Opening for, er, business tomorrow — Yahoo! News – You Witness. Yahoo is teaming up with Reuters on a service called You Witness News, in which users can upload photos and video to sharing sites. Reuters will choose some to post with related content on Reuters.com and Yahoo News. Good Morning Silicon Valley isn’t impressed.
Kissinger the courtier
Very nice piece by Joe Hagan in New York Magazine in which he attempts to deconstruct the man I once described (in my Observer column) as “the patron saint of cement mixers”. It opens thus:
The elevator doors open onto Henry Kissinger’s offices to reveal a bulletproof bank teller’s window. The carpets are worn, the walls in need of fresh paint, the wing chairs stained by the hands of a thousand waiting dignitaries. In a corner sits a large planter holding the dried stumps of a long-dead bamboo tree. A Ronald Reagan commemorative album and a picture book of Israel collect dust on a shelf next to a replica of an ancient Greek bust with a missing nose. Across from Kissinger’s door his hundreds of contacts—presidents, prime ministers, diplomats, and corporate titans—are catalogued in eight flywheel Rolodexes on his secretary’s desk.
And then you hear it: The Voice, a low rumble from around the corner, like heavy construction on the street outside. When he finally appears, Kissinger—architect of the Vietnam War’s tortured end, Nixon confidant and enabler, alleged war criminal, and Manhattan bon vivant—is smaller than expected: stooped and portly, dressed in a starched white shirt and pants hoisted by suspenders, peering gravely through his iconic glasses. He’s almost cute.
At 83, Kissinger has had heart surgery twice, wears two hearing aids, and is blind in one eye. His once-black hair has turned snowy white. But his presence is startling nonetheless, his Germanic timber so low and gravelly everyone else sounds weak by comparison. He starts our conversation on this late-October morning by placing a silver tape recorder on the coffee table.
“I want a record,” he says.
Most of Hagan’s interview reminds him of playing chess with a grandmaster — except in this case, Kissinger is a master of obfuscation. There’s a lot of to-ing and fro-ing over a quote in Bob Woodward’s book, State of Denial, which depicts Kissinger as privately advising President George W. Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney on the war in Iraq, calling him a “powerful, largely invisible influence.” Woodward’s portrays Kissinger as a surreptitious Rasputin, cooing in the presidential ear that “victory is the only exit strategy,” urging him to resist all entreaties to change course. Kissinger flatly denies this to Hagan, who then goes on to write:
Bob Woodward is amused when I tell him that Kissinger believes he “happens to be wrong” about his influence over the Bush administration. “
Is Kissinger backtracking on Iraq?” He laughs. No matter. “What I’m reporting is the view of people like Cheney and people in the White House about Kissinger’s influence,” he says, “not Kissinger’s evaluation of his influence.”
Kissinger admitted to Woodward that he has met with Cheney every month and the president every other month since he took office. Whether this constitutes influence depends on your definition of influence: No doubt, Kissinger never minded being seen as influential, but he argues that meeting with the president half a dozen times a year hardly makes him the architect of a policy. Woodward counters that a total of 36 hours over six years adds up to more time with the president than almost any outsider ever.
Kissinger’s advice to Bush and Cheney, says Woodward, was “very soothing. That’s why they talked to him. It’s all part of the refusal to face reality. If you go back to the Nixon tapes, he’s a flatterer.”
Some of Kissinger’s closest friends are skeptical of his influence on the White House for this very same reason: his legendary sycophancy. Kissinger, they say, didn’t tell Bush and Cheney anything they didn’t want to hear.“
It’s good advertising for Kissinger, and it’s good advertising for the president,” says Brent Scowcroft. “They love that—especially Henry Kissinger—if they can go out and say, ‘Henry agrees with us.’ They want his support, they don’t want his views.”
“I think he likes to please people too much,” says Melvin Laird, the secretary of Defense during the Nixon administration. “You’ve got to be a little bit of a son of a bitch sometimes.” (Laird would know: During the Nixon years, he and Kissinger battled so fiercely for influence that Laird had Kissinger’s phone tapped to gain advantage.)
