Fritz Kraemer SECURITY

Hubertus Hoffmann
True Keeper of the Holy Flame

The Legacy of Pentagon Strategist
and Mentor Dr Fritz Kraemer
Stories told by Henry A. Kissinger, Alexander M. Haig Jr., Edward L. Rowny,

Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul D. Wolfowitz, Madeleine Kraemer Bryant, Wilhelm-Karl
Prinz von Preussen, Klaus Naumann, Friedrich Merz, Henning-Hubertus Baron
von Steuben, Joseph E. Schmitz, Herman Kahn, Vernon A. Walters and friends

The Legacy of Pentagon Strategist and Mentor Dr Fritz Kraemer
Hubertus Hoffmann

Stories told by Henry A. Kissinger, Alexander M. Haig Jr.,

Edward L. Rowny, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul D. Wolfowitz,
Madeleine Kraemer Bryant, Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von

P
reussen, Klaus Naumann, Henning-Hubertus Baron von
S
teuben, Joseph E. Schmitz, Herman Kahn, Friedrich Merz,
Vernon A. Walters and friends
A World Security Network Foundation Publication

LondonBerlin 2012
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number: 2012931874
ISBN: 978-3-9812110-5-4
Published in 2012 by the World Security Network Foundation (LondonBerlin; www.worldsecuritynetwork.com)
in cooperation with Verlag Inspiration Un Limited (Publisher Konrad Badenheuer) LondonBerlin.
More information in www.worldsecuritynetwork.com/fritzkraemer.
This book is dedicated to five extraordinary men who in my youth were strong
influences and generously gave me support along the walk of life:
Georg-Gnther Hoffmann (19182003), my father, patriot from Silesia and a
committed Reserve Officer.
Johannes Steinhoff (19131994), a Luftwaffe ace fighter pilot in WWII with
176 victories, from 19661970 Chief of Staff Luftwaffe German Federal
Armed Forces and Chairman of NATOs Military Committee (19711974).
Prof Dr Karl Dietrich Bracher, former director of the Institute for Political Science
at the University of Bonn in Germany and my doctoral supervisor.
Alphons Horten (19072003), entrepreneur and CDU member of the German
Bundestag from 19651972.
and
Dr Fritz Kraemer (19082003), my mentor from 1979 to 2003, Missionary
and Pentagon Strategist.
Dr Hubertus Hoffmann
Table of Contents
Preface: The True Keeper of the Holy Flame by Hubertus Hoffmann
11
The Prophet and the Policymaker by Henry A. Kissinger
15
Fritz G.A. KraemerMissionary, Mentor and Pentagon Strategist by Hubertus Hoffmann
20
Mentoring and Tutoring Dr Kraemer Style by Hubertus Hoffmann
22
Provocative Weakness by Fritz Kraemer
46
Jewish Roots and Drama in Germanyfrom the Kaiser to Hitler by Hubertus Hoffmann
50
Infamous Conspiracy Theory by Hubertus Hoffmann
70
The Woman behind the Man by Madeleine Kraemer Bryant
72
Personality Plays a Decisive Role by Fritz Kraemer
74
A Daughters Impressions by Madeleine Kraemer Bryant
76
Enhance Patriotism and Overcome Provocative Weakness by Klaus Naumann
82
A Man of the Performance Elite by Friedrich Merz
86
You Have to Struggle against Evil by Paul Wolfowitz
88
Godfather of the Neocons? by Hubertus Hoffmann
90
Character Counts, not Position and Title by Fritz Kraemer
98
On ElitismLook for Men and Women of Excellence! by Fritz Kraemer
104
I am a Missionary! by Fritz Kraemer
120
An Admirer of General MacArthur and General Patton by Fritz Kraemer
122
Tactics or Conviction, Power or Influence by Fritz Kraemer
124
The Key Question: Whose Spirit Animates the Machine? by Fritz Kraemer
126
Mass Societies by Fritz Kraemer
128
Independence as Goal by Fritz Kraemer
130
The Swiss Mountainscape Around Me by Fritz Kraemer
132
The Overestimation of Intelligence and Brilliancy by Fritz Kraemer
134
Dr Kraemer: The True Dr Strangelove? by Hubertus Hoffmann
138
Absolute and Metaphysical Values by Fritz Kraemer
148
On Science and Faith by Britta Bjorkander Kraemer
149
Spiritual Destitution, Soulless Societies, Relative Truths by Fritz Kraemer
150
