RSS
Henry Kissinger, First Jewish US Secretary of State Who Shaped Cold War Diplomacy, Dies Aged 100
Former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger arrives for a memorial service for late Social Democratic senior politician Egon Bahr at St. Mary’s Church in Berlin, Germany, Sept. 17, 2015. Photo: REUTERS/Fabrizio Bensch
Henry Kissinger, the dominant US diplomat of the Cold War era who helped Washington open up to China, forge arms control deals with the Soviet Union, and end the Vietnam War but who was reviled by critics over human rights, has died at the age of 100.
Kissinger, a German-born Jewish refugee whose career took him from academia to diplomacy and who remained an active voice in foreign policy into his later years, died at his home in Connecticut on Wednesday, his geopolitical consulting firm, Kissinger Associates Inc., said.
Kissinger was at the height of his powers during the 1970s in the midst of the Cold War when he served as national security adviser and secretary of state under Republican President Richard Nixon.
After Nixon’s resignation in 1974 amid the Watergate scandal, he remained a diplomatic force as secretary of state under Nixon’s successor, President Gerald Ford.
He was the architect of the US diplomatic opening with China, landmark US-Soviet arms control talks, expanded ties between Israel and its Arab neighbors, and the Paris Peace Accords with North Vietnam.
While many hailed Kissinger for his brilliance and statesmanship, others branded him a war criminal for his support for anti-communist dictatorships, especially in Latin America. In his latter years, his travels were circumscribed by efforts by some nations to arrest or question him about past US foreign policy.
He won the 1973 Peace Prize for ending US involvement in the Vietnam War but it was one of the most controversial ever. Two members of the Nobel committee resigned over the selection as questions arose about the secret US bombing of Cambodia. North Vietnamese diplomat Le Duc Tho, selected to share the award, declined it.
As tributes poured in from around the world, Beijing called him a “good old friend of the Chinese people” who made historic contributions to normalizing relations between the two countries.
Russian President Vladimir Putin praised Kissinger as a “wise and farsighted statesman” while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his meetings with Kissinger provided “a masterclass in statesmanship.”
With his distinctive German-accented voice, Kissinger was never shy to offer his opinion. Ford called him a “super secretary of state” but also noted his prickliness and self-assurance, saying “Henry in his mind never made a mistake.”
“He had the thinnest skin of any public figure I ever knew,” Ford told an interviewer shortly before his death in 2006.
HARVARD FACULTY
Heinz Alfred Kissinger was born in Fuerth, Germany, on May 27, 1923, and moved to the United States with his family in 1938 before the Nazi campaign to exterminate European Jewry.
Anglicizing his name to Henry, Kissinger became a naturalized US citizen in 1943, served in the Army in Europe in World War Two, and attended Harvard University on a scholarship, where he earned a doctorate in 1954 and stayed on faculty for the next 17 years.
During much of that time, Kissinger served as a consultant to government agencies, including in 1967 when he acted as an intermediary for the State Department in Vietnam. He used his connections with President Lyndon Johnson’s Democratic administration to pass on information about peace negotiations to the Nixon camp.
When Nixon’s pledge to end the Vietnam War helped him win the 1968 presidential election, he brought in Kissinger as national security adviser.
But the process of “Vietnamization” — shifting the burden of the war from US forces to the South Vietnamese — was long and bloody, punctuated by massive US bombing of North Vietnam, the mining of the North’s harbors, and the bombing of Cambodia.
Kissinger declared in 1972 that “peace is at hand” in Vietnam, but the Paris Peace Accords signed in January 1973 were little more than a prelude to the final Communist takeover of the South two years later.
In 1973, in addition to his role as national security adviser, Kissinger was named secretary of state — giving him unchallenged authority in foreign affairs.
An intensifying Arab-Israeli conflict launched Kissinger on his first “shuttle” mission, a brand of highly personal, high-pressure diplomacy for which he became famous.
Thirty-two days of shuttling between Jerusalem and Damascus helped Kissinger forge a long-lasting disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria in the Golan Heights.
In an effort to diminish Soviet influence, Kissinger reached out to its chief communist rival, China, and made two trips there, including a secret one to meet with Premier Zhou Enlai. The result was Nixon’s historic summit in Beijing with Chairman Mao Zedong and the eventual formalization of relations between the two countries.
Former US Ambassador to China Winston Lord, who served as Kissinger‘s special assistant, called his former boss a “tireless advocate for peace,” telling Reuters, “America has lost a towering champion for the national interest.”
STRATEGIC ARMS ACCORD
As secretary of state, Kissinger went with Ford in 1974 to Vladivostok in the Soviet Union, where the president met Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev and agreed to a basic framework for a strategic arms pact. The agreement capped Kissinger‘s pioneering efforts at detente that led to an easing of US-Soviet tensions.
