Read "Diplomacy" by Henry Kissinger available from Rakuten Kobo. Sign up today and get $5 off your first purchase. A brilliant, sweeping history of diplomacy . Editorial Reviews. From Publishers Weekly. Kissinger maintains that the United States cannot Diplomacy by [Kissinger, Henry] .. Download Audiobooks. Bu kitap, Henry KISSINGER, DİPLOMACY. Download Kissinger's Diplomacy in which the art of diplomacy and the balance of power have created the world.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Japanese|
|Genre:||Business & Career|
|ePub File Size:||22.54 MB|
|PDF File Size:||8.34 MB|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
A brilliant, sweeping history of diplomacy that includes personal stories from the Diplomacy (eBook, ePUB) - Kissinger, Henry Sofort per Download lieferbar. Henry cheap-diet-pills-online.info - Free ebook download as PDF File .pdf) or read book online for free. Henry A. Kissinger is an American diplomat and historian. He served as national security Nicholas Hormann Narrator (). cover image of Diplomacy.
Not in United States? Choose your country's store to see books available for purchase. A brilliant, sweeping history of diplomacy that includes personal stories from the noted former Secretary of State, including his stunning reopening of relations with China. Brilliant, controversial, and profoundly incisive, Diplomacy stands as the culmination of a lifetime of diplomatic service and scholarship. It is vital reading for anyone concerned with the forces that have shaped our world today and will impact upon it tomorrow. Niall Ferguson.
But at the time that some of these decisions were made, they appeared to just be extensions of the global containment policy that began immediately following WWII. But he does provide some needed context to help explain- especially in the cases of Truman and Eisenhower — the reasoning they used in making their decisions. With Kennedy and Johnson he, appropriately, less forgiving as by then the U. As for his own role in the Nixon Administration, he does not give much of a personal account as he did in his memoirs.
Instead we get a summation of the negotiations. Following Vietnam, Kissinger lapses into a few chapters concerning Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan's relationships with Soviet leadership. As Kissinger tended to do in his White House memoirs, unfortunately he gets bogged down in interminable discussions about the nuclear arms race. While this clearly was a top concern of policymakers on both sides, Kissinger simply goes into too much detail for the average reader.
Discussing strike force capabilities and so forth causes one to struggle at times to get through the narrative. Also of note in this part of the book: How can this be left out?
That, to me, is a prime example of the good that an American president can do on the diplomatic front. To not discuss such a major accomplishment, but yet spare no ink in discussing SALT, leaves me wondering what exactly was Kissinger's purpose in writing this book.
While he is generally spot-on with his analysis, I do question is assertion on page This is a worthwhile read mainly for those interested in global politics, especially European and 20th century. But for a general reader or casual student of history, ultimately this may not be worth the effort. Nov 29, Jakk Makk rated it did not like it. I always wanted to read a book written by a super-villian.
Turns out the guy can't write and no one cared enough to edit this repetitive work of fiction. How can you not notice two paragraphs in a row with the same first words? Only reinforces the notion that these type of people get in power by accident or by virtue of their servitude, as opposed to their aptitude. Then again, who would want Nixon's bourbon breath whispering into your ear?
Basically a history of madness. Sep 21, Zachary rated it really liked it. Very worthwhile read.
Was shocking how little I knew about these topics. Very helpful historical context around raison de'etat, Realpolitik, balance of power, collective security, etc. Was challenging to read the historical conflicts and imagine libertarian foreign policy responses.
I was struck wondering what the response would be to a Romney-esque comment, "Nations are people, too.
And, likewise, the power of the billi Very worthwhile read. And, likewise, the power of the billions of people that give those few the authority. I'm sure there is some simplification of the lesser personalities supporting people like Bismarck and other notable statesmen Was especially nice contrast to "The Prize"'s oil-centric focus on history; the Suez Crisis felt like a different event in each book.
