Introduction
Henry Kissinger is a name that resonates with many as one of the most influential diplomats in American history. Known for his role as National Security Advisor under President Richard Nixon and Secretary of State under both Nixon and Gerald Ford, Kissinger has long been celebrated for his contributions to foreign policy and international relations. His approach, often described as "realpolitik," emphasized pragmatism over ideology in dealing with global affairs.
However, in "The Trial of Henry Kissinger," author Christopher Hitchens presents a scathing critique of the celebrated statesman, arguing that beneath the veneer of diplomatic success lies a dark legacy of human rights abuses, war crimes, and self-serving political maneuvers. This book challenges the popular narrative surrounding Kissinger, suggesting that his actions warrant prosecution under international law.
The Vietnam War: Prolonging Conflict for Personal Gain
One of the most damning accusations Hitchens levels against Kissinger concerns his role in prolonging the Vietnam War. In 1968, as the United States found itself mired in an increasingly unpopular conflict, President Lyndon B. Johnson initiated peace talks in Paris to negotiate an end to the war. Kissinger, then serving as an expert on Vietnam for the US negotiation team, allegedly engaged in a duplicitous scheme that would have far-reaching consequences.
While ostensibly working for Johnson's Democratic administration, Kissinger was secretly feeding information about the peace talks to Republican presidential candidate Richard Nixon. His motivation, according to Hitchens, was purely self-serving: Kissinger believed he could secure a more prestigious position in a Nixon administration than what was offered by the Democrats.
The impact of this betrayal was profound. Armed with inside information, Nixon was able to persuade South Vietnam to withdraw from the peace talks, assuring them he could negotiate a better deal if elected. This maneuver effectively sabotaged the peace process and contributed to Nixon's narrow victory in the 1968 election. As a reward for his covert assistance, Kissinger was appointed National Security Advisor in the new administration.
The consequences of this political gambit were devastating. Instead of ending in 1968, the Vietnam War dragged on for another seven years, resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands more people. Hitchens argues that Kissinger's personal ambition directly contributed to this prolonged bloodshed, raising serious questions about his moral character and fitness for high office.
Expanding the Conflict: Civilian Casualties and Illegal Operations
As National Security Advisor, Kissinger's influence on US military strategy in Southeast Asia led to further atrocities and violations of international law. Hitchens highlights two particularly egregious operations: Operation Speedy Express and Operation Menu.
Operation Speedy Express, conducted in the Mekong Delta region of South Vietnam, ostensibly aimed to clear the area of enemy combatants. However, the operation's results paint a disturbing picture. With only 748 enemy weapons recovered and an estimated 11,000 Vietnamese killed, it becomes clear that a significant number of those who died were likely civilians. Hitchens suggests this may have been a deliberate strategy to inflate body counts and pacify the region through terror.
Even more controversial was Operation Menu, which involved the secret bombing of Cambodia and Laos. These neutral countries, not officially at war with the United States, were subjected to massive B-52 bombing campaigns. The high-altitude nature of these raids made it impossible to distinguish between military and civilian targets, resulting in indiscriminate destruction. Hitchens reports that an estimated 350,000 civilians in Laos and 600,000 in Cambodia lost their lives due to these bombing campaigns.
These actions, Hitchens argues, constitute clear violations of international law and could be classified as war crimes. The deliberate targeting of civilians and the breach of neutral countries' sovereignty demonstrate a callous disregard for human life and international norms, all in pursuit of questionable military objectives.
Bangladesh: Supporting Genocide for Strategic Gain
Kissinger's involvement in the Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971 represents another dark chapter in his diplomatic career. At the time, Bangladesh (then East Pakistan) was seeking independence from Pakistan. Kissinger, prioritizing Cold War geopolitics over human rights, chose to support Pakistan's military regime in its brutal suppression of the Bangladeshi independence movement.
The rationale behind this decision was purely strategic. Pakistan, under military rule, was a key US ally and served as a crucial communication link with China. Kissinger feared that an independent Bangladesh, led by Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, might adopt a non-aligned stance, potentially weakening the US position in the region.
