roundtable | will "kissinger" appear again? historical and contemporary questions between china and the united states
2024-09-14
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
since august 26, the international news center of the paper (www.thepaper.cn) has published a series of reports titled "searching for 'kissinger'". once the reports were released, they attracted attention from all walks of life at home and abroad. at the same time, as we mentioned in the "editor's note" of the series of reports, "whether there will still be a 'kissinger' between china and the united states is a question worth discussing." in the comments from netizens and other online platforms, the biggest question mentioned by readers is whether there will still be a figure like kissinger between china and the united states. some netizens said that searching for "kissinger" is a false proposition.
on august 31, we held an academic salon in suzhou entitled "searching for the next kissinger". we invited many domestic leading scholars on american issues, including those who participated in this series of reports, to continue to discuss the topic of "searching for kissinger". this article selects part of the content of this discussion to focus on responding to the above questions of readers - can today's sino-us relations still provide an era stage for the potential next "kissinger"? can we still use kissinger himself as a "ruler" to find the next "kissinger"? if we hope that the next "kissinger" will appear between china and the united states, what can we do to help it? this open discussion on the above questions is the finale of the "searching for kissinger" series of reports.
on august 31, the "searching for the next 'kissinger'" academic salon was held in suzhou, where a number of domestic authoritative scholars on american issues continued to discuss the topic of "searching for 'kissinger'".
expert profile:
zhu feng:professor, school of international relations, nanjing university
wei zongyou:professor, center for american studies, fudan university
diao daming:professor, school of international relations, renmin university of china
zhang tengjun:associate research fellow, institute of american studies, china institute of international studies
the following is an excerpt from the discussion.
can the current situation create another "kissinger"?
zhu feng:i think it is very difficult for china-u.s. relations to find a new kissinger. the first reason is that the background of the cold war is fundamentally different from the background of geostrategic and geoeconomic competition in china-u.s. relations today. at that time, china and the u.s. had a common opponent and common strategic needs, which enabled the two countries to finally break the ice and come together.
there is another fundamental reason why it is difficult for the "kissinger phenomenon" to appear in sino-us relations, which is kissinger's qualifications, talents and vision. from his two visits to china in 1971 to his death in november 2023, kissinger visited china more than 100 times. he also served as the chairman of the us-china relations committee and had very direct meetings with successive chinese leaders. he played a very important role in further promoting sino-us relations. will there be such a kissinger, or the "kissinger phenomenon", in the future?
there is a third reason. the domestic political environment of sino-us relations has changed fundamentally. the united states is not only the only hegemonic country, but also a highly interest-centric country. china in 1972 was much weaker than it is today, and the difference between it and the united states was greater than it is now, but the united states can transcend the differences between china and the united states based on its own strategic needs.
although the "kissinger phenomenon" is difficult to repeat, the rational, pragmatic, and future-oriented social forces of both countries need to explore and find the second "kissinger". so today when we talk about the second "kissinger", we are not simply looking for who will become the second "kissinger" or whether sino-us relations will replicate a "kissinger". instead, in the context of the long-term strategic competition between china and the united states in the future, we need to continue to explore a positive, pragmatic and strategically forward-looking voice and force, so that sino-us relations can return to rational controllable and mutually beneficial development.
diao daming:are there strong enough common interests between china and the united states to provide a stage for the next "kissinger"? there is no doubt that although many problems have accumulated and increased due to some unilateral and extreme practices of the united states in recent years, this does not mean that the cooperation points are continuously declining. the cooperation points have been affected to a certain extent in some areas, but there are also some areas where long-term cooperation between china and the united states exists. cooperation under these common interests is still an important foundation for stabilizing sino-us relations, and it is also the key driving force for american people of insight to stabilize the relationship between the two countries based on the interests of the american nation and people. therefore, i don’t think there will necessarily be a "kissinger" at the highest strategic level in the future, but in different fields, there should still be people of insight who can do things that are beneficial to sino-us relations and do some correct things from a historical and global perspective, just like kissinger.
wei zongyou:the reason why kissinger was able to serve as a messenger for sino-us relations for a long time was that, from the perspective of the global international strategic situation, under the background of the cold war, when china and the united states had not yet established diplomatic relations, a key figure was needed to communicate well between china and the united states on strategic intentions, find common interests, and avoid misunderstandings and misjudgments.
the external environment of sino-us relations today is very different from that of more than 50 years ago. china is now the world's second largest economy, and its influence in the world is far greater than that in the 1970s. some major global issues may not be well resolved without china. at the same time, sino-us relations have completely exceeded the significance of bilateral relations and have played a pivotal role in the region and even the world. china and the united states have a consensus on this point.
after all, china and the united states are two major countries that have a significant impact on world peace, stability and prosperity. therefore, communication between china and the united states is more important at the moment, and we need an important and influential person who can promptly convey the strategic intentions of the two countries and some of their concerns or doubts about each other. at the same time, as the world's first and second largest economies, china and the united states have important responsibilities for global prosperity and stability. therefore, how china and the united states can strengthen cooperation and move toward each other on global issues also requires better communication and cooperation between the two countries. of course, who can become the next "kissinger" is a topic that needs to be discussed in the future.