But Kissinger‘s diplomatic skills had their limits. In 1975, he was blamed for failing to persuade Israel and Egypt to agree to a second-stage disengagement in the Sinai.
And in the India-Pakistan War of 1971, Nixon and Kissinger drew heavy criticism for tilting toward Pakistan. Kissinger was heard calling the Indians “bastards” — a remark he later said he regretted.
Like Nixon, he feared the spread of left-wing ideas in the Western hemisphere, and his actions in response led to deep distrust of Washington by many Latin Americans for years to come.
In 1970, he plotted with the CIA on how best to topple the Marxist, democratically elected Chilean President Salvador Allende, and in a memo after Argentina’s bloody coup in 1976 he said that the military dictators should be encouraged.
When Ford lost to Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, in 1976, Kissinger‘s days in government power were largely over. The next Republican in the White House, Ronald Reagan, distanced himself from Kissinger, viewing him as out of step with his conservative constituency.
After leaving government, Kissinger set up a high-priced, high-powered consulting firm in New York, which offered advice to the world’s corporate elite. He served on company boards and various foreign policy and security forums, wrote books, and became a regular media commentator on international affairs.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, President George W. Bush picked Kissinger to head an investigative committee. But outcry from Democrats who saw a conflict of interest with many of his consulting firm’s clients forced Kissinger to step down.
He remained active late in life, attending meetings in the White House, publishing a book on leadership, and testifying before a Senate committee about North Korea’s nuclear threat. In July 2023, he made a surprise visit to Beijing to meet Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Divorced from his first wife, Ann Fleischer, in 1964, he married Nancy Maginnes, an aide to New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller, in 1974. He had two children by his first wife.
Kissinger Associates Inc. said in the statement announcing his death that Kissinger would be interred at a private family service, to be followed at a later date by a public memorial service in New York City.
The post Henry Kissinger, First Jewish US Secretary of State Who Shaped Cold War Diplomacy, Dies Aged 100 first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
A History of Hanukkah and Jewish Survival
A Hanukkah menorah. Photo: Pixabay
We like to think that Hanukkah was the great victory of Judah, the son of Mattiyahu the Priest (who initiated the resistance) against the mighty Syrian or Seleucid Greeks over 2,000 years ago. The Seleucid campaign against Judea began when Antiochus the 4th invaded in 167 BCE). He believed his culture was far superior to that of the Jews. Jewish merchants were beginning to rival the Greeks in the Eastern Mediterranean, so commercial rivalry was a factor too.
Judah (the name Maccabee is not mentioned in Talmudic sources) did indeed defeat some Seleucid armies and retook the Temple and purified it in 164 BCE. But in fact, the fighting went on for some five years.
Although in between, the Temple did indeed function the way it did before Antiochus, nevertheless it was not a clear-cut victory. The in-fighting in the court of the Syrian Greeks, the assassination of kings and rival generals, all contributed to stalemate with Syrians still holding on to their fortress in Jerusalem.
Judah was killed in the battle of Elasa in 160 BCE. Judah’s brother Jonathan was killed in 143 BCE. Only with the last brother Simon, who was recognized officially as Judea’s high priest and the head of the Judean state in 142 CE, did Judea become independent, for a while.
Judah did not establish the annual eight-day festival we have today. He did replicate the Eight Days of King Solomon’s original dedication of the first Temple when he re-took it. The late Talmudic rabbis established the ongoing eight days to commemorate the miracle of the oil not mentioned earlier. And their failure to mention Judah indicates their disapproval of the Hasmonean dynasty in general as it played out.
Was Hanukkah just a matter of military conquest — or just cultural disagreement with the Greeks? There were no Palestinians to be seen. In competing for markets, Greeks killed Jews and Jews killed Greeks back. John Hyrcanus, Simon’s successor ,was particularly effective at retaliating against those who attacked Jews even beyond his territory.
Within the Jewish community of Judea, there were huge divisions, which reflected the precise divisions that exist today within the Jewish communities in Israel and the Diaspora.
Succeeding generations could not even agree what the significance of Hanukkah was. For those who fought, it was a military victory that ultimately led to the establishment of regaining and re-opening the Temple and an autonomous state.
For the rabbis of the Talmudic era, who were scarred by the Roman conquests, it was a celebration of the spiritual flame kept burning by the few against the many. Judah the fighter was not mentioned. Some saw it as a response to the Diaspora festival of Purim, others as the interaction between the Diaspora and Israel, with both suffering from different pressures and antagonisms. What we now call antisemitism.
