感想》。这篇本科论文长达377页，埃利奥特教授仅看了前100页，就提笔批了“最优”。

基辛格的论文至今在哈佛仍被人提起，因为他的论文篇幅过长，学校被迫制定了“基辛格规则”，这条规则限定未来的大学生在撰写本科毕业论文时，长度不得超过基辛格论文长度的1/3。由于本科学习成绩优异，基辛格被免试推荐进入研究生阶段的学习。1952年，他获得硕士学位，1954年获得哲学博士学位。基辛格的博士论文题为《重建的世界—梅特涅、卡斯尔累与和平问题，1812-1822年》，该文集中研究了1815年维也纳体系的建立与维持，实际上是对欧洲古典均势学说的评述，它奠定了基辛格作为现实主义学派中第一流学者的声誉。由于杰出的学术成就，基辛格被授予夏季奖。在攻读博士学位期间，他曾担任一门社会学概论课程的教学；他还组织了国际问题研究班，并创办了一份名为《合流》的季刊。但是，基辛格留校任教的愿望却被哈佛大学粗暴地拒绝了。1955年，基辛格不得不回到故乡纽约，担任美国对外关系协会研究小组的研究主任，负责起草带有结论性的研究报告，并准备出版专著。1957年，基辛格出版了《核武器与对外政策》一书，该书首次提出了有限战争的理论，从而使基辛格在学术界和对外政策研究领域一炮而红。同年，哈佛大学决定聘用基辛格，授予他讲师等级。1957-1969年，基辛格历任哈佛大学讲师、副教授、教授。与此同时，他还在校外担任洛克菲勒兄弟基金会特别研究计划主任、国际问题中心成员、国家安全委员会和兰德公司顾问等兼职。 　　在1968年的总统竞选中，基辛格担任了纳尔逊·洛克菲勒的外交政策顾问，但是后来尼克松却战胜了洛克菲勒，获得了共和党总统候选人提名并最终赢得了大选。在竞选中，基辛格曾经把尼克松骂得狗血喷头，但是尼克松却不计前嫌，他看中了基辛格的外交才能，他决定聘请基辛格担任总统国家安全事务助理，并成为发现基辛格的第三个伯乐。1969年1月，基辛格离开了哈佛校园，到华盛顿走马上任，实现了由文人战略家到政策制定人的转变。1969-1973年，基辛格任尼克松政府国家安全事务助理，并兼任国家安全委员会主任到1975年。


他兼任美国国务卿，获得了一个外来移民所能得到的最高政治职务。在任期间，基辛格信奉均势外交，积极推动尼克松政府与中国改善关系，对苏联推行“缓和”战略，从而构筑一个以均势为基础的稳定的世界和平结构。1973年1月，基辛格在巴黎完成了结束越南战争的谈判，并因此获得诺贝尔和平奖。同时，他对阿拉伯国家与以色列关系的缓和也起了重要作用。1977年1月，福特总统授予基辛格总统自由勋章，并称赞他为“美国历史上最伟大的国务卿”。不久，基辛格退出政坛，起初想回哈佛任教，但为哈佛校长博克婉拒。后来，他受聘担任了乔治城大学教授，乔治城大学国际战略研究中心顾问，并担任阿彭斯学会高级研究员、大通曼哈顿银行国际顾问委员会主席等职。


基辛格创建了基辛格联合咨询公司，他本人担任董事长，他的好友和前助手斯考克罗夫特担任副董事长兼总经理。离开政界以后，基辛格仍在不断地撰写论文，发表演讲和出版著作，他对里根政府和布什政府的外交政策均发生过重要影响。1983年任美国广播公司新闻分析员。1983年7月，里根总统曾任命他为中美洲政策两党委员会主席。1986年，基辛格荣获自由奖章。1986年9月任美印委员会主席。1987年3月任美国—中国协会两主席之一。在1989年以后中美关系处于危机的时候，基辛格曾多次访问中国，并呼吁保持中美之间的正常交往。2002年3月5日，基辛格博士在华盛顿国家记者俱乐部发表演讲，介绍中美建交30年来的历程，并展望中美关系的未来。2002年11月27日，基辛格被美国总统布什任命为调查“9·11”事件的一个独立委员会的主席，12月14日，基辛格辞去该委员会主席职务。


主要著作：
Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy. Harper&Brothers, New York, 1957 　　《核武器与对外政策》

The Necessity for Choice: Prospects of American Foreign Policy. 《选择的必要：美国外交政策的前景》

American Foreign Policy: Three Essays. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London 1969 《美国对外政策（论文三篇

