During a phone interview with FNC anchor Megyn Kelly, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, who already voiced disapproval of Barack Obama's attempt to suggest that Kissinger would agree with his intention to meet personally with Iranian President Ahmadinejad, on Saturday elaborated on his disagreement with Obama, and clarified his views on how America should negotiate with Iran. The segment began with a soundbite of Obama from the debate trying to lecture McCain about Kissinger’s views. Obama: "Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who’s one of his advisors, who, along with five recent Secretaries of State, just said that we should meet with Iran, guess what, ‘without precondition.’ This is one of your own advisors."
Asked by Kelly if he supported having a President "meet with Ahmadinejad without preconditions," Kissinger responded: "No, I don’t. I have argued that, at some point, negotiations with Iran are important. But it is my view that they should be on the working level, and that the President should not be involved until we know that we are close to an agreement, or that we know what the nature of the agreement is." Kelly soon sought clarification: "So, in other words, you favor negotiations at the lower level, perhaps all the way up to the Secretary of State, but you do not believe an American President should sit down without preconditions, as Barack Obama says he would like to do." Kissinger: "That is correct."
Kissinger later expanded on his reasoning: "It has to be at a level in which one can test the various issues that are raised by such an effort. And if you start with the President, then that – Presidents and generals should not be the first negotiators because if a negotiation at that level fails, you really have no other recourse, and it would be in the conditions of a country that has declared America as the principle enemy, to start at that level would be to legitimize their conduct over a whole period of time."
The former Secretary of State ended up voicing direct agreement with McCain’s position, and tied in President Nixon’s approach to dealing with China: "I think McCain is right, and I think that it is unwise to sit down with Ahmadinejad. If Iran really wants to negotiate with us, they will find a negotiator who has the prospect of achieving something that needs to be done. And, secondly, if progress is to be made, there have to be a lot of exchanges at other levels. Before Mao and Nixon sat down, there were two years of exchanges at lower levels."
Below is a complete transcript of the interview which aired on Fox News Channel at about 5:15 p.m. on Saturday, September 27:
BARACK OBAMA: Senator McCain mentioned Henry Kissinger, who’s one of his advisors, who, along with five recent Secretaries of State, just said that we should meet with Iran, guess what, "without precondition." This is one of your own advisors.
JOHN MCCAIN: Dr. Kissinger did not say that he would approve of face-to-face meetings between the President of the United States and the President, and Ahmadinejad. He did not say that.
MEGYN KELLY: The candidates sparring last night over whether a United States President should sit down without preconditions with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. It is something that Barack Obama wants to do and something McCain says is not only naive, it’s downright dangerous. Each man claiming that Kissinger supports his position. So what’s the truth? Well, joining me now, on the phone, is former Secretary of State to Presidents Nixon and Ford, Dr. Henry Kissinger. Mr. Secretary, good evening to you.
HENRY KISSINGER, FORMER SECRETARY OF STATE: Nice to talk to you.
KELLY: Nice to have you here. All right, so what is the truth? Do you support the notion of an American President sitting down with Ahmadinejad without preconditions?
KISSINGER: No, I don’t. I have argued that, at some point, negotiations with Iran are important. But it is my view that they should be on the working level, and that the President should not be involved until we know that we are close to an agreement, or that we know what the nature of the agreement is.
KELLY: So, in other words, you favor negotiations at the lower level, perhaps all the way up to the Secretary of State, but you do not believe an American President should sit down without preconditions, as Barack Obama says he would like to do.
KISSINGER: That is correct.
KELLY: What is the danger in having a President do that?
KISSINGER: First of all, we have to understand that if Iran acquires nuclear weapons, that will be a dramatic change in the situation in the most explosive region of the world today in the Middle East. It will give Iran a capability to protect [UNINTELLIGIBLE] ... with a set of nuclear weapons, and it will demonstrate that the opinion of the United Nations Security Council, which asked Iran to desist from building nuclear weapons, has been totally ignored, and therefore it would start an arms race for nuclear weapons in that region. A whole number of countries have declared that nuclear weapons in Iran are unacceptable. So what we need is a definition of what we mean by "unacceptable," and what we’re going to do if diplomacy does not succeed. It’s in this context that I believe negotiations should be conducted to demonstrate either that we can achieve what we define as unacceptable, or that other measures have to be taken. But in order to do this, it has to be at a level in which one can test the various issues that are raised by such an effort. And if you start with the President, then that – Presidents and generals should not be the first negotiators because if a negotiation at that level fails, you really have no other recourse, and it would be in the conditions of a country that has declared America as the principle enemies, to start at that level would be to legitimize their conduct over a whole period of time.
