longbrained
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2011
- Messages
- 3,390
- Reaction score
- 0
For a new order in Iran, look to post-revolutionary France
For a new order in Iran, look to post-revolutionary France - The Washington Post
Nobody can predict where the process of negotiation with Iran is headed, but heres what Id like to see: a broad dialogue that brings the rising power of Iran into a new security system in the Middle East in exchange for Irans commitment not to build nuclear weapons.
If youre looking for a lucid explanation of how such a framework could be built, I recommend an unlikely source: It is Henry Kissingers doctoral dissertation, A World Restored, published in 1957. The book analyzed how the statesmen of early 19th-century Europe created a new security architecture that brought post-revolutionary France the destabilizing, upstart power of its day into an accommodation with Britain and the other status quo powers through the 1815 Congress of Vienna.
I heard Kissinger discuss these issues recently when he visited Harvard for a conversation that filled the universitys largest auditorium. A graduate student, Jessica Blankshain, asked the former secretary of state about his thesis, written 55 years ago, and quoted his admonition that a statesmans job is to harmonize the just with the possible. Later, at a dinner given by Harvard President Drew Faust, Kissinger talked about how the 1815 reconstruction of Europe might be a model for drawing Iran into a new and more stable Middle East.
Ill explain more about the European parallel for todays diplomacy, but first a description of the Harvard event: It was a long-overdue reunion between Kissinger and the university where he received his undergraduate and doctoral degrees and then taught as a professor until joining the Nixon administration in 1969 as national security adviser. That was the Vietnam era, and Harvard was a cauldron of passionate protest.
When Kissinger left government in 1977, the Harvard community was still angry and made only a grudging offer to bring him back, which he declined. This opened a breach that was finally healed with the convocation in Sanders Theatre and Fausts celebratory dinner. I was invited because I have been teaching a course this semester at Harvards Kennedy School.
The event was moving because it offered Kissinger, at 88, a platform for reflection about the costs of war and the challenges of diplomacy. If the statesmen of 1914 had known what the world would look like in 1919, would they ever have gone to war? he asked the students. Of course not, but as Kissinger observed a few moments later: In office, you have to act as if youre sure what youre doing. You dont get rewarded for your doubts.
Back to Iran, and the process of reconciling revolutionary nations with status quo powers. What Kissinger explored in his dissertation was the creation of a new concert of Europe in 1815, after the Napoleonic wars, through the diplomacy of Austrias Count Metternich and Britains Lord Castlereagh: They were statesmen of the equilibrium, seeking security in a balance of forces. Their goal was stability, not perfection.
The upheaval of todays Middle East is surely comparable to the disorder in Europe that followed the French Revolution and, under Napoleons banner, spread military turmoil across the continent. The Middle East still hasnt absorbed the Iranian Revolution of 1979, let alone the Arab Spring that is shaking the Sunni world. Its a region begging for a new concert of nations that accommodates conservative monarchies and new republics.
Kissingers description of revolutionary Europe might have been written about the Iran of the ayatollahs: It is the essence of a revolutionary power that it possesses the courage of its convictions, that it is willing, indeed eager, to push its principles to their ultimate conclusion. Such ascendant powers can be checked only by a new system that at once accepts their rise and limits the most harmful effects.
Restoring the old order is impossible, now as it was in 1815. But we can imagine a different order that establishes new lines of legitimacy and collaboration. The diplomacy that enables such transformations is the art of restraining the exercise of power, wrote Kissinger of his protagonists, Metternich and Castlereagh. About modern Iran, Kissinger has observed, the essential requirement is that it behave like a nation rather than a cause, operating in a rules-based system of nations. Once this happens, Iran can be a force for regional stability, not disorder.
The conversation with Iran in Istanbul is a fragile beginning. But we should expand our minds, with Kissinger, to imagine what a serious exercise of diplomacy might achieve.
For a new order in Iran, look to post-revolutionary France - The Washington Post
Nobody can predict where the process of negotiation with Iran is headed, but heres what Id like to see: a broad dialogue that brings the rising power of Iran into a new security system in the Middle East in exchange for Irans commitment not to build nuclear weapons.
If youre looking for a lucid explanation of how such a framework could be built, I recommend an unlikely source: It is Henry Kissingers doctoral dissertation, A World Restored, published in 1957. The book analyzed how the statesmen of early 19th-century Europe created a new security architecture that brought post-revolutionary France the destabilizing, upstart power of its day into an accommodation with Britain and the other status quo powers through the 1815 Congress of Vienna.
I heard Kissinger discuss these issues recently when he visited Harvard for a conversation that filled the universitys largest auditorium. A graduate student, Jessica Blankshain, asked the former secretary of state about his thesis, written 55 years ago, and quoted his admonition that a statesmans job is to harmonize the just with the possible. Later, at a dinner given by Harvard President Drew Faust, Kissinger talked about how the 1815 reconstruction of Europe might be a model for drawing Iran into a new and more stable Middle East.
Ill explain more about the European parallel for todays diplomacy, but first a description of the Harvard event: It was a long-overdue reunion between Kissinger and the university where he received his undergraduate and doctoral degrees and then taught as a professor until joining the Nixon administration in 1969 as national security adviser. That was the Vietnam era, and Harvard was a cauldron of passionate protest.
When Kissinger left government in 1977, the Harvard community was still angry and made only a grudging offer to bring him back, which he declined. This opened a breach that was finally healed with the convocation in Sanders Theatre and Fausts celebratory dinner. I was invited because I have been teaching a course this semester at Harvards Kennedy School.
The event was moving because it offered Kissinger, at 88, a platform for reflection about the costs of war and the challenges of diplomacy. If the statesmen of 1914 had known what the world would look like in 1919, would they ever have gone to war? he asked the students. Of course not, but as Kissinger observed a few moments later: In office, you have to act as if youre sure what youre doing. You dont get rewarded for your doubts.
Back to Iran, and the process of reconciling revolutionary nations with status quo powers. What Kissinger explored in his dissertation was the creation of a new concert of Europe in 1815, after the Napoleonic wars, through the diplomacy of Austrias Count Metternich and Britains Lord Castlereagh: They were statesmen of the equilibrium, seeking security in a balance of forces. Their goal was stability, not perfection.
The upheaval of todays Middle East is surely comparable to the disorder in Europe that followed the French Revolution and, under Napoleons banner, spread military turmoil across the continent. The Middle East still hasnt absorbed the Iranian Revolution of 1979, let alone the Arab Spring that is shaking the Sunni world. Its a region begging for a new concert of nations that accommodates conservative monarchies and new republics.
Kissingers description of revolutionary Europe might have been written about the Iran of the ayatollahs: It is the essence of a revolutionary power that it possesses the courage of its convictions, that it is willing, indeed eager, to push its principles to their ultimate conclusion. Such ascendant powers can be checked only by a new system that at once accepts their rise and limits the most harmful effects.
Restoring the old order is impossible, now as it was in 1815. But we can imagine a different order that establishes new lines of legitimacy and collaboration. The diplomacy that enables such transformations is the art of restraining the exercise of power, wrote Kissinger of his protagonists, Metternich and Castlereagh. About modern Iran, Kissinger has observed, the essential requirement is that it behave like a nation rather than a cause, operating in a rules-based system of nations. Once this happens, Iran can be a force for regional stability, not disorder.
The conversation with Iran in Istanbul is a fragile beginning. But we should expand our minds, with Kissinger, to imagine what a serious exercise of diplomacy might achieve.