A lot has changed over the last 2,000 years — and a lot has not.
Empires have come and gone, rulers have risen and died, and Jews remain a people as Bilaam says (Numbers 23:9) “A nation that dwells alone and is not regarded (or valued) by the other peoples.” We have always been loners. Does this really matter? For some it does and that explains why so many Jews have always abandoned the confines of Jewish life to try to thrive in the non-Jewish world. It also explains why others have fought for their beliefs and freedom — and why some have become zealots.
We should not be surprised today to discover how many Jews are antagonistic to the Jewish people, and certainly not about how the non-Jewish world continues to be extremely ambivalent towards us. Both in the Middle East and in the West, communities are now no longer as monochromatic or as unified as they once were. Mass migrations have changed the complexity of many societies and divided them against themselves.
This is why the Hanukkah story is so important. It’s the only festival we have that records the military triumph of Israel against its opponents, and the survival of our tradition despite the continuous, repeated attempts to snuff us out.
We have thrived despite it all. In our prayers every single day of the year, we think of Jerusalem and returning to it in our minds if not in our bodies. This is something that the world just does not get — because they are not concerned with history or facts. This is our story, whichever the way the wind blows, and they will not snuff our lights out.
The author is a writer and rabbi, currently based in New York.
The post A History of Hanukkah and Jewish Survival first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Deriving Harmony: A ‘Mathematical’ Reading of Parshat Vayigash and the Story of Yosef
Reading from a Torah scroll in accordance with Sephardi tradition. Photo: Sagie Maoz via Wikimedia Commons.
Parshat Vayigash brings us to one of the most emotionally charged moments in the Torah.
Yosef, now a powerful ruler in Egypt, reveals his identity to his brothers, setting the stage for reconciliation after years of separation, pain, and misunderstanding. The parsha highlights themes of forgiveness, unity, and divine providence, as fractured relationships are mended and a family realigns with its shared destiny.
From a mathematical perspective, the resolution in Parshat Vayigash can be seen as a system of linear equations. Just as a system requires each equation to be satisfied simultaneously at a single solution point, the family’s conflicting perspectives and needs converge into a unified outcome. This metaphor provides a structured lens through which to understand the intricate interplay of values, responsibilities, and emotions in this story.
The Mathematical Framework: Systems of Linear Equations
A system of linear equations consists of two or more equations that must be satisfied simultaneously. For example:
Here, x and y represent variables, while the coefficients
This concept mirrors the narrative arc of Parshat Vayigash. Yosef’s perspective, shaped by his journey and Divine purpose, represents one equation, while Yehdah’s plea, grounded in responsibility and repentance, represents another. Both have their own unique parameters, yet the Torah demands that their paths intersect to achieve harmony.
Yosef’s Equation
Yosef’s trajectory is shaped by years of hardship and Divine intervention. Sold into slavery by his brothers, he rises to become the viceroy of Egypt, using his position to save countless lives during a devastating famine. His equation includes parameters such as forgiveness, hidden identity, and the fulfillment of his prophetic dreams. Yosef operates with a long view of history, understanding that his suffering was part of a Divine plan to ensure the survival of his family.
In mathematical terms, Yosef’s line reflects a higher-level perspective. His decisions are calculated, testing his brothers to see if they have truly changed. He places Benjamin in a position of vulnerability, forcing his brothers to confront their past actions and demonstrate growth.
Yehudah’s Equation
Yehudah’s line, meanwhile, is rooted in loyalty, repentance, and self-sacrifice. Once a key player in the sale of Yosef, Yehudah now steps forward as the family’s moral leader. His heartfelt plea to protect Benjamin, even offering himself as a slave in his brother’s place, demonstrates a profound transformation. Yehudah’s parameters include responsibility for his actions, a commitment to his father Yakov, and a willingness to endure personal suffering for the sake of his family’s unity.
Yehudah’s line represents a grounded, immediate perspective. He is not thinking about grand plans or Divine foresight; he is focused on the here and now, ensuring Benjamin’s safety and preserving his father’s fragile spirit.
Solving the System
The brilliance of Parshat Vayigash lies in how these two “lines” converge. Yosef and Yehudah begin from vastly different places: Yosef with his concealed identity and tests, and Yehudah with his guilt and earnestness. Through their charged interaction, each adjusts their position, mirroring the process of manipulating equations to find a solution.
Yosef’s eventual revelation — “I am Yosef” — is the moment when the system resolves. At this point, all conditions are satisfied: Yosef’s need to confirm his brothers’ repentance, Yehudah’s commitment to his family’s well-being, and the overarching Divine plan to reunite Yakov’s children.
