Death of the “architect of the 20th century” Kissinger: It was he who realized that it was much better not to fight the Russians, but to strangle them silently… in a hug

Moscow. June 30, 2017. Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger at the international forum of scientists and experts “Primakov Readings”. Photo: Stanislav Krasilnikov/TASS

Figures continue to disappear who, no matter how you look at it, shaped the physiognomy of the previous century. A year ago, Queen Elizabeth II of England died at the age of 96; Now, not yet 101 years old, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has gone to another world. Even throughout their lives there is something of the ancient biblical patriarchs who shook the earth in every sense of the word.

I personally saw Kissinger once: in the summer of 2017, he spoke in Moscow at the international Primakov Readings conference. He did not show the liveliness of his body, he read the speech in huge glasses “in the fashion of the seventies”, on paper with letters so large that they shone and, printed on a mirror, were visible to us, the audience, from the other side. But the clarity of thought of the (then) 96-year-old was astonishing:

— The approaches of the United States and Russia to foreign policy and protection of national interests differ significantly: Moscow relies more on the principles of religiosity. [духовных ценностей — Ред.]”Washington has the principles of free trade and an open economy,” I wrote his words that day.

Well, with regard to the second – about the “internal freedom and openness” of the United States – my grandfather, rather, was inspired by the current United States of that country completely different from the time of his youth (when it was discussed the question of “millions of millions of dollars”). “Reparations to African Americans who suffered slavery” are being seriously discussed in California; then it is clear that it is not about “economic liberalism”, but about “taking away the wealth of the bourgeoisie and dividing it in favor of the proletariat.” – in the spirit of the first Bolshevik-Trotskyists).

But “Grandpa Henry” coped well with the first point: understanding Russia. This was, of course, an adversary, but an adversary who was sincerely trying to understand his opponent and take his interests into account. Yes, and he could surpass anyone just because of experience; It’s no joke: the man had tea with Nixon, Mao, Brezhnev and other mastodons of the 20th century.

The happiest and best-fed time of the USSR – the seventies, when instead of the “eternal battle” we began to watch Soviet lyrical comedies on New Year’s Eve on the new TV on the ultra-modern Yugoslavian “wall”. We also owe a lot to him, the “caricatured capitalist Secretary of State” Kissinger.

It was he who realized that it was much better not to fight the Russians (they are invincible in battle), but to quietly strangle them in the arms of unconventional love. Having agreed with Brezhnev (yes, Presidents Nixon and Ford did so formally, but the architect was him, the “genius of shuttle diplomacy” Kissinger), the West and the socialist camp reduced the confrontation; Gas flowed to capitalist Europe through Soviet pipelines, and Brezhnev’s main construction project, BAM, involved hundreds of heavy dump trucks and excavators from the United States, Germany, Japan, and Canada; This is not to mention the thousands of “simple trucks” of Western production.

And what a coincidence: when under Reagan, in the 1980s (Kissinger later retired from government positions), relations between Moscow and Washington deteriorated and the “convergence of the two systems” stopped, somehow the systemic problems in the economy of the USSR, deficits began. to grow – and it ended all you know why.

Finally, today, in 2022, Kissinger, as they said in old novels, “deceived the public” by implying that Ukraine should cede part of its territories to Russia. Not because, of course, he loved Moscow so much, but simply because he realized that in the confrontation with “a seventh of the territory” the West, no longer the leader in economy and population, loses a lot and only receives greater self-destruction. .

According to the laws of the genre, an obituary must end with optimism. But… there’s no reason. There is a less sober head “on the other side,” which means that supporters of “preserving Western hegemony at all costs, even to the point of total war” now have more of a voice.