“The tragedy of Henry Kissinger is that he is a very large intellect joined to a very small man,” says Mark Danner, a foreign-policy writer who knows Kissinger. “No one is more brilliant, but in offering advice to policy-makers he invariably lets his obsession with his own access and influence corrupt what should be disinterested advice, tailoring his words to what he thinks the powerful want to hear. As a matter of character, he is more courtier than thinker.”
En passant, Hagan reveals that Dubya
appointed Kissinger chairman of the 9/11 Commission, a position that would have put him at the forefront of the national debate on U.S. intelligence failures and capped a long public career with a crowning achievement.
In the vetting process, however, Kissinger ran into a snag. Five years after he left office, the former secretary of State had founded the consulting firm Kissinger Associates and established himself as a kind of diplomatic fixer who could work the back rooms of Moscow, Beijing, and Riyadh for corporations needing influence. He charges $200,000 (a reported $50,000 just to walk through the door) to consult for companies like Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc., a mining company with assets in Indonesia. As much as Kissinger wanted to be the nation’s healer, he valued his business interests more. When Congress requested that he reveal his consulting firm’s client list, he stepped down from the commission.
Hagan also reminds us of Seymour Hersh’s assessment of Kissinger: “He lies like most people breathe.” And of the fact that he was once a great friend of Conrad Black.
Now let me get this straight. When Putin shuts off our gas, we nuke him — right?
BBC NEWS: Blair unveils new Trident plans.
Of course it’s always possible that Britain needs a nuclear deterrent to protect us against the French.
Misreadings
Funny how one can misread things. When I saw this my first thought was: what the hell is Amnesty doing with offshore accounts?
Who says crime doesn’t pay?
Memo from Don
Two days before he resigned, Donald Rumsfeld wrote a classified Memo to the White House which has now been leaked to the New York Times.
The situation in Iraq has been evolving, and U.S. forces have adjusted, over time, from major combat operations to counterterrorism, to counterinsurgency, to dealing with death squads and sectarian violence. In my view it is time for a major adjustment. Clearly, what U.S. forces are currently doing in Iraq is not working well enough or fast enough. Following is a range of options…
The ‘options’ include:
Initiate a reverse embeds program, like the Korean Katusas, by putting one or more Iraqi soldiers with every U.S. and possibly Coalition squad, to improve our units’ language capabilities and cultural awareness and to give the Iraqis experience and training with professional U.S. troops. Aggressively beef up the Iraqi MOD and MOI, and other Iraqi ministries critical to the success of the ISF — the Iraqi Ministries of Finance, Planning, Health, Criminal Justice, Prisons, etc. — by reaching out to U.S. military retirees and Reserve/National Guard volunteers (i.e., give up on trying to get other USG Departments to do it.) Conduct an accelerated draw-down of U.S. bases. We have already reduced from 110 to 55 bases. Plan to get down to 10 to 15 bases by April 2007, and to 5 bases by July 2007. Initiate an approach where U.S. forces provide security only for those provinces or cities that openly request U.S. help and that actively cooperate, with the stipulation being that unless they cooperate fully, U.S. forces would leave their province. Stop rewarding bad behavior, as was done in Fallujah when they pushed in reconstruction funds, and start rewarding good behavior. Put our reconstruction efforts in those parts of Iraq that are behaving, and invest and create havens of opportunity to reward them for their good behavior. As the old saying goes, “If you want more of something, reward it; if you want less of something, penalize it.” No more reconstruction assistance in areas where there is violence. Position substantial U.S. forces near the Iranian and Syrian borders to reduce infiltration and, importantly, reduce Iranian influence on the Iraqi Government. Withdraw U.S. forces from vulnerable positions — cities, patrolling, etc. — and move U.S. forces to a Quick Reaction Force (QRF) status, operating from within Iraq and Kuwait, to be available when Iraqi security forces need assistance. Begin modest withdrawals of U.S. and Coalition forces (start “taking our hand off the bicycle seat”), so Iraqis know they have to pull up their socks, step up and take responsibility for their country. Provide money to key political and religious leaders (as Saddam Hussein did), to get them to help us get through this difficult period. [JN: Well, well…]
Initiate a massive program for unemployed youth. It would have to be run by U.S. forces, since no other organization could do it. Announce that whatever new approach the U.S. decides on, the U.S. is doing so on a trial basis. This will give us the ability to readjust and move to another course, if necessary, and therefore not “lose.” [In other words, manage public expectations. Who says Rumsfeld never listened to Tony Blair?]
