Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

gaodawei.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 309 posts

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#51

Post by seanmcdirmid »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #50
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Chinese split from north Vietnam is just a consequence of the sino-Soviet split that began under kruschev. However, the Vietnamese did help with Soviet tech to preserve and display Mao’s body, at least.

both China and the Soviet Union were supporting North Vietnam at the same time - up until 1968 (when they had this war over an island). The Sino Soviet split happened much earlier, in 1961. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_in_the_Vietnam_War The great friendship between China and the USA started after that border conflict in 1968, as China was looking for a counterweight. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_…

But 1973 things were falling apart, they would last until the war end with America (otherwise Mao wouldn’t have gotten his crystal casket), but by the late 70s Vietnam and china were at war.

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#52

Post by throwaway4good »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #20

> Chairman Mao: You have about 600, 000 Chinese in the United States. We probably don't even have 60 Americans here. I would like to study the problem. I don't know the reason. I wonder if he studied it and what he found.

Even after covid and the new Cold War there are certainly more than “60 Americans” in China today.

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#53

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #48
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #32

Looks like some game of chess: China stopped supporting North Vietnam, but that didn't stop North Vietnam from invading South Vietnam, after the pullout. However at that point no one in the US cared about any domino theory, because the US was now friends with China against the Soviet Union. I wonder what the chess pieces were all thinking...

The Sino-Soviet split came to mind when listening to Xi swear to be Putin's BFF and blood brother forever. Is Putin really stupid enough to fall for that? He will be polishing Xi's boots with his tongue soon enough.

Depends on what Xi is planning over Taiwan, that is where things get complicated.

They are all trying to build alliances for that contingency.

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#54

Post by tw1984 »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #32

Looks like some game of chess: China stopped supporting North Vietnam, but that didn't stop North Vietnam from invading South Vietnam, after the pullout. However at that point no one in the US cared about any domino theory, because the US was now friends with China against the Soviet Union. I wonder what the chess pieces were all thinking...

> I wonder what the chess pieces were all thinking...

talk to those in ukraine and taiwan now.

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#55

Post by dang »

cryptonector wrote: post #49
dang wrote: post #36

This reminded me of the great story where Kissinger, on that trip, asks Zhou Enlai "What do you think of the French Revolution" and Zhou replies "It's too soon to tell." I love that, and it is what I say when people ask "how are you" too early in the morning. But I've also been trained by a passion for too-good-to-be-true quotes and that one definitely sounds too good to be true. Guess what - it is. But for an intere…

Zhou might have meant something important by that. If you think that La Terreur set the pattern for many other terrors since, then the fact that the struggle against La Terreur hadn't (probably hasn't) finished quite yet might make that retort quite frank and meaningful.

He was talking about the student protests of May 1968. The quote later got misunderstood to be about the French Revolution.

From https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2011/06/it...: "I distinctly remember the exchange. There was a mis­understanding that was too delicious to invite correction."

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#56

Post by refurb »

MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #32

Looks like some game of chess: China stopped supporting North Vietnam, but that didn't stop North Vietnam from invading South Vietnam, after the pullout. However at that point no one in the US cared about any domino theory, because the US was now friends with China against the Soviet Union. I wonder what the chess pieces were all thinking...

"We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."

This is why it's funny to see people view the war in Ukraine as a "good guy vs bad guy". The geopolitics are incredibly complicated and there is a lot behind the scene the average person doesn't see.

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#57

Post by ggm »

cryptonector wrote: post #40
ggm wrote: post #7

I'm not entirely sure I get what this tells us. A degree of cynicism in politics is inevitable, for the players. And, Kissinger was undoubtedly playing. As was Mao, with other people. Interesting Edgar Snow was brought up, I read his long March piece as a child, it's pretty accessible. ("Red Star over China" 1937) Zhou EnLai was a survivor and a moderating force in the bad times. The national museum in Tienanmen squa…

> Christopher Hitchens was right: Kissinger was a war criminal so I tend to regard this kind of verbatim report as reflecting two criminally minded geniuses shooting the breeze together. Perhaps, but the trade arrangements made at that meeting have essentially been policy for every Administration since. That's very interesting. What to make of that? Why have no U.S. Presidents (except, maybe, maybe in rhetoric, Trump…

The soviets were patronising. Mao resented Stalin's operatives telling him what to do all the time pre 49. Post 49, nothing much Russia did was in China's longterm interest. China and India were in border dispute which still rancours yet the soviets wanted some degree of amity with India, leading the non aligned nations in the UN there was much for them to profit from not supporting China across that boundary dispute. The Korean war probably started overt resentments which had things like inner/outer Mongolia to stew over since day 1. When Russia blew hot, China was cold, and vice versa. When Russia went with peaceful coexistence China was still militant. In the end, they were "much too much in love to get along"

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#58

Post by refurb »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #34
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #32

Looks like some game of chess: China stopped supporting North Vietnam, but that didn't stop North Vietnam from invading South Vietnam, after the pullout. However at that point no one in the US cared about any domino theory, because the US was now friends with China against the Soviet Union. I wonder what the chess pieces were all thinking...

The Chinese split from north Vietnam is just a consequence of the sino-Soviet split that began under kruschev. However, the Vietnamese did help with Soviet tech to preserve and display Mao’s body, at least.

China and the USSR never quite "split" from North Vietnam until well after the end of the war in 1975 (the Sino-Vietnamese war in 1979 was the China aplit which was mended in the 80's).

The Sino-Soviet split had already happened (as you mentioned) and North Vietnam played China and the USSR off against each other "who can be the best friend of an important communist revolutionary government?".

It wasn't until the US engaged both China and the USSR in detente, and the war had progressed to such an extent it was obvious the US was leaving, that Vietnam moved way down the list of priorities for both the USSR and China. Both countries continued to support North Vietnam, but it was heavily tempered by what they might lose with the US.

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#59

Post by MichaelMoser123 »

refurb wrote: post #56
MichaelMoser123 wrote: post #32

Looks like some game of chess: China stopped supporting North Vietnam, but that didn't stop North Vietnam from invading South Vietnam, after the pullout. However at that point no one in the US cared about any domino theory, because the US was now friends with China against the Soviet Union. I wonder what the chess pieces were all thinking...

"We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow." This is why it's funny to see people view the war in Ukraine as a "good guy vs bad guy". The geopolitics are incredibly complicated and there is a lot behind the scene the average person doesn't see.

the war in Ukraine is not funny at all, it has all the potential to turn into WW3.

Re: The Mao-Kissinger Meeting of 1973

#60

Post by skinnymuch »

ggm wrote: post #7

I'm not entirely sure I get what this tells us. A degree of cynicism in politics is inevitable, for the players. And, Kissinger was undoubtedly playing. As was Mao, with other people. Interesting Edgar Snow was brought up, I read his long March piece as a child, it's pretty accessible. ("Red Star over China" 1937) Zhou EnLai was a survivor and a moderating force in the bad times. The national museum in Tienanmen squa…

> But it was good to engage with China, and I think most Chinese now would be happy a pair of cynical bastards met and talked it out.

Is this referring to Mao and Kissinger? Calling Mao and Kissinger collectively cynical doesn’t fit. The imperialist war criminal being a cynical bastard makes sense. Not the eastern revolutionary leftist. That necessitates optimism.

Post reply on HN