I think I have a much better chance of winning Diplomacy the game next time around: Even if it were true, we should retain the option to use it as a threat. In the ideal American universe, diplomats stayed out of strategy and military personnel completed their task by the time diplomacy started - a view for which America was to pay dearly in the Korean and Vietnam wars.
By contrast, for Churchill, war strategy and foreign policy were closely linked. No history graduate student would have received a passing grade for such an analysis.
Because of their conviction that peace is normal and goodwill natural, American leaders have generally sought to encourage negotiations by removing elements of coercion and by unilateral demonstrations of goodwill. In general, diplomats rarely pay for services already rendered -- especially in wartime. Typically, it is pressure on the battlefield that generates the negotiation.
Relieving the pressure reduces the enemy's incentive to negotiate seriously, and it tempts him to drag out the negotiation in order to determine whether other unilateral gestures may be forthcoming. Any any event, he kept that particular insight a state secret. To Eisenhower, the Suez crisis was not sufficiently threatening to merit the use of force. Dulles was caught between an adamant Eisenhower and an outraged group of European allies. When I told him about 25 percent, he replied calmly: The fact that nuclear weapons were carried on airplanes concentrated on a relatively few bases might make it technically possible to destroy the adversary's strategic forces before they were launched.
According to Wolhlstetter, the nuclear balance was in fact highly unstable. Soviet diplomats almost never discussed conceptual issues. Their tactic was to select a problem of immediate concern to Moscow and to batter away at its resolution with a dogged persistence designed to wear down their interlocutors rather than to persuade them.
The insistence and vehemence with which Soviet negotiators put forward the Politburo consensus reflected the brutal discipline and internal strains of Soviet politics Jun 24, Tucker Jones rated it liked it. Kissinger's Diplomacy is essentially four books. The first is a diplomatic history of Europe from the s until WWI. The third is part memoir, part justification for Kissinger's own political decisions, including a full three chapters devoted to the Vietnam War.
The fourth is the final chapter, an essay making predictions and policy prescriptions for the US circa when the book was writt Kissinger's Diplomacy is essentially four books. The fourth is the final chapter, an essay making predictions and policy prescriptions for the US circa when the book was written. Unlike some of the other reviewers, I found that the first two books to be the most thorough, engaging, and educational.
The main thesis that Kissinger pushes is that the world is best off when statesmen identify their country's national interests and act accordingly, eschewing other norms when necessary essentially, Realism. Kissinger's historical examples generally make good cases for this argument.
Kissinger's examples from US policy during the Cold War generally make bad cases for this argument. Once Kissinger moves to examples that his audience is more aware of, the emptiness of the idea of the "national interest" is laid bare. The phrase becomes almost tautological-- states do best when statesmen do what's best for them.
The question that is glossed over is how to systematically discover what those true national interests are. Kissinger seems to think that some people have a talent for it and some do not. Oh, and what a coincidence, Kissinger's own understanding of the national interest happens to be the objectively correct one.
In book three, when Kissinger is attempting to justify and explain his own decisions, he often describes two extreme schools of thought, and places himself in the middle, having taken the best from each school while rejecting their excesses.
This might be something he learned from working in the American bureaucracy: Book four is interesting today mostly because of its historical value. It should be assigned as a standalone essay in history classes about the s and US foreign policy. Diplomacy deserves credit for being a thorough history book. But its central thesis focusing on the national interest is empty.
Sep 04, Emily rated it did not like it. This is one of the several texts we where required to read, annotate and write down additional notes and analysis for my IB 20th Century Studies class.
And from the perspective of a High School Senior granted one taking all University coursed for the past two years , it could not be more dry. In addition to failing to hold my attention for even a page. Kissinger's ideas are often rather grandiose and lacking enough facts to fully suport them. Overall I believe that while I did learn a lot about This is one of the several texts we where required to read, annotate and write down additional notes and analysis for my IB 20th Century Studies class.
Overall I believe that while I did learn a lot about 20th century diplomacy from an extremely biased point of view, the book could have been about half of the length and Kissinger would have been able to convoy the exact same ideas and repeated himself slightly less frequently. Sep 17, Wissam Raji rated it it was amazing Shelves: It is a must read book about diplomacy and foreign affairs.
