Video: Henry Kissinger on Iran

posted at 9:28 am on June 18, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Greta van Susteren interviewed foreign-policy expert Henry Kissinger last night on the events in Iran. Kissinger told the Fox News host that a change from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Mirhossein Mousavi would bring only minimal change in policy, but more change in tone instead. Kissinger makes the same point that Amir Taheri posited in the New York Post yesterday, which is that the proclamation of divine will in what turned out to be a horribly botched election may have been a major psychological turning point for the people of Iran:

The Right Scoop points out this passage as similar to our argument yesterday:

“The Ayatollahs in my opinion cannot fully recover from the fact that they announced the election as a divine result and then had to start reconsidering it…and whatever different result they announce was not what they had originally intended to do.”

Kissinger says that Barack Obama could hardly have done less to support the protestors in the streets, despite the Iranian mullah’s accusations of interference, although Kissinger says that Obama made the right decision in not damaging Mousavi. I don’t think protecting Mousavi is the point, for the same reasons that Kissinger points out at first — there’s not much difference between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad, especially since both represent the Guardian Council and Ali Khamenei.

I did like Kissinger’s point about this being an evolution, not a revolution. Either would be progress.

Update: Don’t miss Gateway Pundit’s interview with Iranian freedom activist Kianoosh Sanjari.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Hillary is no Henry.

Geochelone on June 18, 2009 at 9:31 AM

Where’s the reset button?

Thunderstorm129 on June 18, 2009 at 9:35 AM

Kissinger says that Obama made the right decision in not damaging Mousavi.

I suppose that is fine if one wants to beg them to have a summit.

But if one cares about human beings and freedom, one would want to damage all the people in power in Iran.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 9:35 AM

OBOOBI WAS NOT ACTING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF MOUSAVI, HE WAS SIMPLY NOT ACTING, I,E CLUELESS……..

SHARPTOOTH on June 18, 2009 at 9:37 AM

No one asks him to support Mousavi. This is about the freedom of the people.

the_nile on June 18, 2009 at 9:37 AM

Glad to see Kissinger on TV again.

emailnuevo on June 18, 2009 at 9:38 AM

This doesn’t appear to be about any fill in the blank leader, it’s about the people getting blantantly snuckered. People don’t like to have their intelligence insulted and the Mullahs have done that in spades.

Cindy Munford on June 18, 2009 at 9:39 AM

The Ayatollahs in my opinion cannot fully recover from the fact that they announced the election as a divine result and then had to start reconsidering it

I heard somewhere that allah can be quite fickle. Maybe they can run with that.

Vashta.Nerada on June 18, 2009 at 9:39 AM

It goes to infallibility…once the “masses” see that the ayatollahs are not infallible when it comes to religious dogma, i.e., the proclamation of divine will, they will be more likely to doubt the abilities of the ayatollahs to make decisions regarding the economy, defense, the rights of citizens…sort of like the way we need to look at Obama, really.

Once that infallibility cat is out of the bag, the rest is up to the Iranians…how far do they want to go? A little liberty is a wonderful thing, but a little liberty is never enough, nor should it be.

The Shah was driven from Teheran for a lot less.

Time the 30-year-old failed experiment in Islamacist governance be put to sleep…by the people it has enslaved for three decades.

Mousavi may not come out of this a victor, either, he may not even come out as a contender, might be a whole new slate of younger, angry, leadership who want bread for their families, gas for their cars, real jobs, access to the internet and the rest of the world…sort of like folks here in America it seems.

coldwarrior on June 18, 2009 at 9:39 AM

I like @BarakObama & I think he h/done the RIGHT thing, that’s like how #Mousavi is telling #GR88 what 2do; with Silence! #IranEleciton

From a well-known Twitterer (one that was tipped in an Allahpundit post).

I think Kissinger is right… maybe not an incredibly popular position to take, but it comes down to the fact that Ahmadinejad will accuse us of interference either way, we gotta decide whether we want to give him more “evidence” or make him look even more like a fool.

Siobhan on June 18, 2009 at 9:43 AM

The Shah was driven from Teheran for a lot less.

His son, Crown Prince Cyrus Reza Pahlavi announces himself ready, willing and able to return to Iran in whatever way his nation needs him.
Video:
http://www.activistchat.com/

JiangxiDad on June 18, 2009 at 9:43 AM

The Iranians are done. Both leaders are like choosing which poison you prefer. Its a shame that all they are asking for is some control over their own lives and the mullahs cannot comprehend the message. Obama dosn’t need to “mettle” when freedom is concerned. He is suppose to “mettle” in restricting ours.

volsense on June 18, 2009 at 9:46 AM

If the people thought there was even a remote possibility that the results were divinely inspired they never would have taken to the streets to begin with. I don’t see how they could have lost any credibility they never obviously had to begin with. Maybe they did 20 or 30 years ago but that seems to gone away at some point.