White House Years. Little,Brown and Company Limited,1979 　　《白宫岁月》

Diplomacy. Simon&Schuster and Triump Publishingh Co.,Ltd New York 1994 　　《大外交》

A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh, and the Problem of Peace. 《重建的世界—梅特涅、卡斯尔累与和平问题

The Troubled Partnership Relations: A Reappraisal of the Atlantic Alliance. Magloo&Cell Company,1965 　　《麻烦的伙伴关系—对大西洋联盟的重新评价》　

Observation: selected speeches and essays, 1982-1984.Little,Brown and Company (Canada)Limited,1985 　　《和平、人生与哲学－－－池田大作与基辛格对谈集》，

Does America Need A Foreign Policy? 　　《美国需要外交政策吗？》

SupplementaryOpinion On The Theories of Development

--bookreview of World Politics In a New Era

     The book was written by Dr. Fred L.Wehling and Steven L. Spiegel in 2003. Dr. Fred L. "Wehling is SeniorResearch Associate and Education Coordinator for the Center forNonproliferation Studies (CNS) at the Monetary Institute of InternationalStudies, Monetary, California. Before coming to CNS in 1998, Wehling was aconsultant at RAND, Coordinator of Policy Research for the University ofCalifornia's Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation (IGCC), and aresearcher at the Cooperative Monitoring Center (CMC) at Sandia NationalLaboratories. He is also the author of various articles and reports for TheNonproliferation Review and other publications."[1] "StevenL. Spiegel, Professor of Political Science at UCLA, studies American foreignpolicy in the Middle East. He serves as Director of the Center for Middle EastDevelopment at UCLA, and also provides assistance to Middle East programs atthe statewide Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation of the University ofCalifornia, San Diego. Through the innovative and informal negotiationtechniques he has developed in these capacities, Dr. Spiegel helps producecutting edge ideas for promoting Middle East regional security and cooperation.For this work, he received the Karpf Peace Prize in 1995, awarded to the UCLAprofessor considered to have done the most of any faculty member for the causeof world peace in the previous two years."[2]

     World Politics in a New Era, provides thebasic knowledge and skills needed to appreciate the full range of internationalpolitics in contemporary affairs. Integrating a theme of Globalization andFragmentation throughout, the book enables us to see beyond the notion of"globalization" as a buzzword and to become aware of the trade-offsand tensions that result from a "global community." Furthering thistheme, the authors introduce the concept of Conflict and Cooperation so that wecan see how world leaders balance their relationships with other countries. WorldPolitics in a New Era introduces various theories, which appear throughout thenarrative. In addition, "At a Glance" features are integratedthroughout the text; these summaries help us to see how the theories work andalso how they intersect with individual, domestic, and systemic levels ofanalysis. After reading this, I am thinking about the actions we have taken andsuffered beyond the theories. For example, the neo-interventionism under thepretest of development, the love and hatred of less developed countries towardinternational trade and MNCs, the new developmental model, namely the Chinesemodel which is to combine the two in a delicate way, undergoing the socialchanges that described by the modernization theory while keeping its own stepof political changes.

     Modernization theorists contend that lessdeveloped countries will develop only by shedding their traditional,social,political, and economic institutions. "Socially, this require the abilityto achieve status through merits and success and tolerance of social andintellectual diversity. Politically, this translates into the immergence ofdemocracy, the rule of law, political opposition, human rights and basicfreedoms. Economically, development means the creation of a free market-basedeconomy, though some level of state intervention for social reasons is possibleand desirable."[3]Modernization theory as it requires has brought great changes to thetraditional society, coming up with industrialization and urbanization. Howeverthe theory has been criticized on a number of fronts. Firstly, due to differentnational conditions, those less developed countries can not just duplicate theNorth's part of development. Secondly, the traditional social and politicalinstitutions can not be changed synchronously or it will cause great chaos andput the country in a more miserable situation. Thirdly, this theory is a newexcuse for the west to colonize the newly independent countries in the form ofpolitical change, democracy and human rights. Finally, many less developedcountries feel that the existed international economic order is favorable tothe west who have already dominated the market.

     When we seeing this, we clearly wouldremind of the first advocator of the theory, the Unite States. Whilepropagandizing the idea of American core value, America determines to save theworld from poverty and chaos though the theory of modernization. There has beena great deal of assumptions over the intervention of the U.S. in terms ofbringing about changes to the economics and political situations of otherstates, particularly the developing and underdeveloped nations. Thoseassumptions are that, the political models or frameworks of the U.S. will workelse where; "what is good for the U.S is good for the rest; theegocentric, individualism of western ideas were thought by many to bring aboutgood changes, wealth accumulation and happiness. The natural resources are seenas unlimited and this is what lead to the perception and drive for too muchgrowth and resource exploitation."[4] So, thiseconomic growth is seen as the link to democratization, freedom, peace,stability and harmony. The international order, the system of production,science and technologies, and the ideas of capitalism were thought to be betterand that the democratic systems are virtuous, non-democratic systems arerepressive.