Devouring Information by Henry Kissinger and Fritz Kraemer
156
Relativism in Modern Societies by Fritz Kraemer
158
The True Keeper of the Holy Flame in the Pentagon by Donald Rumsfeld
162
Grand Strategist in the Pentagon by Edward L. Rowny
164
A Medieval Knight in the 20th Century by Leslie Upton
170
Dr Kraemers Soft Power Elements of Peace-making by Hubertus Hoffmann
172
De- and Re-GenerationBourgeois America by Fritz Kraemer
184
Power is not a Privilege but an Obligation by Fritz Kraemer
186
U.S. Generals by Fritz Kraemer
188
How Fritz Kraemer Discovered Alexander Haig by Fritz Kraemer
190
7
The Importance of the Nations Elite in Pursuing and Advancing the Values of a Free Society
by Alexander M. Haig Jr.
194
What it Means to be an American Soldier by Fritz Kraemer
196
Nothing is Possible without Power by Fritz Kraemer
198
Washington behind Closed Doors by Fritz Kraemer
202
Fighting the Cold War from the Pentagon by Hubertus Hoffmann
204
How We Won the Cold War: A Contest of Will and Strength by Fritz Kraemer
218
A Diplomat Often Lacks a Sense of Reality by Fritz Kraemer
220
U.S. PowerWe Have to Shape Reality by Fritz Kraemer
224
9/11 by Fritz Kraemer
226
When a Bourgeois Society becomes Powerless by Fritz Kraemer
228
Modern Man is Not Only a Homo Economicus by Fritz Kraemer
230
In Memory of Jay Lovestonea Convinced Trade Unionist of AFL-CIO by Fritz Kraemer
232
We, the Bourgeois People by Fritz Kraemer
236
The Greatest Threat to the World: Moral Relativism by Fritz Kraemer
238
Why Kraemer and Kissinger Split by Hubertus Hoffmann
240
Fritz Kraemer as an Aristocrat in the Pentagon by Herman Kahn
252
A Man of Unshakeable Selflessness by Vernon A. Walters
253
Letters from Friends of Fritz about His Contributions and Character by Fred C. Ikl, Leslie Upton,
Lane Kirkland, Donald S. Marshall, Albion W. Knight Jr., John L. Madden, William R. Kintner, John H. Morse,
Walter Hahn, William A. Knowlton, Dolf M. Droge, Kenneth E. BeLieu
254
No Interests to Represent, no Projects to Sell by Fritz Kraemer
264
Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von Steuben and Fritz Kraemer: Two Prussian-American Heroes Who
Shaped the U.S. Army by Joseph E. Schmitz and Henning-Hubertus Baron von Steuben
266
A Prussian throughout His Life by Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von Preussen
274
Elite, Chivalry, Aristocracy, Honor by Fritz Kraemer
276
Otto von Bismarck by Fritz Kraemer
278
Excellence by Fritz Kraemer
282
Kraemerism by Fritz Kraemer
284
Democracy is SplendidEgalitarian Democracy is Deadly by Fritz Kraemer
290
Be Proud, My Son! by Fritz Kraemer
292
Arrogance and Absolute Values by Fritz Kraemer
294
Cleverling by Fritz Kraemer
296
Loneliness is the Price of Excellency by Fritz Kraemer
298
Inner Musicality is Needed for a Good Politician by Fritz Kraemer
300
Can the Office of Statesman be Learned? by Fritz Kraemer
304
What Qualities Must a Statesman Have? by Fritz Kraemer
308
What We Can Learn from History by Fritz Kraemer
310
Dr Fritz Kraemers Guidelines for You by Hubertus Hoffmann
312
Show Physical Courage, Take Risks! by Fritz Kraemer
316
You Must Believe in and Fight for Absolute Values! by Fritz Kraemer
318
Read Shakespeare! by Fritz Kraemer
320
Simplicity is the Final Result of Incredible Complication by Fritz Kraemer
322
Fritz Kraemer Today by Hubertus Hoffmann
324
The World Security Network Foundation
328
World 3.0 by Hubertus Hoffmann
332
10
Preface
The True Keeper of the Holy Flame
No, one couldnt agree with Dr Fritz Kraemer on everything. But who does
agree about everything with his own parent? The sentiments, experiences and
influences of different generations and perspectives prevent total agreement
with even our greatest teachers, whom we have admired over the yearsand
that is as it should be. The full potential of a world of seven billion individuals
