Is George Frost Kennan the greatest diplomat in recorded history?
Sorry, gonna have to be Talleyrand.
Metternich, Bismarck or Talleyrand
>>1163893
clearly this. Was Kennan the best American though?
>>1164023
>implying a communist would name Metternich
>>1163820
genghis khan
>>1164023
Communists would say Molotov.
I think diplomats are generally underappreciated.
"War might not always be evil, peace might not always be good. There is peace behind the walls of a prison, if you like that."
"It is an undeniable privilege of every man to prove himself right in the thesis that the world is his enemy; for if he reiterates it frequently enough and makes it the background of his conduct he is bound eventually to be right."
>>1164004
Who would his competitors be? Benjamin Franklin?
Where can I get nice pdf books about Talyrand.
>>1164476
How could I forget
Kissinger was better at diplomacy, but Kennan was far more influential
>>1164476
I just read a book by kissinger. I have no idea how that flew over my head. You're right.
>>1163893
>Bismarck
>the man who personally alienated Russia to the point it took a secret treaty to keep them from busting in Germany's backdoor
>greatest diplomat
Fuck that. Blame Willy all you want, but Bismarck is the one that fucked up Germany's diplomatic situation.
>>1166969
could you explain more?
>>1168909
Despite the praise Bismarck gets for being a deft negotiator and cunning diplomat, he really isolated Germany even before Wilhelm took the throne. His negotiation between Russia and Austria over the Balkans directly led to the disbandment of the League of Three Emperors and Russia immediately became wary of Germany and thus Bismarck had to strike a secret non-aggression pact with Russia. His policy of expansion on the continent was a giant red flag to Britain who claimed hegemony over it and wanted to ensure a balance of power. The formation of Germany through Bismarck did the exact opposite of that. Bismarck was supposedly against the annexation of Elsass-Lothringen, but in reality, if he had been against it, it would have never happened as Bismarck had the final say in everything that happened in Germany as Chancellor. The same goes for Germany's colonialism. Wilhelm and von Bulow often get slammed for Germany's colonialism, but Wilhelm didn't take the throne until 1888 and Bismarck was happily signing colonial charters as early as the 1884 and he almost signed a colonial charter for Prussia in Guatemala during the 1860's before Britain and France blocked the move. Granted, Prussia had city colonies in Guatemala at the time and directly caused the ousting of Belgian colonial cities in the territory, but it almost came an entire colonial state of Prussia. As you can see, Germany's diplomatic situation was a fucking mess before Wilhelm even ascended the throne. Wilhelm definitely didn't help the situation, but the diplomatic situation he inherited was fucked from the get go.
>>1164030
Or Bismark, for that matter. Not exactly a foaming revolutionary.
ibn khaldun
>>1169065
can you really blame him for the formation of Germany though? seems like you're saying diplomat at least in part because of the alienation of Britain over formation of Germany...but there's no way to get around that except not forming Germany, right? In which case it's a question of priorities not a failure as a diplomat.
The rest of your criticism seems valid, though, thank you. I don't know much about this era so it's very interesting.
About Alsace-Lorraine--did he have domestic political concerns he was catering to? Why did he end up going for it then?
>nobody has mentioned Eban yet
I'd also second Talleyrand, Bismarck and Kissinger though, plus Zhou Enlai should also get a mention.
>>1163893
>Talleyrand
a degenerate traitor
>ctrl+f
>no Disraeli
stupid goy
>>1171742
Counting heads of state is cheating. Might as well throw in Churchill, Caesar, Putin and the rest while you're at it.
>>1164044
Fascists would say Ribbentrop