     This is maybe why, the whole modernizationtheory is seen by America as something good that can bring about new changes tothe rest of the world, particularly the hot issues of Afghanistan and Iraq andthe fight against terrorism. The question that many modern theorists often posewould be, if the modernization theory is persistent and flawless, would it workin all cases, why does such theory keep reappearing if it does not work?

     Dependency theory rejects themodernization theory premise that the western way of development is perfect tothe less developed countries. Instead, the theory believe that it is thewestern idea of development and democracy that caused the social troubles inthe less developed countries, keeping them in a dependent condition. As foreconomy, "the roots of this unequal relationship between the periphery(the third world) and the core (the first world) can be traced to thecolonization period. This kind of structure fuels the development in the Northand stiffs it in the South."[5] Forexample, the unfavored position of the South stems from the fact that the mostSouthern states' economies depend heavily on the export of the primaryproducts. To be worse, most countries' exports are dominated by a singlecommodity. Besides, the international division of labour --primary products inthe South and manufactured products in the North --perpetuates the ThirdWorld's backward position. In terms of MNCs, the modernization theoristscontend that the MNCs promote development in the South, providing capital, technology,training and managerial know-how to Southern states. However, dependencytheorists believe that the MNCs exploit the South, hinder its development andcontribute to the widening gap between rich and poor.

     This theory has always been used by Chinato expose the evil of capitalism and the exploitation that the newlyindependent countries suffer. Like Marxism, Dependency Theory was an activistproject that didn't just analyze. But in becoming political actors andadvisors, there was an irony, that the best way for a country to be more likethe metropolis was to actually join the ranks of exploiting countries, at leaston a regional level. During the 60's and 70's we pointed to the systemicinequities in the so-called north-south trade, to the continuing of thebloodsucking economic relations of colonialism in the newly independentcountries, and to the role of the comprador class in economics and politics.This was a large part of the content of our anti-imperialist work, that the U.S. wasn't aiding countries to develop, but deforming their economies to suitthe imperialist dominated world market and assigning them to a persistentlydisadvantaged position. On dependency theory, I think the crucial issue is thatit gives a wrong picture of imperialism in what is to a large extent apost-colonial world. They overlooked the economic changes that occur undercolonialism and held instead that colonialism was simply ripping off a countryby political means and that independence means the sole sway of the free-market.

     There are some important new developmentsin the world contributing to the new shape of third world development. First,there is a huge glut of capital seeking investment opportunities that hasfocused in overseas markets increasingly since the 70's. There has been anexplosion in the technology of investing, new instruments offering vastlyreduced barriers for investors. Together they have facilitated the rapidmovement of huge amounts of capital and changed the principal form of capitaltransfer from north to south. This switch from governmental to privateinvesting has helped to increase the wealth and power of the local bourgeoisiein a group of newly-developing countries, creating more billionaires andmillionaires. "Even the least developed countries are asking differentquestions as they negotiate with many regional and international players for apiece of the capital flow."[6] Thedoesn't mean that the masses of these countries became prosperous. The splitbetween rich and poor has grown deeper, both between rich and poor countriesand among the classes inside Third World countries.

     The third model of development, China'sway of development, is not something quite innovative. But it arises people'sinterest and causes alertness of the western countries due to its perfectcombination of the two theories and attractiveness to the less developmentcountries. "U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice wrote an article onthe U.S. national interest in the latest issue of "Foreign Affairs"magazine , which relates to China's development model."[7] Sheborrowed the concept of "the authority of capitalism" (authoritariancapitalism) from Western academic circles, summing up the concept of China'sdevelopment model. She said that countries like China uses the capitalist wayof promoting economic development in the absence of democratization which shebelieves will have a negative impact on existing international order. Becausethis model has the same democratic values of western countries. As a result,the United States and other holders of common values of democracy (Europe,Japan and Australia, etc.) share a common responsibility in a global scale andpromote the implementation of the occurrence and development of democraticpolitics. This point of view of politicians in the West are not uncommon. Itconcerns whether Western countries intentional or not impose a common politicalpressure on China.

