Kissinger, former assistant to U.S. affairs and former secretary of state, passed away peacefully at his home in Connecticut, USA, on November 29, 2023, at the age of 100.
When I saw this news, I immediately remembered a word familiar to Chinese: Wufu Linmen.
This word is familiar to Chinese, but what are the 5 blessings?There may be friends who have not studied deeply, and I want to Xi with my friends today.
The first blessing in the Five Blessings Door refers to wealth. To put it simply, to be rich means to be rich, and expensive means to have status, which usually means to be an official. To be rich is to be rich and to be an official, which is really good. In many people's minds, this is almost all there is to life. Even, if one of the two can be accounted for, there is a feeling of "what more can a husband ask for". But I want to remind my friends that such two big things only account for one of them in Wufulinmen, and in the way of the current ** students, they account for only 20%.
The second blessing of the Five Blessings refers to Kangning, that is, health and tranquility. Generally speaking, being healthy is basically peaceful, and being at peace is often healthy, so it can actually be understood in a narrow sense as health. Of course, this is a simplistic understanding of mine. Needless to say, how important health is, but it only accounts for one of the five blessings in China's concept, accounting for only 20%.
The third blessing of the five blessings refers to virtue, that is, a person has a good character. What I would like to share with my friends in this regard is that when we modern people understand the matter of good morality, we usually say that because we have a good character, we can bring more or less benefits to people. For example, when doing business, harmony is precious, and if you have good morality, it is easy to make peace, and you can make money with harmony. When dealing with interpersonal relationships, having good character can get a good connection. There are also many people who say that having good moral character can achieve inner peace, so that they can get less sick and thus get healthy, because emotional diseases account for a very high proportion of modern people.
But, no matter how you interpret it, we will find a mystery. In the eyes of modern people, good character is a means, and everyone thinks of relying on this means to achieve other goals, such as making money, such as being an official, such as health. In short, it is a means, a process, not an end, not a result.
However, in the traditional concept of the Chinese, one of the five blessings is good virtue, that is to say, good virtue is the goal, the result, the goal, just like wealth, just like Corning.
This is something to ponder for modern people, because it means that good character, even if it does not bring anything to people, should be pursued. It can be seen from this that the matter of virtue is very important in the concept of the ancient Chinese, and its proportion is the same as that of wealth and wealth, Kangning, reaching 20%.
The fourth blessing of the Five Blessings is longevity. This is naturally well understood. When we often describe longevity, it is Xi to say that longevity is 100 years old, that is, living to 100 years old is considered longevity. And Kissinger lived exactly 100 years old, and no more, no less, exactly 100 years old. And that's a coincidence.
The fifth blessing of the Five Blessings is a good death. The original meaning of good death refers to a normal death, implying that you cannot die because of some kind of disaster or some kind of punishment, that is, when you are old, slowly, life will end, and it will end peacefully.
Sometimes I think that under modern medical conditions, a person is full of tubes, and before he dies, he endures all kinds of pain caused by modern **, and finally dies, is this a good death?Or doesn't it count?According to the concept of the ancients, it seems to count, because after all, this is not a criminal law or a scourge. But in my heart, I always felt that this kind of death was not perfect. Of course, there is a lot of controversy in society about this matter, and we will not discuss it today.
However, Kissinger, who died at his home in Connecticut on November 29 and visited China in July at the age of 100, naturally did not endure the pain I just mentioned, and I think it should be regarded as a genuine good death.
When I associate Kissinger's death with the Five Blessings, do I want to say that I think he is the Five Blessings?Not really. Because about the first three --- of the Five Blessings, wealth, Kangning, and virtue, has he achieved it?I don't judge favorably. Because he is an American, it may not be fair for me to judge him from the perspective of a Chinese;If you judge by the standards of the Americans, it seems to be suspected of treason. So I'm not judged.
But the fourth blessing of longevity and the fifth blessing of good death, Kissinger must have gotten it, and this has nothing to do with the position, because the standard is very objective.
Therefore, on November 29, 2023, Kissinger received at least two of the five blessings advocated by the Chinese and the ancients, accounting for 40% of all the life pursuits in the traditional concept of Chinese, which is certain.
From this point of view, Kissinger's death was also a successful death. Because people always have to die, there is no need to be too sorry for death. However, if the way of dying meets some kind of positive standard, people can naturally get a lot of comfort.
