Henry Kissinger’s World Order asks, if today’s leaders can rise above their own definition of world “order”, to achieve peace and global stability. Especially when the “balance of power” is constantly threatened by anarchy and chaos. The reason Kissinger, makes this his core enquiry, is because it addresses a challenge that the human race faces today, one that it might fear the most- a total global chaos.

Kissinger uses conflict between different nations as the premise to his argument. He does so by looking at the historical experience of different civilizations, even going back to the Dark Ages, as suggested by the subheading of the book. The author begins by defining World Order as “an inexorably expanding cooperative order of states observing common rules and norms, embracing liberal economic systems, forswearing territorial conquest, respecting national sovereignty and adopting participatory and democratic systems of governance”. But in the introduction, the author also lets us know that “No truly global 'world power' has ever existed”. And what is considered to be the 21st century world order, is just a treaty which was devised in western Europe, without taking into consideration, the other countries and civilisations. Towards the end, Kissinger remarks that the leitmotif of our age is science and technology. With countries making huge advances in technology, they consider the security dilemma, before looking at the zero (sum) game analysis. Technology could thus prove to be a deterrent to warfare and lead to a new world order.

The reader thus moves forward, understanding the trajectory of the author. The author then gives a detailed account of various events, and concepts in world history. He does so in an organized manner by going chronologically and regionally, hence making it easier for the reader to follow the map laid down meticulously in the authors writing. The book is filled with different perspectives, including that of Europe, China, USA, Middle East etc. The book explains basic concepts of nation-state and sovereignty via the emergence of the Westphalia treaty. It also explains more complex concepts of hegemony, balance of power (using USA, China as case studies), and anarchy in the way Islamism has threatened world order, by going against the Westphalian Treaty. Kissinger spends quite a few pages on describing the role of the United States, and their contribution to the world order. Kissinger sees the United States as a “ambivalent superpower”, with a big role to play, in the international sphere. A lot of the book also deals with foreign policy, diplomacy etc. and the way in which all of them are connected to each other by geo politics, an extremely important factor in international relations according to Kissinger. An example of this could be India’s role in Asian or Global order “in any of these evolutions, India will be the fulcrum of twenty-first century order: an indispensable element, based on its geography, resources and tradition of sophisticated leadership, in the strategic and ideological evolution of the regions and the concepts of order at whose interaction it stands”
Kissinger also talks a lot more about other countries including Syria, Iraq, Iran, Japan to highlight the countries who are now major players seeking more recognition. Kissinger, while talking about all these countries, advises America to acknowledge “the role of others and with itself”.

Henry A. Kissinger known for his diplomacy, served as a National Security Advisor, followed by Secretary of State in the Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford administration. These posts have made him an authority figure, which is in a position to “Reflect on the Character of Nations and the Course of History”. Kissinger also received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1973, for his actions negotiating the US withdrawal from Vietnam.
Through out his works (On China and Diplomacy, being the most popular), Kissinger is seen to be using a philosophical approach similar to realism or Machiavellian. Kissinger places importance on the State, because its history is said to have a synchronous role, in the sense that the past is embodied in, and it influences the present. Thus making it easier to draw parallels. However in the book, Kissinger derives a normative sense of history of international order and the role of statecraft. On its basis he is able to prescribe the need for a new world order.

While the concept of creating a new world order is not a new one, Kissinger redefines the existing theory, by bringing something new to the field of foreign policy. This is the importance of technology in framing foreign policy and implementing diplomacy. According to Kissinger technology has the capability to deter war and help in the transmission of information, which is essential to create global stability.

While Kissinger is complimented for the way he carried out his job, critics have had something to say about his role in diplomacy, and the way he put across certain facts of history. A real life example of this would be his role in during the 1971 India-Pakistan war. In the name of maintaining foreign relations and looking at his countries self interest, Kissinger ignored the detailed report of the killing from Archer Blood.

In the book too, even when Kissinger writes about various situations, it is addressed to the United States, in a way, which would promote the interests of the Americans. This can be seen in his description of the Iran Nuclear Programme, and how if the situation doesn’t change, the USA could face danger in future. Kissinger does not provide a lot of explanation about the various wars USA has entered, while being considered the crusaders of the Westphalian treaty.
What can be assumed here is that, a country even while propagating world order, will want to look at national interest of the country. Kissinger can be seen agreeing to this principle. He uses the quote of India’s first Prime Minister- Jawaharlal Nehru (this speech argues that India’s foreign policy would be based on India’s national interest, and not international amity).
“Whatever policy you may lay down, the art of conduction foreign affairs of a country, lies in finding out what is most advantageous to the country, we may talk about international goodwill and mean what we say. But in the ultimate analysis, a government functions for the good of the country it governs and no government dare do anything which in the short run or long run manifestly to the disadvantage of the country.” Kissinger adds his own remarks by saying that “Kautilya (and Machiavelli) could not have said it better”.

Another criticism would be the lack of attention the author has given to Africa, South America and Australia. When the author seems hesitant to acknowledge three of the seven continents, one would agree that the reader is not able to gain complete knowledge on a global concept such as World Order. These continents are definitely undergoing a lot of development, and should be to the reader’s attention.

So while some readers argue that Kissinger fails to write more about current situations, as one reads along that disappoint fades, when the reader is able to grasp the wide berth of knowledge the author is actually providing. What Kissinger is essentially trying to convey is the need to prevent total global chaos, and for this he provides a prescription by illuminating the need for a new world order. Kissinger thinks this to be achievable, if the whole world tries to go after it. If this is possible it practicality is something to be seen, especially with emerging powers coming up, to disturb the current unipolarity and balance of powers.

With everything said, one can still say that world power is an important book to read, as it highlights the concepts of order, “which have most shaped the evolution of the modern era”. It also elucidates the need to understand history, and use it as a yard scale to gauge the events of the past and use it in the present, so that the world can strive for a universal future.