“The Trial Of Henry Kissinger” – Book Review

During my winter vacation, I had a chance to read another work by Christopher Hitchens, “The Trial Of Henry Kissinger”.

One of the things I’ve always admired about Hitchens is that his approach is like that of a pit bull if you have the misfortune of showing up on his radar.  However, as much misfortune as it may be for his target, it inevitably proves to be serendipity for the rest of us.  He is simultaneously entertaining, edifying and horrifying with various and sundry tales of his object of revulsion – in this case, of course, Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of State under President Richard Nixon.  Having seen the Trump impeachment and learning of his past misdeeds, reading this seemed truly timely indeed. 

This book was initially published back in the Spring of 2001.  Why did Hitchens choose to write this tome?  Basically, he felt as though the United States was being somewhat hypocritical in that while it condemned world leaders of other countries for having either committed war crimes or crimes against humanity, it really need look no further to find such a villain among its own ranks.  Kissinger, Hitchens believed, should have been brought up against a tribunal at The Hague for actions taken during the U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War.  If no such trial would be forthcoming, Hitchens reasoned, then he would conduct his own in the form of a book where he would lay out the variegated allegations and accusations.

Chile resistance fighters were supplied with “sterile” arms by the U.S. – this means that the arms had no serial numbers and as a result, could not be traced back to the Nixon Administration.  Kissinger did this because he wanted its leader, Allende, out of office – despite having won a democratically-held election where he won by a slim plurality.  His reasoning for this was that Allende held strongly leftist views which, Kissinger reasoned, would completely destabilize the region and significantly harm relations with the U.S..  

Kissinger, it turns out, was also supporting a Bengali genocide in Bangladesh, which was being conducted by the primarily Muslim Pakistan.  Here, the State Department conducted what was referred to as a “Two-Track Diplomacy”, meaning that Ambassadors and Diplomats would conduct one track while the CIA would pursue a second track, which was counter to the first track; this was often done without knowledge by the Ambassadors.  The CIA’s murderous participation was nothing short of appalling.      

After citing Kissinger’s influence and antics in Indochina, Bangladesh and Chile, Hitchens spends Chapter 7 detailing about how a coup was allowed to happen on the island of Cyprus.  The strategy here was to allow the land to be used as a battlefield by Greece and Turkey to fight for its control.  The island was inhabited by both Greeks and Turks, but the overwhelming majority was Greek.   

Hitchens’ writing, as always, is top notch.  Unsurprisingly, his word choice – including and especially with respect to adjectives – is consistently perfect.  If there is one criticism, it is this:  Hitchens does an impeccable job of research – but it may be too good.  In fact, he’s so thorough that the material is densely packed with so many facts that it’s hard to process all of this information in the first reading.  This, however, is also typical of Hitchens’ writing style, if you are already familiar with his other work.    

“I Was Home, But…” – Movie Review

This week at Lincoln Center, I attended a sneak preview of the new German drama by Angela Schanelec, “I Was Home, But …”

Synopsis

A single mother struggles to raise her children alone while moving on with her life.

Story

Two years after her husband’s death, Astrid (Maren Eggert) is struggling to raise her teenage son and young daughter all by herself.  The stress has gotten so bad for her that even some of the more mundane things in life become increasingly challenging.  She’s having a hard time holding it all together for herself and for the kids.  Still, Astrid tries to plod along, even attempting to finally find a new romantic interest in her life.  But friends and co-workers are soon to grow tired of her moods and she finds herself increasingly isolated.

Meanwhile, her son is having problems of his own.  After disappearing for a few days, he finally returns home, but by now is quite ill.  Astrid takes him to the doctor; following an examination and some tests, it is determined that the boy has sepsis and he will require surgery in order to amputate his toe.  In addition, his teachers are debating whether or not to have him expelled and Astrid is forced to defend his right to stay in school.  All the while, Astrid’s daughter is receiving the brunt of her anger as Astrid’s frustrations are getting the best of her.

Astrid sees an advertisement about a used bicycle that is for sale by the owner for 80 euros.  She meets him to discuss the bike and takes it for a test ride and agrees to make the purchase.  After paying to replace the seat, she uses the bicycle to ride all about town but soon thereafter finds the bike to be defective.  Astrid returns the bicycle to its previous owner and demands her money back; instead, he counters by offering to fix the bike himself.  Concerned that she will have to keep coming back every so often to get it repaired, she relents and insists on getting the 80 euros. 

Review

If it could be possible for a movie to be characterized as schizophrenic, then that would be an apt diagnosis for “I Was Home, But … “.  As a matter of fact, one might want to toss in a side of Attention Deficit Disorder just for good measure.  The Synopsis of this review was hard to write because it’s a bit of a challenge to make head or tail out of what’s going on here; as a result, the Synopsis above was basically something of an amalgam of various other descriptions that have been published online.  That said, make of it what you will. 

Beware when someone describes a movie as being “elliptical”; it’s a sure sign that there’s plenty of trouble ahead – at least from the standpoint of how it will be experienced by an average viewer.  While it may be true that there is a certain smug and pretentious group that would laud such a film with cringe-worthy platitudes, such pseudointellectuals merely want to make the hoi polloi feel culturally inferior. As an example, Schanelec won Best Director at The Berlin International Film Festival for “I Was Home, But …”.  Also, if you haven’t done so already, check the motion picture’s rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

Following the screening, there was an interview with the director, who also wrote the screenplay (such as it is).  To be quite blunt, Schanelec appeared to have trouble answering some specific and reasonable questions from the audience, such as one about the Foley work that was clearly done on the movie.  At first, it appeared that she was uncomfortable speaking in English, but then she would speak rather eloquently about her past as an actress.  So, it’s difficult to understand why some softball questions weren’t given the courtesy of a response.