TheBigOldDog on June 18, 2009 at 9:46 AM

Henry Kissinger? The same guy that promotes population reduction? The same man who would sell our nations sovereignty for a place at the New Orders table?

Henry Kissinger wants one thing. To open up Iran to the banking cartel. The way you control nations is through the issuance of debt like our Fed debt notes.

Eventually, Christianity is going to have to wake up.

True_King on June 18, 2009 at 9:47 AM

This guy drank boatloads of kool-aid too.

promachus on June 18, 2009 at 9:47 AM

This guy drank boatloads of kool-aid too.

promachus on June 18, 2009 at 9:47 AM

It was the only beverage served at the dinner the other night with Albright, Hillary, Condi, Baker and Henry.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 9:50 AM

the young protesters will never give up their means of communication ala NorK. the gig is up in that part of the suppression/repression.

kelley in virginia on June 18, 2009 at 9:50 AM

The Shah was driven for a lot less.

Yes, but he had an American president, “Jimmah” Carter, who “mettled” him out of power. Amazing how democrats “mettled” people into bondage and refrain from “mettling” when freedom is involved.

volsense on June 18, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Kissinger always reminds me of Soros.

Bishop on June 18, 2009 at 9:51 AM

True_King on June 18, 2009 at 9:47 AM

Um, yikes. Somewhere there’s a Ron Paul forum missing its conspiracy theorist.

Word to the wise… blaming DA JOOZ (I’m sorry, the Bilderberg group, CFR, whatever) for your problems is not gonna fix anything.

Siobhan on June 18, 2009 at 9:52 AM

I still think that country has no hope. That country’s religion will sooner or later reassert itself. Sorry, I’m just pessimistic, because Islam can’t play with any other religion or non-Islamic government

Oil Can on June 18, 2009 at 9:54 AM

Siobhan on June 18, 2009 at 9:52 AM

Thank you.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 9:54 AM

The Shah was driven for a lot less.

Yes, but he had an American president, “Jimmah” Carter, who “mettled” him out of power. Amazing how democrats “mettled” people into bondage and refrain from “mettling” when freedom is involved.

volsense on June 18, 2009 at 9:50 AM

On Kissinger’s advice, as Kissenger and the Shah were friends, as I recall.

Wethal on June 18, 2009 at 9:57 AM

Mousavi or Ahmadinejad? I think I’d rather have Muhammed Mossadegh at this point.

Shock the Monkey on June 18, 2009 at 9:57 AM

Consider this, though: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/06/17/so-now-whats-going-on-in-iran/

Perhaps overly optimistic, but Mousavi may not be the same man he was a week ago.

pifactorial on June 18, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Who cares about supporting Mousavi??? You got 2 Million gun-less rioters in the street, this is a chance to fuel this into toppling the Theocracy completely with some nudging

jp on June 18, 2009 at 9:58 AM

This doesn’t appear to be about any fill in the blank leader, it’s about the people getting blantantly snuckered. People don’t like to have their intelligence insulted and the Mullahs have done that in spades.

Cindy Munford on June 18, 2009 at 9:39 AM

I think the people are waking up.

I don’t see why Obama can’t come out and condemn the strong arm tactics without endorsing any candidate. I mean, after all, he is such a great orator…he should be able to thread that fine needle.

ladyingray on June 18, 2009 at 9:59 AM

It was the only beverage served at the dinner the other night with Albright, Hillary, Condi, Baker and Henry.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 9:50 AM

Should have been a gallon of milk or calcium fortified orange juice.

WashJeff on June 18, 2009 at 10:00 AM

You’d think the democrat socialists would at least call for a separation of church and state in Iran…

SouthernGent on June 18, 2009 at 10:01 AM

That country’s religion will sooner or later reassert itself. Sorry, I’m just pessimistic, because Islam can’t play with any other religion or non-Islamic government

Oil Can on June 18, 2009 at 9:54 AM

We can hope they’ll abandon their religion just as Europe has abandoned theirs.

Their infallible Ayatollah’s are looking pretty fallible now. If they have no devine right to rule, then they are just tyrants and that’s becoming apparent to the Iranian people.

NoDonkey on June 18, 2009 at 10:01 AM

I did like Kissinger’s point about this being an evolution, not a revolution. Either would be progress.

That’s because Kissinger is generally a conservative and a realist, but mostly conservative.

Conservatives don’t believe that the living generation has the prerogative to tear down history and start from scratch, which, let’s face it, is what the Left has done ever since the French Revolution.

