Professional Documents
Culture Documents
David Ignatius
Associate Editor and Columnist
The Washington Post
© 2008 The German Marshall Fund of the United States. All rights reserved.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without permission
in writing from the German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF). Please direct inquiries to:
About GMF
The German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF) is a non-partisan American public policy and grant-
making institution dedicated to promoting greater cooperation and understanding between the United States
and Europe.
GMF does this by supporting individuals and institutions working on transatlantic issues, by convening leaders
to discuss the most pressing transatlantic themes, and by examining ways in which transatlantic cooperation can
address a variety of global policy challenges. In addition, GMF supports a number of initiatives to strengthen
democracies.
Founded in 1972 through a gift from Germany as a permanent memorial to Marshall Plan assistance, GMF
maintains a strong presence on both sides of the Atlantic. In addition to its headquarters in Washington, DC,
GMF has seven offices in Europe: Berlin, Bratislava, Paris, Brussels, Belgrade, Ankara, and Bucharest.
March 2008
David Ignatius
Associate Editor and Columnist
The Washington Post
When former U.S. Secretary of State Henry of 1789 in its destabilizing effects—and in the
Kissinger submitted his doctoral dissertation to need it created for a new balance of power.
Harvard University in May 1954, he pondered Each event set loose powerful shock waves that
a problem that has an unlikely resonance undermined the stability of neighboring states,
more than 50 years later: How can a stable and indeed, challenged their very legitimacy. Each
and legitimate security system be established inaugurated an era in which mobilization of the
following the rise of a revolutionary state that masses, through emotional, ideological, or religious
has disrupted the previous balance of power? In appeals, had a transforming effect on their regions.
this dissertation—published later under the title: Each introduced a revolutionary challenge to
A World Restored: Metternich, Castlereagh and the prevailing balance in regional security. Each
the Problem of Peace, 1812–1822 — Kissinger launched other revolutionary movements that,
examined the construction of a new security order though they appeared to be competitors, were really
in Europe after violent disruptions of the French aftershocks—the rise of Prussia was arguably such
Revolution and the subsequent Napoleonic wars. an event in Europe and the rise of Al-Qaeda was
certainly such an event in the Islamic Middle East.
The hero of Kissinger’s tale was the Austrian And each prompted what might be called “wars
chancellor, Count Clemens von Metternich, who of containment”—attempts by the neighboring
skillfully (and sometimes deviously) engineered status quo powers to contain the revolutions’
the Congress of Vienna in 1815 that created a disruptive impact outside their home borders.
new European security architecture that kept These comparisons are obviously not precise—the
the peace, more or less without interruption, for growth of the Prussian state and the emergence of
nearly a century. Kissinger quotes Metternich’s own Al-Qaeda terrorism are radically different events.
assessment of this transition from the tumult of But each phenomenon was linked to the disruption
revolutionary Europe to an orderly continent where of the status quo by a revolutionary power.
stable relations between states were once more
the norm: “We have relapsed again into an epoch In A World Restored, Kissinger offered a description
where a thousand small calculations and petty of a revolutionary power that is hauntingly
opinions form the history of the day. The sea is still appropriate for contemporary Iran. “Whenever
tumultuous at times, but only from passing storms.” there exists a power which considers the
international order or the manner of legitimizing
At the time of Kissinger’s writing, the analogy it oppressive, relations between it and other
he had in mind for this 19th century diplomatic powers will be revolutionary,” Kissinger wrote. He
history was the confrontation between the United warned that status quo powers make the mistake
States and an expansionist, Napoleonic Soviet of assuming the revolutionary power can be easily
Union—in what he called “an age faced with contained or bought off: “Lulled by a period of
the threat of thermonuclear extinction.” But we stability which had seemed permanent, they find it
can apply a similar analysis to the great security nearly impossible to take at face value the assertion
challenge of the first decade of the 21st century— of the revolutionary power that it means to smash
the instability in the Middle East posed by a state the existing framework. The defenders of the
born in revolution, the Islamic Republic of Iran. status quo therefore tend to begin by treating the
I will argue in this paper that the Iranian revolution revolutionary power as if its protestations were
of 1979 can be compared to the French revolution merely fanciful; as if it really accepted the existing
Though we live today in what is sometimes By analogy, one can argue that a defeat for the
described as a “unipolar” world of one superpower, Iranian revolution is the requirement for a workable
As Kissinger explains, the diplomatic bargaining A similar identity of interests would seem to
that preceded the 1815 Congress of Vienna, exist in the larger arena of strategic relations in
Britain and Austria were essentially status quo the Persian Gulf. Any stable system will have to
powers; they wanted to restore a measure of the accommodate the reality of Iranian power—for
old, pre-revolutionary order. Russia and Prussia a rising Iran is simply a fact of life in that part of
were “acquisitive” powers that wanted to digest the the world. But if the United States and its allies
gains they had achieved from Napoleon’s defeat. must accept an Iranian role in the regional balance
The essential element in the new equilibrium was so, too, must Iran accept a continuing American
that France renounced influence outside its own security role there. Even after setbacks in Iraq, the
borders. Russia’s ambitions in Poland were satisfied United States retains immense power in the Gulf.
by an arrangement that created a Kingdom of The Iranians will not achieve their strategic goals
Poland under the hegemony of the Tsar of Russia. until they accept and accommodate this fact.
As for Prussia, its hope of annexing Saxony was
partially met; it obtained two-thirds of Saxony, plus A final lesson of this study in Metternich-Kissinger
Pomerania, plus the Duchy of Westphalia. In other realism is that if the conditions do not exist for a
words, each of the players got some of what they genuine peace that recognizes and accommodates
wanted, but nobody got all of what they wanted. the mutual interests of both the revolutionary and
status quo powers, then the only sound alternative
Kissinger applied this bargaining approach most is containment of the revolutionary power until
effectively in his famous opening to China. One times are more propitious for settlement. To quote
can now study the once-secret memoranda of Kissinger again, “whenever peace—conceived as
conversation from his 1971 and 1972 meetings