meetings—withoutresult,true,butalsowithoutdebacleorcontroversy.Nixon,
likeme,whilenotindifferenttothehallowedagenda,sawanopportunityin
WarsawtoconveyanewandmoresignificantmessagetoChina.Noneofthe
agendasubjectswascapableofbeingdefined,muchlesssolved,solongasPeking
consideredtheUnitedStatesitsprincipalforeignenemyandWashingtonviewed
ChinaasthefountofallaggressionandrevolutionaryactivityinAsia,includingin
Vietnam.
FortwentyyearsUSpolicymakersconsideredChinaasabrooding,chaotic,
fanatical,andalienrealmdifficulttocomprehendandimpossibletosway.They
hadbeenconvincedthattheVietnamwarwasareflectionofChinese
expansionism,andthattheCulturalRevolutionderivedfromanobsessionwith
ideologicalpurityalien,andnotalittlefrightening,totheAmerican
temperament.TheChinese,fortheirpart,sawthescaleofoureffortinVietnam
asdisproportionatetoanyobjectivetobeachieved,andhencebelieveditsonly
rationalpurposecouldbetoturnIndochinaintoaspringboardforaneventual
assaultonChina.Thesetwentyyearsofdeadlock—reflectingsincerelyheld
views—hadblindedourexperts,andnodoubttheiroppositenumbersinthe
People’sRepublic,toavitalchange:anemerging,stillonlydimlyperceived
communityofinterestbetweentheUnitedStatesandChina.Theleadersintwo
countrieshadbegun,forthefirsttimeinageneration,toregardeachotherin
geopoliticalratherthanideologicalterms.
ImpelledbytheobviousmenaceoftheSovietbuilduponthe4,000‐mile
commonborder,Chinawantedtoreducethenumberofitsadversariesandto
obtainanothercounterweighttoSovietpressure.Burdenedbythetraumasof
Vietnam,yetdeterminedtoshapeaneweraofinternationalrelations,theNixon
Administrationwasconvincedthatcontactwiththisonequarterofhumanity
couldrestorenewperspectivetoourdiplomacy.Bothpartieshadtotreadwarily,
feelingtheirwaytowardeachotherwithsignificantbuttenuousmessagesand
gestures,whichcouldbedisavowedifrejected.Itwasperhapsnotsurprisingthat
thesubtlechangesbywhichtheChinesesignaledtheirwillingnesstoaltercourse
hadbeenoverlookedbyourexperts;andtheissuehadbeenconfusedbythe
well‐meaningbutwoollyeffortsof“Chinesefriendship”groupsinAmerica.
Toomanyofthembasedtheirviewsonabstractnotionsofpersonal
“goodwill,”orevenhistoricalguilt,difficultforpolicymakerstoreconcilewiththe