Kissinger's way of saying goodbye to the world, which seems to me to be very successful, is comforting to me, a Chinese.
There is no doubt that when I say this, I am full of positive thoughts about Kissinger, specifically mainly respect.
Why do I respect him?I think my friends can probably guess it. However, since he passed away, it is still necessary for us to repeat some things that everyone knows again, as a farewell.
The first thing Kissinger did to earn my respect, and undoubtedly his most widely circulated and the most brilliant event of his life, was his secret visit to China in 1971. Please note: Secret access.
This was announced by the White House press secretary at a regular meeting before he left the United States on July 1, 1971, to begin his so-called "Operation Polo":
Nixon** was about to send Dr. Kissinger to South Vietnam from July 2 to 5 on an investigative mission, and then to Paris to meet David. Bruce Consultation. On Kissinger's journey to Paris, he will hold talks with Thailand, India, and Pakistan**. ”
To put it simply, he was mainly going to Vietnam, and then he was going to Paris to talk to someone, but on the way to Paris, he had to go to Thailand, India and Pakistan. In short, the most important thing on his trip was to Vietnam, followed by Paris, and then to Thailand, India and Pakistan.
But then the people on earth understood that in fact, the core of his trip was to go to China, and the rest was to cover up.
Kissinger left the United States on July 1 for three days in Vietnam, and then spent a day in Bangkok, Thailand. He then spent two days in New Delhi, India, before arriving in Islamabad, Pakistan, on July 8.
Since he spent two days in India on that trip, India and Pakistan are on opposite sides, and in order to take care of India's feelings, the United States openly announced that it would only stay in Pakistan for two days, so as not to make India feel that the United States and Pakistan have better relations.
He arrived in Islamabad, Pakistan on July 8, and attended a dinner held for him by Pakistani ** in the evening---. And at that time Pakistan ** Yahya. Khan announced that because the weather in Islamabad, Pakistan was too bad, which affected Kissinger's health, he specially invited Kissinger to his ** villa in Natia Gali to recuperate. Moreover, because Kissinger is not in good health, he asked reporters not to go, so that no one knows where he is.
Pakistan ** This was announced on the evening of the 8th, just that night, that is, in the early morning of the 9th, at 4:30, he flew directly to Beijing by Pakistani Civil Aviation 707 plane, and arrived at Beijing Nanyuan Airport at 12:15 noon on the 9th.
Then there is the meeting with the Chinese leaders, especially with ***, the meeting lasted more than 17 hours, and I also visited the Forbidden City in the middle, and naturally we had to discuss things like announcements.
As we all know, because of his secret visit to China, there was a visit to China on February 21, 1972. On February 28, China and the United States issued a joint communiqué in Shanghai, announcing the normalization of relations between the two countries.
In ChineseXi usual expression, Kissinger's secret visit to China opened the door to the normalization of Sino-US relations. For China at that time, easing relations with the United States greatly improved our international environment. If we go further, the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States in 1979, eight years later, created a good external environment for China's reform and opening up, and China's reform and opening up has allowed the Chinese to have their current brilliant achievements.
According to the principles of Marxist philosophy, there was inevitability in this, which was mainly determined by the general environment of the US-Soviet struggle for hegemony at that time and China's national strength and international status, and it was certainly not the credit of Kissinger alone. However, inevitability must be manifested by chance. Kissinger is honored to be a contingent figure in the expression of this inevitability. We should not attribute too much credit to one person for the course of history, but someone always has to do things, so we cannot deny the role of certain accidental figures in the course of history.
In particular, Kissinger's visit to China was "secret" because there was also a huge controversy in the United States, so Nixon could only arbitrarily select his henchman --- Kissinger to quietly operate this matter.
We can further reason, then, that Kissinger was in favor of and pushed Nixon to make such a decision. In fact, there is a belief that Kissinger, as an assistant to affairs, has an unprecedented role in winning trust and influencing decision-making. No one in front can match him, and no one in the back can match him.
Because, strictly speaking, the assistant for affairs is not a formal official position, and his appointment does not need to go through the U.S. Senate, and whoever he wants to appoint is whomever he wants. The official person in charge of foreign affairs in the United States is the secretary of state. However, at that time, Nixon of the United States set aside the secretary of state and directly sent Kissinger to handle such top-secret matters.