lies in the power of their diversity, based on a shared morality - and ignited by
a teacher.
If one experiences that inner fire, lit by a great mind, and still burning fiercely,
it is obvious that one has enjoyed a rare privilegenot just a brief encounter
with a truly unforgettable individual, but also the transfer of his wisdom to ones
own heart and mind, like a download. We his pupils will never be the same as
him, because we are all different individuals, responding differently; one may
be bolder, another more cautious: that is Gods will. But a Holy Flame burns
forever.
Each of us has been moulded by particular people, often our mothers or
fathers. Other personalities influence our artistic, professional, religious and
political tastes beyond the cozy realm of our families: our mentors and tutors.
True mentors and tutors are a very rare species; their young, unmoulded pupils
have yet to accomplish what they have imparted, so what is the reward for the
mentors time and effort? They may not live to see the fruits of their mentoring,
but they are indispensable as a catalyst for the higher level interaction of old
and new, for passing on the Holy Flame to the next generation.
Dr Fritz Kraemer was such an individual: a missionary, mentor and Pentagon
strategist, who assumed the role voluntarily and carryied it out fantastically,
expecting nothing in return. He considered it his life-long task.
11
In this book companions, pupils and friends write about his deeds and the
enormous influence and fascination he had for them. It also includes his teachings, recorded over many meetings we had to collate them, as well as several
letters from his written legacy.
Fritz Kraemer stands in stark contrast to many high-ranking people who
assemble networks of contacts like a stamp collection, to boost their own egos,
but spare no time for young and unknown talents. This seems to be the modern
rule. Where are todays mentors for tomorrows elite? Fritz Kraemer stands out
as a role model and a reminder of his own adjuration: look for men and
women of excellence and give them life-long support. He expected nothing in
return, unlike todays orators, who are all too often merely salesmen for themselves. His credo is the need for a responsible elite, focused not on their privileges and rights, but on their duty to serve their countries and the world.
Compare the embarrassing impression given by so many politicians, officers
and officials, who check the way the wind is blowing before every action or
utterance. They lack true substance: in Fritz Kraemers striking words, they
started as a grape and ended as a raisin. Their sole intention is to be VIPs.
Fritz Kraemer was totally different. He was always true to himself and his
cause, unbending as the Krupp steel of his home town, Essen.
He went through the hell of the 20th Century, experiencing the downfall of
civilisation in his native Germany, and the rise of the proletarian demon, Adolf
Hitler. He escaped to the United States, and fought for freedom against the
Wehrmacht as a new American in the 84th Infantry Division. After World War
Two he became the True Keeper of the Holy Flame in the Pentagon, fighting
what he called provocative weakness all his life in the struggle against evil
and the threat of totalitarianism.
His intellectual anchor, which combined the Lutheran faith of his parents,
who had converted from Judaism, and an anti-materialist spiritual component,
dominated Fritz Kraemers personality, making him a vehement critic of nihilism
and moral relativism. Deeply rooted traditional Prussian values, mixed with
American freedom of spirit, drive and passion for liberty and human rights,
created the personal philosophy of a truly enlightened gentleman, fighting for
the cause of right.
12
In a world geared to consumption and wealth his non-capitalist thinking is