To maintain Pakistan's control, Kissinger ensured that the United States provided arms and equipment to Pakistani forces. What followed was a campaign of terror and violence that many have described as genocide. In the first three days alone, an estimated 10,000 people were murdered. Some reports suggest that the final death toll may have reached 3 million, with countless instances of rape, mutilation, and the killing of children.
Even after Bangladesh gained independence, Kissinger's interference continued. In 1975, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and 40 members of his family were assassinated in a military coup. Evidence suggests that the CIA, likely with Kissinger's approval, played a significant role in planning and supporting this coup. This intervention effectively undermined the newly established democratic government of Bangladesh, further destabilizing the region.
Hitchens argues that Kissinger's actions in Bangladesh demonstrate a willingness to support and enable mass atrocities in pursuit of perceived strategic advantages. By prioritizing Cold War politics over human rights and democratic principles, Kissinger became complicit in one of the most horrific episodes of post-World War II history.
Chile: Overthrowing Democracy and Supporting Dictatorship
The 1973 coup in Chile that overthrew democratically elected President Salvador Allende stands as one of the most notorious examples of US intervention in Latin America. Hitchens presents compelling evidence that Kissinger was a key architect of this operation, which replaced a leftist government with a brutal military dictatorship.
Kissinger's involvement began even before Allende took office. When Allende, a Marxist, won the Chilean presidential election in 1970, Kissinger immediately began plotting to prevent him from assuming power. The first obstacle was General René Schneider, the commander-in-chief of the Chilean Army, who insisted on respecting the constitutional process and refused to intervene against Allende.
To remove this impediment, Kissinger allegedly authorized the CIA to supply weapons and money to Chilean military officers willing to "kidnap" Schneider. This plan went awry when Schneider was murdered instead of kidnapped. With Schneider out of the way, the path was cleared for a military coup, which was eventually carried out by General Augusto Pinochet in 1973.
The aftermath of the coup was brutal. Thousands of Allende supporters and suspected leftists were rounded up, tortured, and killed. The repression extended beyond Chile's borders through Operation Condor, a coordinated effort by several Latin American dictatorships to hunt down and eliminate political opponents across the continent. Hitchens alleges that the CIA, under Kissinger's guidance, provided crucial intelligence to support these operations.
Throughout Pinochet's reign of terror, Kissinger maintained a close relationship with the dictator, often expressing friendship and support. This backing continued even as evidence of widespread human rights abuses mounted. Hitchens argues that Kissinger's role in the Chilean coup and its aftermath represents a clear case of subverting democracy and enabling crimes against humanity for ideological and geopolitical ends.
East Timor: Greenlighting Invasion and Occupation
One of the most damning episodes in Kissinger's career, according to Hitchens, is his involvement in Indonesia's invasion and occupation of East Timor. On December 6, 1975, Kissinger met with Indonesian President Suharto in Jakarta. The very next day, Indonesian forces invaded East Timor, beginning an occupation that would last for decades and result in the deaths of an estimated 200,000 people – roughly one-third of the territory's population.
Hitchens presents evidence that Kissinger not only knew about the impending invasion but effectively gave Suharto the green light to proceed. Documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act contradict Kissinger's claims of ignorance, showing that he was well aware of Indonesia's plans and worked to ensure that the United States would not criticize the action.
Even more troubling is Kissinger's response to the subsequent reports of atrocities committed by Indonesian forces in East Timor. Despite clear evidence of massacres, forced relocation, and widespread starvation, Kissinger advocated for increased US support for Indonesia. He pushed for greater weapons exports to the country and doubled military aid after the invasion, despite US laws prohibiting the use of American-supplied equipment for offensive operations.
Hitchens argues that Kissinger's actions in relation to East Timor constitute a clear case of complicity in genocide. By providing diplomatic cover, military support, and economic assistance to Indonesia, Kissinger enabled and prolonged a brutal occupation that resulted in immense human suffering.