In fact, two years before this incident, in 1969, there was another interaction between China and the United States, which also had a lot to do with Kissinger. Since China did not have diplomatic relations with the United States at that time and did not have any direct contact, I can only call this interaction "estrangement".
On March 2, 1969, China launched a self-defense counterattack on Zhenbao Island against the Soviet Union, and Sino-Soviet relations deteriorated.
In August 1969, the Soviet Union planned a surgical nuclear strike against China. In the middle of the night of 28 August, Soviet Ambassador to the United States Dobrynin received an order from Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev to secretly consult the opinions of the American authorities, preferably in individual interviews with Nixon or Kissinger. The aim is to win the support of the United States, specifically to hope that the United States will be neutral in this matter.
Kissinger, as Nixon's confidant, advocated opposition to the Soviet Union on this matter, and Nixon eventually confirmed such a position at a senior cabinet meeting.
At that time, they were faced with an operational difficulty: First, there was no diplomatic channel between China and the United States, and it was inconvenient to convey to China this plan of the Soviet Union and the position of the United States. Second, even if the information is delivered through an intermediary, China is likely to be suspicious of the news because of the lack of trust between China and the United States.
Under these circumstances, on 28 August, the Washington Star, a small newspaper in the United States, published a news that shook the world, entitled "The Soviet Union Wants to Carry Out a Surgical Nuclear Strike on China." Almost at the same time, Kissinger officially stated the American position to the Soviet ambassador to the United States, Dobrynin. It was claimed that once the war broke out, the United States would consider it the beginning of World War 3 and that the United States would do the same against the Soviet Union.
When China got the news, it quickly made strategic arrangements, and the great man put forward the principle of "digging deep holes, accumulating grain, and not seeking hegemony," a large number of factories moved into the isolated mountainous areas, and the construction of underground fortifications and air-raid shelters began throughout the country, and the army entered a state of readiness for war. China's response and the U.S. containment of the Soviet Union ultimately allowed China and the Soviet Union to avoid a military conflict that could have dire consequences.
In retrospect, that was a big deal. And in that incident, the United States and Kissinger, the then assistant for U.S. affairs, played a very important role and made a choice that was beneficial to China and world peace.
These two major events in the late '60s and early '70s of the last century were the first reason why Kissinger won my respect.
The second reason why Kissinger won my respect is that he wrote a book called "On China", which is very famous, and many friends know it, and I have mentioned it many times in past programs, and my meditation has the 77th book of my book club dedicated to this book.
In this book, he first introduced Chinese culture, and between the lines was full of affirmation.
For example, he believes that Chinese culture seems to have no beginning, and he deliberately makes a comparison between Chinese culture and Western culture, saying that when studying Western culture, it is always Xi to say when to start. For example, if Confucius's thought is the starting point of Chinese culture, but I feel that something is wrong, because Confucius's view is self-denial and repentance, and Fu is the restoration of the repetition, that is, to restore the requirements and order of the ancients, then it means that Confucius is not the starting point at all, because he said that he wants to go back to the past sometime. This is the same meaning as what the Chinese themselves say has a long history.
In his book "On China", Kissinger also emphasized that modern Chinese are still writing the writing system created by the Shang Dynasty more than 3,000 years ago. He also said that in "Romance of the Three Kingdoms", the law that the division must be combined for a long time, and the law that must be divided for a long time, in short, although there were times in history when China's *** collapsed, it was quickly rebuilt, and, and then it was unified again. Therefore, China cannot be broken up and defeated.
The second point of the book is that China has no ambitions for foreign expansion. He specifically mentioned that Zheng He's voyage to the West was earlier than the Age of Discovery in Europe, but wherever Zheng He went, he only announced the favor of **, but did not have the ambition to abuse others. He also specifically mentioned that the ancient sages of China believed that the world can never be conquered, so the Chinese never want to conquer others, and the Chinese only want to conform to the trend of the world. This is simply a slap in the face to the "China threat theory" of the United States today.
The third important point of "On China" is that the final outcome of the Chinese nation is integration. He listed several times when the Central Plains region was invaded by foreigners, and the foreign invasion was successful, but what happened if the foreigners succeeded?In the end, it was assimilated by the Central Plains civilization, and of course, the Central Plains civilization also absorbed the advantages of foreign civilizations, making Chinese culture more excellent.