     China has implemented the policy of reformand opening-up over 30 years, not only creating national sustained economic andsocial development, but also integrating into the world system and playing anincreasingly important role. In short, China's development model is gradual andin order. To achieve social and economic development, we must first have astable order without which there will be no room for economic development. Inaddition, the economic and social development will inevitably put pressure onthe existing order, which in turn lead to further reform of the existing order,protecting the fruits of the earlier development, and further promotingeconomic and social development. There is no doubt that in China political andsocio-economic order enjoy a benign interaction during in development.

     On the diplomatic front, China'sexperience is also in the favor of the vast number of developing countries. BeforeChina, developing countries either highly depend on the West or isolate fromthe them. But China enters into the world system and keeps independence fromthe west. It is also observed that China not only participates in internationalmultilateral organizations, but also becomes an international or regionalmultilateral organizations initiator. For example, the "ShanghaiCooperation Organization" and "(the North Korean nuclear issue) thesix-party talks". It is in this sense, Western politicians feel that theChinese model poses threat to the Western model of development. China stressessocio-economic development without denial of political democratization, seekinga suitable path of democratization of China. Many developing countries are alsoaware of that the Chinese-style will not hinder the development of democracy,but foster the democracy a strong socio-economic support.

     From history and with the observation ofthe current social, economic and political dilemmas, it seems that the theoriesof development of the West are not applicable to the East and vice versa. Theproblem of the world cannot be resolved by any one particular person or acollective group of powerful people, or a theory. The way people currently viewthe world must be changed. Yet it's a real challenge for any country or nationstate to try to change that perception and mentality about how people perceivethe world. So, the whole idea of this development theory can only do so much tominimize the impact of the wrong views we hold and how we act. But it cannotcompletely eradicate and eliminate the problems.

References:

1)        Dr. Fred L. Wehling, Steven L.Spiegel, World Politics in a New Era,(Orlando: Harcourt Brace College Publishers, 2003)

2)       Pan Weijie, Zhang Chengbin,"the Refelction of Modernization Theory", the Study of Europe, 1998/06

3)       Ronald Inglehart, Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural,Economic, and Political Changes in 43 Societies", (Princeton, NewJersey: Princeton University Press, 1997)

4)       Sun Yujian, Rao Guobin,"neoimperialism and modern international relations", Nan Jing College of Politics LearnedJournal, 2007/06

5)       Tao Haiyang, "theDevelopment and Main Points of Dependency Theory", the Study of Socialism, 2007/05

6)       Teng Haijian, "the BriefIntroduction of Dependency Theory", ChiFeng College Journal, 2005/01

7)       http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/ge ... s/?view=usa&ci= 978019533559

8)       http://cif.miis.edu/cif/profiles.htm

9)       http://www.oup.com/hiff/us/gener ... ernationalStudies/? view=usa&ci= 67540167895439

---

[1] Edit from http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/ge ... s/?view=usa&ci= 9780195336559

[2] Edit from http://cif.miis.edu/cif/profiles.htm

[3] Dr. Fred L. Wehling, Steven L. Spiegel, World Politics in a New Era, (Orlando: Harcourt Brace CollegePubilishers, 2003), pp 334-335

[4] Pan Weijie, ZhangChengbin, "the Refelction of Modernization Theory", the Study of Europe, 1998/06, page 67

[5] Dr. Fred L. Wehling, Steven L. Spiegel, World Politics in a New Era, (Orlando: Harcourt Brace CollegePubilishers, 2003), p341

[6] Ronald Inglehart,Modernization and Postmodernization: Cultural,Economic, and Political Changes in 43 Societies", (Princeton, NewJersey: Princeton University Press, 1997), page 111

[7] http://www.oup.com/hiff/us/gener ... ernationalStudies/? view=usa&ci=97801678905439

     基辛格是一位富于传奇色彩的国际人物。七十年代，他曾在世界政治舞台上叱咤风云，名噪一时。他执掌美国国务院的大权，参与外交大政方针的制定，经常奔走于列国之间，进行穿梭外交，与各国首脑政要揖让周旋，折冲樽俎，时常有出人意料的神来之笔。对于这位犹太人出身的杰出外交家，国际上至今还流传着不少他的逸闻轶事。

       “了却君王天下事”的基辛格，于今也像中国古代那位功成身退的智者范蠡一样，将纵横捭阖的政治智慧转用于商业经营上，为个人积聚起大笔的财富身家；但与此同时，他还在不断地著书立说，一面盱衡天下大势，总结国际关系的理论与经验；一面检点美国外交政策的得失，不断有新的力作出版。《大外交》一书就是其中之一。