zhang tengjun:first, the easing of sino-us relations during the cold war was based on a common interest, mainly strategic security considerations. let's go back to the current situation. do china and the united states still have a strong enough common interest or such a convergent threat perception? the conditions of the times have indeed changed. at present, there is no external largest third factor between china and the united states.
if china and the united states want to have a strong enough common interest or threat perception in the future, i think the first thing to do is to change the concept. this change of concept requires a condition. i personally think that one of the conditions is that the united states has changed. that is to say, after many rounds of games and even competitions between china and the united states, the united states has found that it has no way to contain china's development. it needs to take the initiative to adjust and reflect, and rethink whether the past perception or strategy of china as the "number one enemy" is still feasible. from another perspective, will the united states experience more intense domestic political and other turmoil in the future, so that it has no time to take care of other things and must focus on domestic affairs. i think these two possibilities can be discussed, but judging from the current situation of sino-us relations, it will take quite some time to change and reshape the concept, and it will not happen quickly.
is kissinger’s “ruler” applicable to the next “kissinger”?
zhu feng:we are looking for the second "kissinger", not simply using kissinger as a standard. some of kissinger's experiences are difficult for anyone to "replicate" now. we are now looking for someone who has a constructive and positive view of today's china, who has rational propositions, and who promotes reasonable and scientific propositions based on common humanity and human values.
if we are looking for the next kissinger today, the highest standard is that this person must be a core member of the us government's diplomatic and security department, not only directly in charge of government affairs, but also directly manage sino-us relations and bring about some historic changes in sino-us relations. the lowest standard is that he has government experience, has made great achievements in think tanks and academia, and is also a very important voice in the united states with social and policy influence.
wei zongyou:in addition to his knowledge, kissinger has an important characteristic, which is that he has a very firm belief that major powers should not be cut off from each other forever. even though china and the united states have not yet established diplomatic relations, he believes that it is wrong to isolate a major country with hundreds of millions of people from the world's nations for a long time. he believes that major powers should maintain dialogue, communication, and exchanges, and that wars should not occur between major powers. of course, he mainly emphasizes the balance of power and maintaining peace between the major powers in the world. on the other hand, kissinger also plays with power and sacrifices the sovereignty and interests of small countries for the balance of power between major powers, which is also why he is criticized.
now that china and the united states have established diplomatic relations, and with advanced communication tools, the leaders of the two countries have many opportunities to communicate face to face, leaving very little room for the next "kissinger" to play a role.
if we set a highest standard, including what professor zhu mentioned, it is to become a diplomat, thinker, and strategist. this is a relatively high standard. a strategist is able to observe the general situation and plan for the overall situation, know the current situation of the world pattern and its future evolution, and be able to maneuver in the relations between major powers. thinkers must be as knowledgeable as kissinger, and be able to apply extensive knowledge to the practice of specific international relations. and diplomats must be willing to communicate and promote cooperation in the complex international relations, and turn his ideas or the ideas of the leaders into concrete results, which can ease competition, promote mutual understanding, and cool down the situation.
these three points together may be the highest standard.
the minimum standard is that this person should be a good listener, a communicator, and a good executor, and he should at least be recognized by the political circles of both china and the united states, and ultimately be able to promote cooperation on some specific issues, or resolve differences on specific issues.
zhang tengjun:last year, director wang yi made an evaluation of kissinger, saying that the older generation of chinese and american leaders, including kissinger, opened a new chapter in sino-us relations with extraordinary foresight, political courage and diplomatic wisdom. this very accurately describes the personal characteristics that make kissinger what he is.
to break it down, what is foresight? it means having the strategy and vision of a strategist, always considering issues from a strategic, overall, and long-term perspective, and formulating the country's domestic and foreign policies. political courage means that as a politician, one must have the political courage and courage to be the first in the world. not only must one be good at strategy, but one must also have firm beliefs and the courage to withstand pressure, overcome all difficulties, and resolutely implement. this is very obvious in kissinger. diplomatic wisdom means that in order to reach consensus and agreement at the negotiation table and promote cooperation, superb diplomatic skills are required.
i think these three points are very necessary for the current china-us relations - foresight, political courage and diplomatic wisdom.
the minimum standard for our search for the next "kissinger" today is that this person must have a certain understanding of china, be willing to engage in contact and dialogue with china, and have a recognition that sino-us relations should be based on dialogue and cooperation rather than competition and confrontation, and be able to personally promote sino-us relations back to a healthy and stable development track. the highest standard is what professor zhu just mentioned, that is, you must have power, influence, and be in that circle, otherwise everything is empty talk.
i would like to return to the question of the "ruler" mentioned earlier. what kind of "ruler" should be used to measure kissinger or the "kissinger" that may appear in the future? i personally have an immature view. based on the current reality of sino-us relations, this "ruler" can be - prudent but not reckless, pragmatic but not empty talk, rational but not extreme, and knowing china but not necessarily being pro-china. this is not the highest standard, but if more such people can emerge and exert influence, then the stability of sino-us relations in the future can be expected.