The solution to the system is a point of harmony where all variables align. The family’s unity is restored, not by erasing their differences, but by finding a resolution that respects and incorporates each perspective.
Lessons from the Formula
The system of linear equations in Parshat Vayigash teaches us profound lessons about reconciliation and harmony. Just as mathematical systems require each equation to maintain its integrity while finding common ground, human relationships thrive when differing perspectives are acknowledged and balanced. The Torah shows us that unity is not about uniformity; it’s about creating a space where all voices can contribute to a shared solution.
The process of solving such a system highlights the importance of adjustments and dialogue. Yosef and Yehudah’s interactions involve testing, negotiation, and moments of vulnerability. The result is a meaningful reconciliation that strengthens their family’s bond.
Conclusion
Parshat Vayigash offers a timeless blueprint for resolving conflicts and building unity. Through the lens of a system of linear equations, we see how Yosef and Yehudah’s distinct trajectories intersect to create a harmonious outcome. Each perspective brings its own parameters, yet the solution honors them all. This mathematical metaphor not only deepens our understanding of the parsha, but also inspires us to seek alignment in our own relationships, finding points of connection where harmony can flourish.
Rochie Gottheil is an analyst by day and creates high school and college math curricula in her spare time. She can be reached at Rochel.desk@gmail.com
The post Deriving Harmony: A ‘Mathematical’ Reading of Parshat Vayigash and the Story of Yosef first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
How Hamas Lies About Israeli Hostages — With the BBC’s Help
The BBC logo is seen at the entrance at Broadcasting House, the BBC headquarters in central London. Photo by Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images/Sipa USA.
On Dec. 17, the BBC News website published a report by Yolande Knell and Rushdi Abualouf headlined “Gaza ceasefire talks in final stage, Palestinian negotiator tells BBC.” Readers of that report were told that:
Of 96 hostages still held in Gaza, 62 are assumed by Israel to still be alive.
As was the case in another BBC report published a week earlier, that portrayal fails to clarify that Hamas also holds two Israeli civilians who entered the Gaza Strip in 2014 and 2015, and the bodies of two soldiers who were killed in 2014.
Readers are also told that Israel’s concern for the security of its civilians is “problematic” and a nod to the “far right”:
According to his spokesman, [Israel’s minister of defence] Katz told members of the Israeli parliament’s foreign affairs committee on Monday: “We have not been this close to an agreement on the hostages since the previous deal,” referring to an exchange of hostages and Palestinian prisoners in Israel in November 2023.
He has since written on X: “My position on Gaza is clear. After we defeat Hamas’s military and governmental power in Gaza, Israel will have security control over Gaza with full freedom of action,” comparing this to the situation in the occupied West Bank.
“We will not allow any terrorist activity against Israeli communities and Israeli citizens from Gaza. We will not allow a return to the reality of before 7 October.”
Such comments are likely to be seen as problematic by negotiators trying to bridge gaps with Hamas. However, in Israel, they are seen as vital to guarantee the support of far-right Israeli cabinet ministers who have previously warned they would not agree to what they have described as a “reckless” deal in Gaza.
In a televised report about the talks which was aired on the BBC News channel on the same day, Rushdi Abualouf (located in Istanbul) told viewers that: [emphasis in italics in the original, emphasis in bold added]
“…also the first stage will allow the dead hostages — the civilian dead hostages — also will be released. So not only alive [sic] hostages but also the people who were killed in the airstrikes and they are civilians…”
With that highlighted statement Abualouf promoted and mainstreamed the long-standing Hamas propaganda whereby any deceased hostages were killed as a result of Israeli actions.
In August we saw that when such claims were shown to be false, the BBC failed to adequately inform its audiences when Hamas murdered six Israeli hostages, including American Hersh Goldberg-Polin.
Among the civilian hostages known to be deceased, are those who were murdered during the October 7 onslaught and their bodies then abducted and taken to the Gaza Strip. They include Idan Shtivi, Judith Weinstein Haggai, Gadi Haggai, Dror Or, Yair Yaakov, Manny Godard, Ilan Weiss, Eitan Levy, Ofra Keidar and two Thai nationals. Additional hostages were kidnapped alive and subsequently died or were murdered while in captivity.
Rushdi Abualouf not only promoted disinformation by claiming that the deceased civilian hostages were “killed in the airstrikes” — he deliberately misled BBC audiences by means of brazen promotion of the Hamas narrative, which is intended to erase its responsibility for the deaths of hostages and place the blame on Israel.
Hadar Sela is the co-editor of CAMERA UK — an affiliate of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA), where a version of this article first appeared.
The post How Hamas Lies About Israeli Hostages — With the BBC’s Help first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login