Unpacking Kissinger's Legacy in Indochina

Image Credits: https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-henry-kissinger-56th-united-states-secretary-of-state-previous-appointments-81108744.html 

 

Summary: Henry Kissinger, the late American diplomat, played a pivotal role in shaping U.S. foreign policy during the Cold War, particularly in Vietnam and Cambodia. Known for his realpolitik approach, he prioritized national interests and geopolitical stability, often at the expense of ethical considerations. While his negotiation skills earned him the Nobel Peace Prize for helping end the Vietnam War, his controversial actions, such as the bombing of Cambodia and prolonging the war, led to significant human costs, as well as contributing to the rise of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. Despite his diplomatic achievements with China and the Soviet Union, Kissinger’s legacy is marred by debates over the moral implications of his decisions. Critics argue that his realpolitik often disregarded human rights, raising questions about the ethical responsibilities of global powers in foreign diplomacy. Ultimately, Kissinger’s career highlights the complex interplay between strategic goals and ethical dilemmas in international relations.

 

The late American diplomat Henry Kissinger was born in 1923 in Fürth, Germany. Fleeing Nazi persecution, the Kissinger family moved to New York as refugees in 1938. This early exposure to the atrocities of the Nazi regime arguably shaped his understanding of the world: that “[he] started thinking about this very early on in [his] life, how to stop such catastrophes from happening again” (Beddoes & Carr, 2023). 

 

Kissinger’s Political Ideas

​

In a podcast interview with the Economist, Kissinger explained that for his doctoral thesis at Harvard, he had studied how diplomacy sustained stability in Europe for nearly a hundred years after Napoleon’s defeat. Unsurprisingly,  Kissinger has largely adopted a realist understanding of international relations, which prioritises national self-interest in the conduct of foreign policy. However, Stanley Hoffmann – a one-time Harvard peer of Kissinger – pointed out that Kissinger’s scholarly work during his time at Harvard revealed four crucial perspectives that later illuminated his approach to policy-making: the importance of historical context in understanding both allies and adversaries; the necessity of grappling with uncertain outcomes and the uneven rewards they might bring; the recognition that decisions in foreign policy often involve choosing the lesser of two evils; and a caution against adopting a form of realism devoid of moral considerations (Ferguson, 2015). 

​

Understanding his political ideas is thus crucial to understanding and unpacking his policy decisions in the Indochinese theatre of the Cold War — that effective diplomacy was crucial in avoiding the type of horrific global conflict that had driven his family from Germany. 

 

Vietnam: Controversies and Reflection?

​

Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for negotiating an end to the Vietnam War in 1973, Kissinger was undeniably a good negotiator, and he had his merits as a realpolitik-style diplomat. Leading both public and private negotiations alongside President Nixon, he had to first overcome unabating military efforts by the North Vietnamese to vanquish South Vietnam and persuade the South that genuine negotiations were in its interest. For any agreement short of the military victory fervently pursued by South Vietnam, Kissinger had to persuade the mostly reluctant South Vietnamese President Nguyen Van Thieu to accept it. 

​

On top of his diplomatic duties, he also sought to respond to increasingly insistent pressure from Congress and domestic anti-war protesters to withdraw entirely from Indochina, which later became a main source of criticism for his work in Vietnam (Sebenius, 2016). He successfully leveraged the US’s defrosting of diplomatic relations with Beijing, and Washington’s pursuit of détente with Moscow to seek both Chinese and Soviet assistance in obtaining North Vietnam’s agreement to hold peace talks. Critically, he was also instrumental in persuading South Vietnam’s President Thieu to agree to the terms of the Paris Peace Accords, which he was initially greatly reluctant to sign. This illustrates Kissinger’s effectiveness as a diplomat, at defending and promoting US interests abroad. 

 

However, these merits have to be taken in light of his controversial approval of Operation Menu — the covert bombing of eastern Cambodia — conducted in tandem with opening peace negotiations with the North Vietnamese in Paris, although Kissinger maintained that these bombings were conducted in largely unpopulated rural areas, and the US painted the campaign as a bombing of North Vietnamese forces on Cambodian soil.