diao daming:now when we discuss the next "kissinger", we are discussing who can play a positive role in the current china-us relations and become a knowledgeable person like kissinger who can be committed to stabilizing china-us relations.
the so-called knowledgeable people probably have two aspects: one is talent. kissinger himself has major plans and considerations in the strategic field, and has strategic thinking in certain areas. today, we are not necessarily looking for the next "kissinger" in such a high-level field. perhaps in a certain field, we can also find a person with important influence and sufficient voice to lead or shape sino-us relations.
on the other hand, in addition to talent, "knowledge" also requires insight. today, we are looking for a "kissinger" again. such a person should have a relatively clear understanding of the development trend of the world today, sino-us relations, and china and the united states. he should be able to clarify what the current sino-us relations need most from a historical perspective and work hard for it. this person needs to know what is right for china and the united states, and be willing to work hard for a long time to achieve the right thing. this may be very critical.
kissinger back then was not found by us. from this perspective, perhaps we should say that we are discovering "kissingers" now, and we also look forward to discovering more "kissingers" in the future.
in addition to looking for "kissinger", what else can we actively shape?
zhu feng:our process of searching for and discovering the next "kissinger" is also one in which we must strive to promote and provide relevant policy options and background that can produce the second "kissinger". this process is very important in sino-us relations. there can only be good interaction between the two sides if both sides interact with each other. therefore, whether the next "kissinger" can emerge in the future depends to a large extent on whether the interaction between china and the united states can develop in a more constructive, positive and pioneering direction.
throughout the 1990s, sino-us relations were also in turmoil, but why did sino-us relations continue to move forward? what did they rely on? they relied on interaction, giving and receiving, and jointly shaping it.
what scholars are most worried about now is not sino-us relations. what i am most worried about is the extreme online speech that is now everywhere. can we handle sino-us relations objectively, soberly and rationally? we must remember chairman mao’s famous saying that "revolution is not a dinner party". we must fight and make peace with the united states. we must resolve this contradiction and create an environment for healthy interaction between china and the united states.
if china-u.s. relations are to truly get out of the "thucydides trap," we need to walk our own path, economic development, social progress, and political reform. none of these links can be left behind. on the one hand, china-u.s. relations are our greatest pressure, but on the other hand, they are the most important driving force that forces china to move forward.
wei zongyou:from the chinese perspective, i think the major principle for the emergence of the next "kissinger" is agree to disagree. the next "kissinger" must first safeguard the interests of the united states. in this regard, we must have confidence. if he criticizes us or has different positions and views from us, we must first recognize that he is communicating and exchanging ideas with us from the perspective of the interests of the united states.
second, while recognizing that we have differences and disagreements, we still need to seek common interests, that is, seek for common ground. china and the united states have differences and contradictions, but as the world's first and second largest economies and two important countries with significant influence, we have many common interests, bilateral common interests, regional common interests, and even global common interests.
third, let's talk. we still have to talk, even though we have these differences and contradictions, but both sides agree to increase mutual understanding and understand each other's concerns through contact, communication and dialogue, so as to cool down bilateral relations and seek common ground while reserving differences.
zhang tengjun:kissinger is an american, so the main work of shaping the future "kissinger" is of course first on the us side. at the same time, we can also take the initiative to do something to create a more favorable environment for the emergence of kissinger-like figures. first, we should rationally look at some of the noise and even noise in the current us public opinion on china. we know that the united states has a lot of so-called "political correctness" on china issues. in order to survive, some scholars often criticize china when they say some rational and constructive words to cater to the consensus of toughness on china. this phenomenon is not normal or healthy, but it is indeed a reality that is difficult to avoid. in this regard, while continuing to clarify false remarks about china and counter malicious hype, we should give more room for error to some rational remarks that may sound harsh but are intended to promote stability and friendship in sino-us relations, so that they can continue to play their due positive role and shape the us's perception of china bit by bit.
second, we should take more measures to promote people-to-people exchanges between china and the united states, encourage and attract more rational people from all walks of life in the united states to visit china, and help them understand a complex, real and diverse china. on the one hand, we should continue to strengthen the dialogue between the two governments, remove the political obstacles to people-to-people exchanges as much as possible, and continue to have unremitting dialogues with the united states on how to further promote people-to-people exchanges. we should continue to urge the united states to immediately cancel negative measures such as travel warnings to china, and promote the resumption of exchange programs such as the china-us fulbright program. of course, there will definitely be substantial difficulties here, but if there is no consensus at the official level, individual actions of civil society will not change the overall situation.
on the other hand, given that the united states currently lacks sufficient willingness to interact with us, we can also try to introduce some measures to open up to the united states at a high level. in recent times, china travel has become a new trend, but there are still relatively few americans. we need to take some substantive measures to attract more americans to china. we need to find ways to encourage more cultural and academic exchanges while maintaining our national security and provide more convenient conditions and measures. i think this is necessary and also sends our goodwill of firm opening up to the united states.
compiled by the paper reporter zhu zhengyong and interns sui ruxin and chen zhenyi
(this article is from the paper. for more original information, please download the "the paper" app)