In his book, Kissinger gives a historic overview about diplomacy that dates back to the 16th century. He discusses the different schools of foreign affairs supported with historic examples. He then continues to describe the evolution of American foreign affairs with all its strengths and weaknesses.
It is one of the fundamental books in political science and it is very rich in history and diplomacy spiced up with Kissinger exceptional a It is a must read book about diplomacy and foreign affairs. It is one of the fundamental books in political science and it is very rich in history and diplomacy spiced up with Kissinger exceptional analytic critic.
Jun 15, Andrei Love rated it really liked it. A wonderful book. It is a perfect book to understand latest "Causes and effects" in history starting with Napoleon Bonaparte and ending with Boris Yeltsin. I would recommend it to each and every President, External affairs minister etc.
It is a practical guide in geopolitics, diplomacy, manipulation and strategy. Mar 04, Mihai rated it it was amazing. The title of the book promises one thing: Starting from the 15th century and the birth of the national interest as guiding principle of France's foreign policy, and ending with the sudden collapse of the USSR and the subsequent finalisation of the Cold War, the book provides a nuanced, engaging and surprisingly coherent overview of the history and evolution of Diplomacy.
Some of my favourite parts of the book were those before W The title of the book promises one thing: Some of my favourite parts of the book were those before World War 1. The early modern period is presented with a firm grasp of the subject matter. The lucid analysis provided brings nuance and perspective to the period which a merely descriptive text couldn't have. The lead-up to the First World War read almost like a thriller to me, episode after episode of diplomatic faux-pas and misguided policy feeling all the more impactful given the reader's foreknowledge of the carnage they would inevitably end up in.
Once we get to the Cold War period, the book notably changes in tone, as seems natural given that the author becomes an active participant in the events he's describing. I appreciated the personal insights into historical figures and the behind-the-doors activity in the White House, however the book started reading a lot more like an opinion piece and a lot less like a cold analytical presentation once it reached this period.
The extent to which Kissinger talks about certain subjects, such as the justifications behind the Vietnam War or Nixon's merits as a leader, seem to go well beyond what would be strictly necessary to provide an objective overview. However, given his personal involvement and the controversial nature of the topics, any claim to neutrality would be inevitably attacked as at best unconvincing, so while not ideal Kissinger's embrace of his subjective experience is definitely understandable.
Particular credit should go to Kissinger's almost prescient ability to predict future events, within the book with more or less precision predicting the renewed assertiveness of Russia getting even the decade right , the Ukraine crisis, and the Syrian civil war.
More books from this author: Henry Kissinger
Not bad for a book written in Despite some natural limitations given the author's personal involvement in some of the events he's presenting, that intimate knowledge also serves as one of the book's greatest strengths, allowing for a degree of insight and expertise in presenting the history of diplomacy among great powers which few other authors could hope to provide.
Dec 02, Eric Lin rated it it was amazing Shelves: It was a great change of pace to read Kissinger's descriptions of more recent history, since most of the books I read are from the Revolutionary War until the Civil War. Kissinger explains the Vietnam War and Cuban missile crisis in a way that explains the thinking of those in power. More importantly, he explains how each action influenced subsequent actions, and describes the chain of consequences.
I've heard this book described as Henry Kissinger's master's thesis, that he just kept on writing. It certainly seems that way - with some really scholarship-heavy chapters in the beginning of the book about England's traditional role of balance of power on the continent, and more personal memoir-like chapters after he gets to the 60's. There was definitely a page where Kissinger starts name dropping, and once he starts, you realize it's going to be happening for the rest of the book.