The fourth point of view of "On China" is that China is very advocacious of strategic thinking and attaches great importance to the thing of "potential", which is what we often say when we play chess, "it is better to lose a son than to lose a momentum." He believes that China is characterized by Go, slowly implementing strategic detours and encirclement. He also said that Western thinking is like playing chess, focusing on eating specific pieces one by one. Translated into popular expressions, it can be said that Chinese like to go around in circles with their opponents, go around and around, and finally make you obedient, without focusing on eating a few seeds.
The fifth viewpoint of "On China" is to fully affirm New China and the Communist Party of China that led New China.
The sixth point of "On China" is that it puts forward its vision of Sino-US relations, and there is one word that can express its meaning in particular, it looks forward to the establishment of a "Pacific Community". How similar is this to our people's suggestion that "the Pacific Ocean is big enough to accommodate China and the United States"?Of course, our latest statement now is that "the earth is big enough". In short, Kissinger's viewpoint, in the final analysis, is that Sino-US relations should be relaxed and cooperative.
These are the points that impressed me the most when I read the book "On China".
In terms of his conclusions, his conclusions are consistent with the expectations of the Chinese, because we look forward to Sino-US cooperation and peace.
Logically speaking, he fully affirmed Chinese culture.
So, I respect Kissinger.
Of course, in the case of this book, I don't just respect him because of the content in the book.
His views on the understanding of Chinese culture and the expectations of Sino-US relations are not new to Chinese, and we Chinese originally think so. However, it may be a little difficult to get this idea out to the whole world, because after all, the Americans control the world. We can imagine that if a Chinese wrote a book on this view, its dissemination power in the world might be limited. However, with the same point of view, a former *** affairs assistant in the United States writes a book, and more people read it. So Kissinger's book is to promote China, Chinese culture, Chinese ideas, and Chinese stories--- although his foothold is the United States.
Therefore, I list Kissinger's book "On China" as the second reason why I respect him.
The third reason why I have more respect for Kissinger is that after he turned 90 years old, against the backdrop of the declining Sino-US relations, he still spared no effort to call for cooperation and peace between China and the United States. As he made in his book "On China", the Pacific Ocean is big enough that China and the United States should establish a "Pacific Community".
His views have also been criticized by many Americans, because too many people in the United States today do not agree with his views. We can also say a little narrowly that he also paid some price for his view, and that price is the scolding of many Americans.
In fact, he has not fared very well in the United States and in American politics in recent years. Biden is the only person in American history who has not invited Kissinger to the White House for talks after he did not hold a position. In the words of the Chinese people, the United States ** Biden does not treat him well. Even Trump invited Kissinger to the White House for talks, but Biden did not. There is no other reason than Kissinger's advocacy that the United States and China should cooperate and peace, not contain and confront China.
Thinking of this, how can I, as a Chinese, not respect him?
However, my feelings for the past two days are mixed.
Because after Kissinger's death, many people in China have written a lot of articles, and on the whole there are many positive ones, but there are also different voices.
And I would say that it doesn't seem to make sense to say that these statements make no sense at all. For example, from 1969 to 1977, Kissinger served as assistant for U.S. affairs and then secretary of state, that is, in charge of U.S. diplomacy, and during that time, the Vietnam War was in full swing. On the battlefield in Vietnam, the Americans dropped millions of tons of bombs, killing many people. The bombardment of Cambodia and Laos was particularly intense. In addition, we cannot say that other major events that happened in the world during that period had nothing to do with him. For example, the United States supported Indonesia's invasion of East Timor. The United States supported the coup d'état of Pinochet in Chile against Allende**. The United States also supported the Argentine military's efforts against leftists.
From the point of view of the debate, I can also make some counter-arguments.
For example, for the Vietnam War, Kissinger participated in the decision-making of the bombing of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia on the one hand. On the other hand, when he was presiding over U.S. diplomacy, he completed negotiations to end the Vietnam War in 1973. This year, he also won the Nobel Peace Prize together with Le Duc Tho, head of the Organization Department of the Communist Party of Vietnam.
But I don't want to make too many excuses for Kissinger today. Because on the whole, when Kissinger was the assistant for U.S. affairs and the U.S. secretary of state, he must have had a connection with what the United States did all over the world during that time. And many of these things, the Chinese do not approve.