Profiting from Past Policies
Hitchens' critique of Kissinger extends beyond his time in office, examining how the former diplomat has continued to benefit from his controversial legacy. After leaving government service, Kissinger founded Kissinger Associates, a consulting firm that leverages his extensive network of global contacts to advise clients on international business opportunities.
Hitchens argues that many of Kissinger Associates' deals are directly linked to the questionable political decisions Kissinger made while in office. For example, despite the Chinese government's violent crackdown on pro-democracy protesters in Tiananmen Square in 1989, Kissinger consistently opposed international sanctions against China. Today, facilitating business access to the Chinese market is a major source of income for Kissinger Associates.
An even more troubling example involves Indonesia. Years after supporting Suharto's brutal regime and its actions in East Timor, Kissinger formed a joint venture with the Indonesian government to exploit a massive gold and copper mine in the East Timor archipelago. This venture raises serious ethical questions about profiting from past policies that led to widespread human rights abuses.
Hitchens suggests that these business dealings reveal a pattern of self-interest that has guided Kissinger's actions throughout his career. By cultivating relationships with authoritarian regimes and turning a blind eye to human rights abuses, Kissinger positioned himself to reap financial rewards long after leaving public office.
The Case for Prosecution
Throughout "The Trial of Henry Kissinger," Hitchens builds a compelling case that Kissinger's actions meet the legal threshold for prosecution under international law. He argues that if Kissinger were held to the same standards applied to other alleged war criminals, he would have already faced trial for his role in various atrocities and human rights abuses.
Hitchens points out the double standard at play in international justice. While leaders from smaller or less powerful countries have faced prosecution for similar actions, Kissinger has thus far escaped legal consequences. The author draws parallels to the post-World War II trials of Japanese generals, noting that some were executed for giving commands similar to those Kissinger issued during the Vietnam War.
The charges Hitchens believes could be brought against Kissinger include:
- War crimes related to the bombing campaigns in Cambodia and Laos
- Complicity in genocide in Bangladesh and East Timor
- Involvement in the assassination of foreign leaders and coup plots
- Violations of the US Neutrality Act and other domestic laws
Hitchens acknowledges that prosecuting Kissinger faces significant obstacles, primarily due to the United States' reluctance to subject its officials to international jurisdiction. However, he notes that increasing scrutiny from European courts and the gradual erosion of impunity for former dictators suggest that Kissinger may not be entirely safe from future legal challenges.
Conclusion: A Legacy Reconsidered
"The Trial of Henry Kissinger" presents a powerful indictment of one of America's most celebrated diplomats. Christopher Hitchens challenges readers to look beyond Kissinger's carefully cultivated image as a master statesman and confront the darker aspects of his legacy.
The book raises profound questions about the nature of power, accountability, and the moral compromises often made in the name of national interest. Hitchens argues that Kissinger's actions, far from being mere realpolitik, often served his personal ambitions and ideological biases at the expense of human lives and democratic principles.
While it's unlikely that Kissinger will ever face a literal trial for his alleged crimes, Hitchens' work serves as a metaphorical prosecution in the court of public opinion. By meticulously documenting Kissinger's involvement in various atrocities and questionable decisions, the author invites readers to reassess the true cost of Kissinger's brand of diplomacy.
Ultimately, "The Trial of Henry Kissinger" is a call for greater accountability in international affairs. It challenges us to consider whether diplomatic "success" achieved through the sacrifice of human rights and democratic values is truly worthy of celebration. As the world continues to grapple with issues of global justice and accountability, Hitchens' critique of Kissinger serves as a stark reminder of the importance of holding even the most powerful figures accountable for their actions.
The legacy of Henry Kissinger, as presented in this book, is not one of diplomatic triumph but of moral failure and human tragedy. It stands as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked power and the importance of upholding ethical standards in the conduct of foreign policy. Whether or not Kissinger ever faces legal consequences for his actions, Hitchens argues that history should judge him not by his accolades, but by the true impact of his decisions on the lives of millions around the world.