Leadership: Six Studies in World Strategy

None of Kissinger’s chosen case studies stayed in power past 1990, a year generally associated with the end of the Cold War. Are they still the best sources of wisdom for the post–Cold War world, if none of them actually governed in that world? Why or why not?

Kissinger’s focus on individuals reflects his belief that great leaders really are the prime movers of history. Do you think that he pays insufficient attention to structural forces? If so, explain how they might compel the actors involved to behave in particular ways. If not, expanding on Kissinger’s own justifications, explain why individuals should be the prime focus.

Kissinger often mentions how he was able to meet, and in many cases work with, each of the figures in his case studies. How does his personal involvement enhance his account of these individuals?

Among all the leaders profiled, who do you think is Kissinger’s favorite? Setting aside his personal relationships, such as his friendship with Nixon, who do you think in his view was the most effective leader?

Why do you think that Kissinger chose all leaders who were, broadly speaking, conservative? Does that reflect Kissinger’s own political bias, or is there an argument that the conservative politician exemplifies a particularly useful model of leadership?

Who do you think was the most effective leader profiled in this volume? Who was the least effective? Explain your reasoning for each.

Kissinger addresses Lee Kuan Yew’s decidedly undemocratic form of rule, but ultimately defends it as appropriate to the time and place. Do you accept his account of Lee’s sometimes harsh methods? Does Kissinger’s reverence for powerful individuals make him overly liable to praising autocrats? Why or why not?

How do you assess Kissinger’s concluding arguments that the main problem in the present day is a lack of civic virtue? Do you in fact agree that there is a dearth of leadership, and if so, would you suggest any alternative causes?