I've been wondering for the past two days whether I should still have respect for such a somewhat contradictory person
After thinking about it, I thought I should anyway. My reasons are as follows:
First, from the perspective of the Chinese, Kissinger has made tremendous contributions to promoting the normalization of Sino-US relations, understanding and disseminating Chinese civilization, and planning for future Sino-US relations. Maybe it's because I'm so unheard of, and I haven't even been able to find an American who has contributed more than him, or even an earthling. Marxist dialectics tells us that we must distinguish between the primary and the secondary in everything. From the perspective of the Chinese, his positive contribution is primary, and other aspects are secondary.
This view of people and things also applies to the way we look at anyone and everything around us. For example, someone around you has helped you a lot, but he may have done something you don't approve of outside--- which is almost certain, because no one in this world does everything that you approve of. So, is it because he has done something that you don't approve of, that you have negative emotions and attitudes towards someone who has been of great help to you?The answer is self-evident.
Second, if we look at any American, or even any earthling, through our eyes, we will find that no one can live 100% of China's hopes and standards. No matter how good he is to China and how much he has contributed to it, he must have done things that the Chinese do not approve of. If a person does something that the Chinese do not approve of, and we abandon this person, then we will not have a friend in the world. And not having a friend is a terrible thing. A great man once said that the so-called politics means that there are as many people who support us as there are as many people as possible and as few people who oppose us. If we don't treat others as friends, how can we expect others to support us?
Third, some people say that everything Kissinger does is for the sake of safeguarding the interests of the United States, not for the good of China. I raise my hands in favor of this, and if I could raise my feet, I would like to raise my feet in favor of them. But there is a question: What foreigner in the world can serve the Chinese people wholeheartedly?If a foreigner is serving the Chinese wholeheartedly, then in my heart he will become a traitor to their nation and country, and I will look down on such a person. I would like to return to the logic I just said, if a person's starting point is not for the good of China, but for the good of his country and nation, we will not accept this person, then we will become without a friend in the world. As I said earlier, not having a friend is a very scary thing. My expectation for the world is that everyone is for the good of his country, but what he does is objectively beneficial to China, and that is enough. I don't expect any foreigner to serve China wholeheartedly. Those who serve the Chinese wholeheartedly can only be Chinese, and cannot be foreigners.
So, I still maintain my respect for Kissinger.
Friends may have sensed that in the articles about Kissinger on the Internet in the last few days, my perspective may be a little different. I am not simply glorifying Kissinger's exploits, or simply criticizing him, or even swearing. I'm talking about how to look at Kissinger as a person.
This is because, although Kissinger has passed away, the question of how to view Kissinger is still a huge practical problem facing us. In the current Sino-US game, there are many Americans, as well as earthlings, who are also doing something conducive to the easing of Sino-US relations, but they must stand on the position of the Americans, or stand on the position of their own business. At the same time, they may support China on one issue, and they may do things on another issue that displease China. Should we unite such people?Or do you dislike such people?
If you dislike such a person and write an article and publish it, you can actually show that you are very patriotic, and you can also show that your thoughts are very pure. However, if we are disgusted with those who cannot pass the examination of China's position 100 percent, and push such people thousands of miles away, how can we follow the teachings of the great men to get as many people who support us as possible and those who oppose us as few as possible?
If we can't get as many people who support us and as few people who oppose us, how can we win the broadest support in the world?
Thinking of this, I decided to put this point of view in this episode about Kissinger.
However, it is a bit of a pity that this article was posted a little late.
Kissinger passed away on November 29 local time, and I learned the news on November 30, Beijing time, when I had already prepared the draft for the episode I did on December 1. If he has already thought about it and doesn't write it down while the iron is hot, he may disappear in a few days, and it will be difficult to find it again. That's why I wrote about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in my December 1 episode. The next few days were a bit busy, and I didn't bother to write about it, but now I finally have some time to write it down, although the discussion about Kissinger on the Internet has cooled down.
But I always feel that respect is in no particular order, and it doesn't matter if you are late or not.
More importantly, our attitude toward Kissinger also means our attitude toward some Americans at present, and this attitude determines whether we can get as many people who support us as many people as we support and few people who oppose us as few people as possible in the game between China and the United States in the world.