Revolution undermines an irreplacable and necessary cultural resource: of centuries of tradition, the precipitate of everything a culture has learned about how to solve it’s problems and maintain stability.

Evolution carries culture and tradition to the next stage, it is what conservatives want to see. One could even say the disintegration of the Soviet Union was an evolution, as seen in Gorby’s Glasnost, which was a dialing down of communism. The USSR appeared to fall in a brief cataclysm, but the apparent revolution was a long time coming.

Shove you revolutions, Lefties.

jeff_from_mpls on June 18, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Didn’t Obama make a Cultural Relativism statement the other day? He said flat out that we can’t say one culture or country is better than any other culture/country. idiot that he is.

jp on June 18, 2009 at 10:02 AM

Who cares about supporting Mousavi??? You got 2 Million gun-less rioters in the street, this is a chance to fuel this into toppling the Theocracy completely with some nudging

jp on June 18, 2009 at 9:58 AM

Exactly

DarkCurrent on June 18, 2009 at 10:03 AM

I don’t see why Obama can’t come out and condemn the strong arm tactics without endorsing any candidate. I mean, after all, he is such a great orator…he should be able to thread that fine needle.

ladyingray on June 18, 2009 at 9:59 AM

That would require Obama taking a stand for something that isn’t in his immediate self-interest.

A’int happening. Obama is about one thing – Obama. Now maybe if the Iranian protestors start contributing to the Obama re-election campaign, Obama might start taking an interest.

NoDonkey on June 18, 2009 at 10:04 AM

Hillary broke her arm yesterday, apparently trying to arm wrestle Obama into taking a tougher stand on Iran and North Korea.
Hillary lost.

albill on June 18, 2009 at 10:06 AM

The real reason behind Obama’s silence? He doesn’t believe in Democracy or the will of the people. Look at what he’s doing to this country. It’s a complete power grab not unlike what is happening in Iran right now.

smartsy on June 18, 2009 at 10:07 AM

The people of Iran will not forgive Barack Obama for siding with the evil regime.

izoneguy on June 18, 2009 at 10:09 AM

Obama’s self interest is that he wants a cable news televised summit with him sitting down with the irrational “leader” of Iran. Nothing will be accomplished. No good will come from it. But he will be hailed as having opened up relations with Iran.

If these demonstrations bring down the whole mullah organization in Iran it will take a really long time to sort out the mess and create a new sysytem of government. It will be a long time before they can come to a table with Obama. There is a chance that the people who then come to that table will be reasonable, thus defeating the lefty dream of talking to irrational dictators.

Obama cannot wait. He is in a big hurry. This election mess is getting in the way of his plans.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 10:11 AM

Hillary lost.

albill on June 18, 2009 at 10:06 AM

Get outta here with that, she’d kick his pansy ass back to Chitown, I’m not buying it.

She probably broke it falling off a bar stool, her career is pretty much in the toliet at this point.

NoDonkey on June 18, 2009 at 10:12 AM

Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho The Ayatollahs Have To Go!!!

Hey, Hey, Ho, Ho The Ayatollahs Have To Go!!!

izoneguy on June 18, 2009 at 10:12 AM

Should have been a gallon of milk or calcium fortified orange juice.

WashJeff on June 18, 2009 at 10:00 AM

The White House is going to have to switch to Calcium tablets for the weekly Obama Communion.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 10:14 AM

Obama cannot wait. He is in a big hurry. This election mess is getting in the way of his plans.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 10:11 AM

We will have to keep messing up Obummers plans. We don’t like his plans.

izoneguy on June 18, 2009 at 10:14 AM

Barry O

Saying what needs to be said
/iranisarc

blatantblue on June 18, 2009 at 10:15 AM

Forget Kissinger, Iowahawk weighs in on Iran:

Hail to the Victors

A Special Message to the People of Iran

By Barack Obama
President of the United States

Greetings. As president of United States — or, if you prefer, the Great Satan — I have have been following with keen interest the vigorous post-election debate and vibrant political dialogue which has been taking place in your great and noble Islamic Republic of Iran over recent days. It has been both educational and fascinating, and as a sports fan I have thrilled to the pageantry, the suspense, and the fast-paced, hard-hitting action…

John_R on June 18, 2009 at 10:19 AM

Get rid of Mousavi too, and get rid of the mullahocracy entirely.

rbj on June 18, 2009 at 10:19 AM

Consider this, though: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/06/17/so-now-whats-going-on-in-iran/

Perhaps overly optimistic, but Mousavi may not be the same man he was a week ago.

pifactorial on June 18, 2009 at 9:58 AM

I think that Ledeen’s point about Mousavi taking a lot of personal risk here was a good one. He, his top supporters, and his family will likely pay dearly for this if the regime doesn’t topple.