​

Additionally, Kissinger’s choice to accept the Nobel Prize reflected the general celebratory mood in the White House, where President Nixon said the award gave “deserved recognition to the art of negotiation itself in the process of ending a war and laying the groundwork for peace” (Rothman, 2015). However, his Vietnamese counterpart, Le Duc Tho, rejected the Nobel on the grounds that lasting peace had yet to be achieved in Vietnam. This symbolised their divergent views on peace: Kissinger's acceptance reflected his belief at the time, that the accords represented a genuine step towards peace and stability in Vietnam. Conversely, Le Duc Tho’s refusal might have reflected his conviction that true peace was still absent, which shows how both sides differed in their views of the agreement's success and fairness. 

 

This therefore prompts a wider discussion on the legitimacy of the peace accords — most pertinently, regarding its significance on Vietnam and the wider Indochinese region. The complex legacy of these negotiations, with vastly different perspectives on their outcomes, reflect broader controversies in the discourse surrounding Kissinger’s strategies, and the moral dimensions/considerations of US foreign policy. 

 

Another critical point to consider when reflecting upon Vietnam was the human cost of the US’s prolongation of the war. There are serious ethical concerns called to mind when examining Kissinger’s legacy and US interests in Vietnam during the war, as well as the aforementioned broader implications of accepting the Nobel. In Fatal Politics, Ken Hughes asserts that Nixon had stretched out the withdrawal of American troops to avoid destabilising the Saigon government prior to election day in 1972, which would have illustrated the failures of his “Vietnamisation” policy. Historical evidence shows that the US could have ended the war earlier when the French surrendered — ultimately, staying in Vietnam did not have a major, positive impact on US influence abroad due to their eventual surrender at the end of the war. 

 

The prolonging of the war is even less justifiable when one considers the horrifically high death toll of 2.45 million soldiers and civilians across Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, and the US (Rummel, 1997). (For this article, the author has taken Rummel’s mid-tier estimates, but at present the figures of the death toll and casualty count in Vietnam remain much disputed.) This has to be taken into account alongside the wartime atrocities that soldiers committed against civilians on both sides. Most notably, the My Lai and Hue massacres (Dror, 2018) and the use of chemical weapons such as Agent Orange against innocent civilians continue to shock and appall the world, with the use of chemical weapons during the war still having long-term ramifications on the health of civilians in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. The last utilisation of Agent Orange in Vietnam was over five decades ago, yet more than 4 million people, particularly local people and veterans, have suffered and died from various types of cancers and congenital disabilities (Truong and Dinh, 2021). This has profound, tangible ramifications on the lives of those living in affected areas, where birth deformities are still observed at rates higher than normal, causing financial and caregiving burdens in affected families.

 

When weighed against the arguably minimal, possibly negative impacts that the 2nd Vietnam War had on improving the US’s clout on the international stage, one might ponder the question: was the US’s decision to enter the war to establish a bulwark against communism in Indochina justified, given the human cost?

 

Cambodia: Domino Theory and its Bloody Consequences

​

Cambodia, like Vietnam, suffered brutal human costs through the war despite being a bystander state, as a result of Kissinger’s foreign policy in the Indochinese theatre of the Cold War. Operation Menu, Kissinger’s brainchild, was intended as a disruption of North Vietnamese operations along the Ho Chi Minh Trail which cut across east Cambodia with Sihanouk’s consent, allowing North Vietnamese troops to resupply on Cambodian soil in supposedly unpopulated areas. The defence of Saigon through Operation Menu was part of the “Domino Theory”, as Kissinger felt it imperative that the US-friendly Saigon government be kept in power to stand as a bulwark against communist influence in the region. To this day, there remain ongoing efforts in Vietnam to clear unidentified ammunition in these areas, where unsuspecting civilians are still killed (Ear, 2023). The American doctrine of “Peace with Honour” in Vietnam thus comes across as ironic given the involvement of two neutral states, Laos and Cambodia. This calls to attention the human cost of a war underpinned by realist philosophy. In itself, prioritising national security and interests is not wrong, but it should not be the only thing that superpowers and their representative diplomats consider when conducting their foreign policy.