        通常的国际关系理论著作大都出于学院派的教授之手，这类著作以思辨的演绎方法来建构繁复的理论，往往给人以晦涩艰深之感。基辛格虽然是哈佛大学的博士出身，却对这种抽象的理论推演不感兴趣。他的这部书既有别于闭处书斋中的教授坐而论道，也不同于一般政治家个人外交经验的总结。

      十九世纪英国的历史学家西利有言：“言政治而不求之于历史，必定游谈无根。”基辛格遵循的正是这一以史为鉴的路径。

       《大外交》一书网罗古今，议论纵横，从十七世纪欧洲的三十年战争，中经本世纪两次世界大战的人类浩劫，越南战争，直至柏林墙倒塌，苏联解体，冷战结束，将几百年间纷纭变幻的国际风云尽收笔底，力图从浩繁的世界历史中引申出自身的外交哲学来。因此，它既是一部自十七世纪以迄于当代的国际关系史，又是一部探讨国际政治的理论著作。基辛格以广博精深的历史知识，练达圆熟的外交经验，解说国际关系领域中的治乱分合，行文之际，时时不忘做外交哲学上的理论提升，让读者在亲瞻那些风云人物言谈风采，辨析不同国家外交风格差异的同时，领略其后蕴含的深邃的外交智慧。

          在基辛格看来，十七世纪法国以强悍首相著称的枢机主教黎塞留，最先打破了中世纪大一统的道德与宗教的束缚，首先开启了“民族国家利益至上”的现代外交。黎塞留虽然是一位虔信天主教教义的主教，但作为首相，却将民族国家的利益置于宗教之上。他处理外交的唯一标准便是看是否对法国有利。在他看来，世俗的世界是一个魔鬼撒旦的世界，因而一般的宗教道德信条在这里并不适用。为了法国的国家利益，他对神圣罗马帝国的斐迪南皇帝“为上帝而战”发动的宗教战争，非但不予支持，反而巧妙地利用对手的宗教热情加以愚弄，以实现法国的利益，甚至最终不惜与之宣战。而后者却依赖神圣的宗教信念来制定国际政策，结果身败名裂而为天下笑。

      贯穿在《大外交》中的一条主线，便是强调以现实的国家利益而非僵化的意识形态来处理外交关系。在现代国际关系中，特别是冷战结束以后，注重力量均衡的现实主义正日益成为主导各个国家外交政策的基础。

       列国纷争，此消彼长，无论是抽象的宗教信条，某些独断的意识形态教条，还是个人的道德原则，都只能遮蔽现实的权力关系，导致霸权坐大的危险，因而并不适用于变动不居的国际关系。

        然而，基辛格并不是鼓吹“国家理性”至上的又一个黎塞留，更非“以三寸舌为王者师”的纵横家。在他的外交观念背后，有一套系统的政治哲学作为支撑。当年作为美国宪法之父的麦迪逊曾经指出，在幅员足够大的共和国中，不同政治派别图谋私利的政治行为，在自动的作用下反而可以形成政治秩序的和谐。将这种不轻信人性与政治制度可臻完美性的麦迪逊式的民主理论，扩大应用到国际政治领域中，正是基辛格的外交现实主义之所从来。

        自这一视角观察国际政治，各个国家在国际舞台上谋取的虽然只是自身的利益，但正是出于这一自利行为所导致的力量均衡，反而形成了国际政治秩序的稳定基础。美国著名政治学家维特曾经指出，在国际政治中，“权力平衡是可能找到的近乎基本的政治法则：从历史上很容易观察到，它是大多数场合追求自我保护的方法。”基辛格本为德国出身的犹太人，童年时代就生活在纳粹暴政的阴影下，亲眼目睹了由于法西斯德国的崛起，给包括犹太人在内的整个人类带来的劫难，因而他对于国际力量的失衡深怀戒惧之心。

        他在这本书中反复强调，正是国际力量的均衡与外交的艺术，塑造了当今世界的格局，其意在于推动美国外交政策由早期的理想主义，转向在现实主义与理想主义之间保持均衡。

        有西方学者曾指出，历史上只有三个国家体系具备了现代外交的特征。它们是现代的或西方的国家体系；古希腊罗马的国家体系，以及战国时代中国的国家体系。中国文明不仅历史悠久，而且包孕了精深丰厚的战略智慧。

         今天，现代科技与经济正日益将整个地球连为一体。随着全球化进程的不断拓展与深化，国际关系对于中国的重要性急剧上升。理解现代国际关系已不再是少数外交家的专门事务，而成为现代国民应当具备的基本知识。

         在这一意义上，读读基辛格的《大外交》，会使我们获益匪浅。