Illinidiva on June 18, 2009 at 10:21 AM

Waiting for the first MSM journalist to connect the George Bush-built democracy in next door neighbor Iraq (and Afghanistan) and the impact it is having on the people of Iran…

albill on June 18, 2009 at 10:21 AM

I can’t even listen to him, his voice makes me gag in the back of my throut.

feedercattle on June 18, 2009 at 10:24 AM

I still maintain that Obama really doesn’t care much about foreign policy.

His primary goal–above everything else–is to remake American society and culture into the long-hoped-for socialist utopia.

Now, he doesn’t want to do anything stupid in foreign policy, because that could affect him politically at home and make it harder to implement his agenda. So, foreign-policy-wise, he’ll do what it takes to avoid that.

Like continuing many, if not most, of Bush’s War On Terror policies. And staying out of the current Iranian situation as much as possible.

The progressive/lefty/Marxist moment in the US is finally at hand, and Obama isn’t going to let any overseas unpleasantness get in the way.

tsj017 on June 18, 2009 at 10:41 AM

ladyingray on June 18, 2009 at 9:59 AM

Great orator. Good one.

Cindy Munford on June 18, 2009 at 10:48 AM

One can only hope.It amazes me that its taken this long. When the Mullahs took over alot of friends were cut off here and threatened if they did`nt return home.Which they knew if they went home they would face death or prison. Under the Shah they grew up very western , women went to college they wore makeup and even pants. To have your freedom taken away so completely and quickly has to have festered all these years. I say give the women the weapons and set them loose, mission accomplished!

LSUMama on June 18, 2009 at 11:12 AM

Good news! It turns out that Henry Kissenger posts on Hot Air.

He goes by the name starfleet_dude.

Which is odd because I thought Kissenger was much smarter than a lot of his posts here.

myrenovations on June 18, 2009 at 11:26 AM

As much as I disagree with the Obama in almost everything, he is right to not encourage rioting in Iran. I know that most of you have very short memories about things that have happened in the world, but our past great presidents have encouraged things like what is happening in Iran only to get a lot of people killed. Most of your memories don’t go back to Cuba, Hungary, the mountain tribesmen in Vietnam, or the killing of Shias and Kurds after the first gulf war. We encouraged all these, then walked away. Look to the Iraq war as an example of bringing democratic freedom to people unasked. For the people of the world to cherish and defend their freedoms and democratic form of governments, they must fight for it and earn it all by themselves.

Old Country Boy on June 18, 2009 at 11:36 AM

Maybe they did 20 or 30 years ago but that seems to gone away at some point.

TheBigOldDog on June 18, 2009 at 9:46 AM

The Iran/Iraq war seems to have done a lot of the damage.
Loosing an entire generation for nothing, does that.

MarkTheGreat on June 18, 2009 at 12:07 PM

This guy drank boatloads of kool-aid too.

promachus on June 18, 2009 at 9:47 AM

I thought you were talking about True_King for a second there.

MarkTheGreat on June 18, 2009 at 12:08 PM

Get rid of MousaviOBAMA too, and get rid of the mullahocracyOdumbocracy entirely.

rbj on June 18, 2009 at 10:19 AM

FIFY

falderal on June 18, 2009 at 12:37 PM

Obama is likely looking for a quote in the “Holy” Koran to help him decide.

Maybe Sura 19:27-28?

Which declares that Jesus’s mother Mary was the sister (or daughter) of Moses’s brother Aaron.

Who would have been about 800-900 years old by then.

Oops! So much for the “perfect” Koran.

Maybe Obama should try “Common Sense” instead.

profitsbeard on June 18, 2009 at 12:50 PM

coldwarrior on June 18, 2009 at 9:39 AM

Very much agree. This gives me hope for the Iranian people.

Loxodonta on June 18, 2009 at 1:38 PM

jeff_from_mpls:

“That’s because Kissinger is generally a conservative and a realist, but mostly conservative.”

Realism, thy name is Kissinger! He’s no conservative.

“Kissinger told the Fox News host that a change from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Mirhossein Mousavi would bring only minimal change in policy, but more change in tone instead.”

Minimal change in policy, yes. Working within the existing system, yes. But if he manages to oust Ahmadinejad, it will be a big win for democracy, not just a tremor. If dissidents are not being disappeared in the middle of the night, and women not being abused on the streets for appearing without chadors, and gays not being hung from cranes, we’re talking about a whole lot more than a change in tone.

JM Hanes on June 18, 2009 at 3:27 PM