 

The ramifications of Kissinger’s foreign policy decisions in Cambodia were far-reaching, as the brutalities of Operation Menu contributed to the rise of the Khmer Rouge. Opposition to the Americans proved to be an effective recruitment tool for the communist regime. Cambodia’s autocratic ruler, Hun Sen, who held power for 38 years before handing over the prime ministerial reins to his son in August 2023, attributed his decision to join the Khmer Rouge regime to the US’s bombing of his hometown. Many others joined because of similar reasons (Ear, 2023).

 

The Khmer Rouge’s rise to power spelled disaster for the people of Cambodia. Led by Pol Pot, it inflicted unimaginable atrocities upon the Cambodian people. According to “Counting Hell” by Bruce Sharp, the Pol Pot regime saw at least approximately 1.87-2.15 million people killed through executions in the killing fields, forced labor, and starvation – a quarter of the country’s then population. 

 

The Good (?): Other Theatres of the Cold War

​

Kissinger’s diplomacy efforts with China serve as a counter-example to his ethical failings in Indochina, illustrating his diplomatic brilliance in establishing US-China relations and ushering in an era of détente with the Soviets, which shaped the second half of the Cold War. Kissinger’s approach to the genocide in East Pakistan (known today as Bangladesh) demonstrated this seemingly blasé attitude towards human rights and ethical concerns, as well as how that played into his grand strategy with regard to US relations with Beijing. The then-Prime Minister of Pakistan acted as a conduit for negotiations with the Chinese, and Kissinger wanted to avoid a potential confrontation in pursuit of the US’s larger goal of winning over Beijing. Especially given the backdrop of the US’s Cold War rivalry with Moscow, establishing good relations with Beijing was paramount in diminishing the threat the Soviet bloc posed to America’s global strategic interests. While this approach helped uphold realist American interests abroad, its ethical price tag may come across as a tad too high in hindsight — as illustrated by the estimated 3 million dead in East Pakistan (Tharoor, 2023). 

 

Hence, in reflecting upon Kissinger’s impact on Indochina, one must consider how his diplomatic achievements were often underpinned and sometimes, only made possible via the morally dubious decisions made throughout his career. 

​

A Troubled Legacy?

​

The ethical controversies that Kissinger has endured throughout his career serve to highlight the complexities of Cold War-era diplomacy, as well as the enduring debate over how much moral responsibilities global powers should hold. 

 

These diplomatic complexities stem from the interplay of ideological rivalry, geopolitical interests, and ethical considerations throughout the Cold War. The complex web of diplomatic maneuvers by both superpowers was often driven by realpolitik principles aimed at advancing their strategic agendas, culminating in a myriad of conflicts, proxy wars, and diplomatic negotiations, with each side seeking to expand its sphere of influence while preventing the other from doing the same. However, alongside these geopolitical calculations, the ethical dimension must not be ignored in considering superpower actions in the international realm. 

 

On the one hand, advocates of realpolitik argued that national interests should take precedence in foreign policy decision-making, as national security is a zero-sum game and therefore must always be a state’s top priority. However, this often leads to morally questionable actions justified by strategic necessity. Kissinger’s style of diplomacy epitomized this approach, prioritizing geopolitical stability and balance of power considerations over ethical concerns. Kissinger’s aforementioned policies, characterized by the approval of controversial military operations and disregard for human rights abuses, illustrate the ethical dilemmas inherent in realpolitik diplomacy. Similarly, Soviet actions in Eastern Europe and elsewhere reflected a similar calculus, where ideological imperatives sometimes justified authoritarian repression and intervention in other countries’ affairs.

 

On the other hand, critics of realpolitik emphasized the moral responsibilities of global powers to uphold human rights, promote democracy, and prevent humanitarian crises, usually through adherence to international norms, laws, and soft law. These voices called for a more principled approach to foreign policy, one that prioritized ethical considerations alongside strategic interests. However, navigating these competing demands posed significant challenges for policymakers, as the pursuit of moral imperatives often clashed with geopolitical realities. The Vietnam War, for example, highlighted the tensions between humanitarian concerns and strategic objectives as the United States grappled with the ethical implications of its military intervention in Southeast Asia.