Personally, I loved it, since it's rare to have someone who participated in so many of the meetings that occurred behind closed doors willing to share their experiences. What Kissinger teaches us repeatedly is that diplomacy is a brutal game, based on the realities of power discrepancies between the participants. Those who forget this, or who don't understand their position pay for their lack of self-awareness: It seems like had we understood the bargaining position our nuclear monopoly gave us, we could have kept the spread of Soviet influence well before the USSR got into several of the satellite states such as the Czech Republic, or Poland.
The West ultimately ended up adopting a policy of containment, but it sounds like we blew a huge opportunity early on, which could have made things easier for us later on. If the idea of being a fly on the wall in a meeting between diplomats appeals to you, or if you'd like just enough understanding about international diplomacy to be dangerous when reading the news, read this book.
This was the book that opened my intellectual curiosity. Everybody has a book like that, a book that lets you glimpse behind the curtain, or as in Plato's allegory of the cave, makes you leave the cave. I've read this book when I was 16 and hundreds of books later, I cherish the memories of sitting at the platform of our local train station and reading. To some, it might be rather strange that a book about diplomacy does just that, but for me it did.
Henry Kissinger is the still living embodime This was the book that opened my intellectual curiosity. Henry Kissinger is the still living embodiment of realpolitik as it was practiced by Bismarck, Disraeli and Metternich. However, most people fail to realize that Kissinger is not a proponent of amoral international behaviour.
He is a somewhat idealistic Macchiavellian, if there is something like that and the book he's written is the closest to a comprehensive study of international power politics we're ever likely to get. No wonder every president since has seeked his council. If you read this book, you'll never look at war and conflict the same way again. It will come to you as something natural, something to be thought about carefully, something to be avoided to be sure, but not at all costs.
You should have basic to medium knowledge of western history before reading. This is a book that I reread from time to time and it will stay forever on my honor shelf in my library. This was the text for a history class of mine in high school. It was a really good text. I really enjoyed reading a book that wasn't a textbook for a history class.
I felt like the history texts insulted our intelligence while a book like this allowed for more varied and interesting discussion. Reading a text like this allowed more analysis of what happened and why instead of simply memorizing things.
Feb 08, Bob rated it liked it. While I admire Henry Kissinger and his extensive background in world diplomacy, this book requires a lot from the reader. Details, names, dates and always, Henry's thoughts. I hate to start reading a book and then give up, but I almost did on this one.
henry kissinger: 60 Books available | cheap-diet-pills-online.info
I'm pleased that I finally finished it, learned a lot and gained new insight into problems that The U. A good editor could have chopped off about pages without losing the quality. Mar 08, Yvonne rated it really liked it. At first, I thought this book is intended to give people a general overview of modern history. However, it often lacks key information for people that don't have a thorough background in history.
It is nicely written. The best aspect of this book are the annecdotes from his personal experience as a politician. Jun 21, Jack rated it it was amazing Shelves: That was a long book. A fantastic one though. Make sure you have a good solid month to get through this one. Over years old diplomacy in one solid book. Make sure you are very steeped in European history before you tackle this Achilles of history. I cannot begin to state the amount I have learned from this single book.
Diplomacy by Henry Kissinger. In stock online Available in stores. A brilliant, sweeping history of diplomacy that includes personal stories from the noted former Secretary of State, including his stunning reopening of relations with China. The seminal work on foreign policy and the art of diplomacy.
Moving from a sweeping…. On China by Henry Kissinger. With the enduring institutions of Chinese statecraft and its civilization clearly in mind, Henry Kissinger in On China examines key episodes in Chinese foreign policy from its earliest days through the 20th century, with a particular emphasis on the modern era. Hardcover sold out. Ending the Vietnam War: The Definitive Account Many other authors have written about what they thought happened -- or thought should have happened -- in Vietnam, but it was Henry Kissinger who was there at the epicenter, involved in every decision from the long, frustrating negotiations….
See the Collection. World Order by Henry Kissinger. Drawing on his experience as…. Kissinger On Kissinger: Pre-order online Not yet available in stores. In a series of riveting interviews, America's senior statesman discusses the challenges of directing foreign policy during times of great global tension. A World Restored: Kobo ebook.