Recast the U.S. military mission and the U.S. goals (how we talk about them) — go minimalist. [see above re expectations]
This is an amazing document, not because of what it says, but because of who authored it. As he once famously said, “stuff happens”, which is actually a way of absolving himself of responsibility.
Carbon footprints
My friend and OneWorld colleague, Peter Armstrong, never does anything by halves. About two years ago he decided that he wanted to reduce his family’s carbon footprint (which was high because he and his partner Anuradha have to do a lot of air-travel). He started with their house in Oxfordshire and installed a heat-pump as well as doing a lot of insulation etc. He also blogged the entire process in a fascinatingly open way. Here is his assessment of where they’ve got to after the first year of the new regime.
October marked the end of the first year with the heat pump and the other energy saving measures we have put in place. The results are very interesting and to some extent surprising. We can look at them in a number of different ways.
Our baseline was 2004 when our heating oil cost £2,431 and our electricity £2,292, giving a total energy cost for the house of £4,732.
Now in 2006 (Oct 2005-Oct 2006) we have only electricity to consider. This breaks down as non-heat pump £1,481 and heat pump £1,663, giving a total energy cost of £3,144.
So we may conclude that we have a crude saving of £1,579 on the year, about half from using less general electricity and half from using the heat pump instead of oil.
Perhaps more interestingly, the cost of oil in 2006 would have been £3,403, which would have made us another £1,000 worse off.
So we could say that the heat pump (cost £13,000) will pay for itself in seven years at 2006 oil prices…
Justice vs. Wisdom
From Eben Moglen’s Blog…
The United States Department of Justice announced today that it would be making a radical purchasing decision: stop dealing with the firm it considers an illegal monopoly. No more Microsoft Word at Main Justice. So they will spend $13 million to acquire Word Perfect licenses from Corel. Did they consider OpenOffice at $0? Why bother—Let’s just cut Social Security benefits instead.
The economics of abundance
This morning’s Observer column…
MIPS is to computer geeks what BHP (brake horse-power) is to Jeremy Clarkson. It is an acronym for ‘Millions of Instructions Per Second’, a measure of the speed of a central processing unit (CPU). Mips measures raw CPU performance, but not overall system performance, which is determined by lots of factors (such as disk speed and data in and out of Ram) so it would be foolish to use it as the only measure of how powerful your computer is. But Mips is an interesting indicator none the less….
Life etc.
It’s Saturday evening. A log fire crackles in the grate. In another room, two of the kids are watching a DVD, both of them curled up on a settee, each wrapped in a rug. In another room, another son noodles on his guitar. The cats are snoozing on the stairs. I’m reading the Saturday papers. And then, without warning, I come on this:
Summer 2006: an injured soldier dictates a note to his wife, knowing he is not going to survive
To my most beautiful *******
I am sorry to say that I must break my promise and not come back to you. Jaz is writing this for me and he will hand it to you in person. We have only been married such a short time compared to most and I know you and the kids will miss me but please remember what I said about death. I will always be there with you, always looking after you and smiling at you always.
Tell the kids to look after you and each other and to be brave and that daddy loves them so very much and a HUGE kiss for them both.
To you my sweet lady I thank you for each moment we had together, the laughter we had and the love we have always shared. Remember me but don’t mourn me, celebrate what we had.
Got to go, I’ll be in the mountains where I belong.
Your man Billy
I’m choked by his quiet, matter-of-fact, dignity; by the gentleness with which he goes “into that good night”; by the way he doesn’t rage against the dying of the light.
These letters are extraordinary documents written by ordinary men faced with the terrible obligations that we — or at least our elected representatives — have placed upon them. And they make me feel ashamed for being, well, safe.