 

Ultimately, the complexities of Cold War diplomacy underscored the intricate balance between strategic interests and moral responsibilities. While realpolitik principles guided much of the decision-making during this era, the enduring debates over the moral responsibilities of global powers served as a constant reminder of the ethical dimensions of international relations. As such, understanding the interplay between geopolitical calculations and ethical considerations is essential for evaluating the legacies of key figures like Kissinger, and for informing contemporary debates on foreign policy and diplomacy.

 

Kissinger, in his later years, sought to return his Nobel, albeit unsuccessfully. He remarked that to him, it was “the saddest point in [his] governmental experience”, and that after the last US troops withdrew from Saigon, “only a feeling of emptiness remained” (Sebenius, 2016)

​

Bibliography

Beddoes, Z.M. and Carr, E. (2023) ‘The Economist: Kissinger on avoiding world war’, The Intelligence from the Economist. Available at: https://open.spotify.com/episode/4d5iM4XQ9GqF3k6HvmANJP?si=gGa0UlN1Q2KMN6yVpav6rQ&nd=1&dlsi=83d63d315a3b4e55 (Accessed: 2024). 

​

Ferguson, N. (2020) Henry Kissinger and the Study of Global Affairs, Johns Hopkins SAIS. Available at: https://sais.jhu.edu/kissinger/about/legacy (Accessed: 07 April 2024). 

Sebenius, J.K. and Kogan, E.B. (2016) ‘Henry Kissinger’s negotiation campaign to end the Vietnam War’, SSRN Electronic Journal [Preprint]. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2884193. 

​

Hughes, K. (2016) Fatal politics: The Nixon tapes, the Vietnam War, and the casualties of reelection. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press. 

 

Palmer, J. (2023) ‘The Intelligence: Henry Kissinger’s legacy’, The Intelligence from The Economist. Available at: https://open.spotify.com/episode/7qUO1lKzKDjWcSoxVpPBM1?si=f9ea3da042c74e8f (Accessed: 2023). 

 

Rothman, L. (2015) Nobel peace prize winner history: Why it was once rejected, Time. Available at: https://time.com/4061794/nobel-peace-prize-winner-history/ (Accessed: 07 April 2024). 

 

Rummel, R.J. (1988) ‘AS THOUGH A NUCLEAR WAR THE DEATH TOLL OF ABSOLUTISM’, International Journal on World Peace, 5(3). 

 

Truong, K.N. and Dinh, K.V. (2021) ‘Agent orange: Haft-century effects on the Vietnamese wildlife have been ignored’, Environmental Science & Technology, 55(22), pp. 15007–15009. doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c06613. 

 

Dror, O. (2018) Learning from the Hue Massacre, The New York Times. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/20/opinion/hue-massacre-vietnam-war.html (Accessed: 07 April 2024). 

 

Sophal Ear Associate Professor in the Thunderbird School of Global Management (2023) Henry Kissinger’s bombing campaign likely killed hundreds of thousands of cambodians − and set path for the ravages of the Khmer Rouge, The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/henry-kissingers-bombing-campaign-likely-killed-hundreds-of-thousands-of-cambodians-and-set-path-for-the-ravages-of-the-khmer-rouge-209353 (Accessed: 07 April 2024). 

 

Sharp, B. (no date) Counting Hell: The Death Toll of the Khmer Rouge Regime in Cambodia, Mekong.Net. Available at: https://www.mekong.net/cambodia/deaths.htm (Accessed: 07 April 2024). 

 

Tharoor, I. (2023) Henry Kissinger’s role in the Bangladesh genocide of 1971 - The Washington Post, The Washington Post. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/12/01/bangladesh-kissinger-henry-genocide-pakistan-east-legacy/ (Accessed: 07 April 2024). 

 

Rothman, L. (2015) Nobel peace prize winner history: Why it was once rejected, Time. Available at: https://time.com/4061794/nobel-peace-prize-winner-history/ (Accessed: 07 February 2025).