KELLY: And let me ask you, Mr. Secretary, one of the things John McCain says is that it would legitimize Ahmadinejad in the eyes of the world. In other words, you give this man who says Israel should be wiped off the face of the map legitimacy by even having that sort of photo-op with him. What are your thoughts on it?
KISSINGER: I think McCain is right, and I think that it is unwise to sit down with Ahmadinejad. If Iran really wants to negotiate with us, they will find a negotiator who has the prospect of achieving something that needs to be done. And, secondly, if progress is to be made, there have to be a lot of exchanges at other levels. Before Mao and Nixon sat down, there were two years of exchanges at lower levels.
KELLY: Understood. And the candidates are at issue on that and many other items. Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, always a pleasure. Thank you so much for coming on, setting the record straight. We appreciate it.
—Brad Wilmouth is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
KISSINGER!
September 28, 2008 - 01:17 ET by i b squidlyI've nothing good to say of this Rockefeller protege. Certainly I'd not use him as authority for anything. Unless you want Entante with russkies, want to trade shabby uniforms with the ayatollas for hostages and whatever else this flatulent miscreant offers. KISSINGER & Assoc are an abominatation.
First, kill all the lawyers.
-Wlm Shakespear
huh?
September 28, 2008 - 01:22 ET by wdhorningFunny, he had a lot to do with easing relations between the USA and China.
How's that working out?
September 28, 2008 - 07:21 ET by WingletDriverChina is as despicable a nation as they were under Mao. The biggest difference is that we've supported their economic growth to the point of them being the largest economy in the world. They've had tremendous economic success but no political reform to go along with it. Their own people are still utterly repressed and China plays the foil in the UN all the time to the US. We've definitely come out on the losing end in this.
Kissinger wanted to bolster relations with them as a wedge against the USSR and live in "peaceful coexistence." Reagan wanted to defeat the USSR.
You have never been to China have you?
September 28, 2008 - 08:01 ET by richb313It is easy sitting in your room and pontificating on a subject you seem to know something about, but have you ever been to China? I have worked overseas most my adult life. China is just one of several countries I have worked in. I do not argue with you about the Chinese Govt. Remember this, when Dr Kissinger went to China to negotiate it was a completely isolated country. We in the outside world knew nothing of went on in thier country. China is a lot more open now. The benifits to the Chinese people are easy to see. Also remember that the supporters of the Tienamen Square demonstraters are getting to an age where they will be taking over several key positions in the Government in the near future.
Actually, I've been to China several times
September 28, 2008 - 08:15 ET by WingletDriverI've been to Beijing, Xian Yang, Shanghai and Hong Kong (kinda undercuts your argument that I don't understand it if I haven't seen it).
"The benifits to the Chinese people are easy to see." Yeah, like forced abortion and sterilization, no right to religion, press or free speech, forced labor camps, having your children taken from you because they are great gymnasts, harvesting organs, rampant pollution, etc. I'm sure their oil contracts with the Sudan and their state-controlled undervalued currency are a big help, too.
Obama lies frequently.
September 28, 2008 - 01:21 ET by wdhorningObama, the liar, had a fire, now its been quenched.
He sucks at prose, see his big nose, now he's been benched.
Well, that's OK, the point
September 28, 2008 - 05:23 ET by motherbeltWell, that's OK, the point was made.
Most of the people who heard his lie in the debate won't get the news that Kissinger refuted it. Especially if only FNC is reporting it; since his supporters wouldn't be caught dead watching Fox.
Stick It
September 28, 2008 - 08:04 ET by kilrodI would like to see this interview etched in stone and stuck sideways up "cattie katies" big fat arse!!!
(GRINS) kilrod
Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier
Kissinger
September 28, 2008 - 10:55 ET by jaywlI am sure Kissinger is not only correct on this, but that this statement accurately portrays his position despite what Obama said. On the other hand, the old dog Henry would probably tell Megan Kelly anything he thought she wanted to hear!