pure gold, countering the addiction to that constant accumulation of material
wealth which is so ultimately unfulfilling, and results in emptiness, unhappiness
and the waste of years in purposeless and superficial lives.
So join me now and travel into the world of this unique genius and character,
to be inspired by Dr Fritz Kraemers words and deeds, all true to his Prussian
and American motto as a soldier: HonorDutyCountry.
Dr Hubertus Hoffmann
London, October 2012
Author and protg of Dr Fritz Kraemer

from 1979 to 2003: Dr Hubertus
Hoffmannan international investor
and geo-strategist from Germany. This
book is based on many conversations
with his mentor over two decades.
Inspired by him Dr Hoffmann founded
the independent global network for
young elites in foreign affairs
www.worldsecuritynetwork.com.
13
Fritz Kraemer struck up a

friendship with Henry Kissinger
when the two were privates
in the United States Army.
14
The Prophet and the

Policymaker
By Henry A. Kissinger
Fritz Kraemer was the greatest single influence of my formative years. His
inspiration remained with me even during the last thirty years when he would
not speak to me.
We met in 1944 in Camp Claiborne, Louisiana. We were both privates in
the 84th Infantry Division. I served in the G Company of the 335th Regiment,
Kraemer in the G-2 section of division headquarters. We were both refugees
from Germany: I by necessity, Kraemer by choice. He was thirty-six years of
age; I nineteen. He had two PhD degrees. I had two years of night college in
accounting.
When I first saw Kraemer, he was dressed in a German uniform, wore a
monocle, and carried a riding crop. The occasion was a speech to the regiment in which I was serving. The subject was the moral and political stakes of
the war, and the Commanding General thought Kraemers outfit would endow
his presentation with verisimilitude. Kraemer spoke with passion, erudition,
and overwhelming force, as if he were addressing each member of the regiment individually. For the first time in my life, and perhaps the only oneat
least I can recall no other such occurrenceI wrote to a speaker how much he
had moved me. A few days later Kraemer came to where my company was
training. Now the uniform was American, but he still wore the monocle around
Henry Kissinger (left), the talent, with his scout and mentor
Dr Fritz Kramer in 1945 as soldiers in the 84th U.S. Infantry
Division in Germany again, their Heimat until 1938.
his neck and continued to carry his riding crop. He invited me to have dinner
with him at the enlisted mens club at which he questioned me about my views
and spoke to me about his values.
Out of this encounter grew a relationship that changed my life. After the
division reached Europe, Kraemer arranged to have me transferred to the G-2
section. We worked together and, after work, we walked the streets of battlescarred towns at night during total blackouts while Kraemer spoke of history
and postwar challenges in his stentorian voicesometimes in German, tempting nervous sentries.
Over the next decades Kraemer

shaped my reading and thinking,
influenced my choice of college,
awakened my interest in political
philosophy and history, inspired
both my undergraduate and
graduate theses, and became an
integral and indispensable
part of my life.
Over the next decades, Kraemer shaped my reading and thinking, influenced my choice of college, awakened my interest in political philosophy and
history, inspired both my undergraduate and graduate theses, and became an
integral and indispensable part of my life. He was always there to discuss my
concerns; he never talked of his own needs to me, and I doubt to anyone else,
as if such an admission would derogate from his mission.
Kraemer dedicated his life to fighting against the triumph of the expedient
over the principled. Intellectuals, Kraemer once said, have always
preached that everything is relative and that there are no absolute values. The
result is spiritual emptiness. Everything is possible and therefore nothing is.
The worst thing about a loss of faith is not the fact that someone has stopped
believing, but that they are ready to believe anything.
Kraemer fought his battle not so much by seeking to influence policymakersthough on occasion he had that opportunitybut by giving lectures and
above all by discovering in young people qualities they did not always know
they possessed. He would then devote an enormous amount of his time on
encouraging them towards a life of duty and honor. He lived an ascetic,
nearly monastic existence. His learning matched his commitment. For decades
he spent much of his day clipping newspaper articles from all over the world,
marking significant passages, and filing them by major categoriesa oneman, handmade Internet.
He asked nothing for himself. He refused all promotions beyond civil service
grades.
16
Kraemers values were absolute. Like the ancient prophets, he made no

concessions to human frailty or to historic evolution; he treated intermediate
solutions as derogation from principle.
And therein lay the source of our later estrangement. When I became part
of the world of policymaking, I entered the realm of the contingent. For the
prophet, there can be no gap between conception and implementation; the
policymaker must build the necessary from the possible. For the prophet, values are eternal, independent of time. For the policymaker, absolute values
must be approached in stages, each of which is by definition imperfect. The
prophet thinks in terms of crusades; the policymaker hedges against the possibility of human fallibility. The policymaker, if he wants to avoid stagnation,
needs the prophets inspiration, but he cannot live by all the prophets prescriptions in the short term; he must leave something to history.
Kraemer could not accept this distinction. And so we did not speak for thirty
years. He felt he needed to make a demonstrationeven a personal sacrificeto vindicate the absoluteness of his convictions. It was not personal.
During the decades of silence, he never spoke of me except with respect, nor
I of him with anything but devotion.
As Kraemer enters the realm of eternity, and I approach it, I want to thank
his children, Sven and Madeleine, for allowing me this occasion of reconciliation with an extraordinary man who will be part of my life as long as I draw
breath. Kraemer will remain to me, as to so many in this room whose lives he
touched, a symbol of commitment and dedication, a beacon that, amidst the
turmoil of the moment, guides us to the transcendental.
Kraemers values were absolute.

The policymaker, if he wants
to avoid stagnation, needs the
prophets inspiration, but he
cannot live by all the prophets
prescriptions in the short term;
he must leave something to history.
Eulogy for Fritz Kraemer, Memorial Service, Chapel at Fort Meyer, Arlington National
Cemetery, October 8, 2003
17
An extraordinary man
who will be part of my life
as long as I draw breath.
Kraemer is often described as the man who discovered Kissinger.

My role was not discovering Kissinger!
My role was getting Kissinger to discover himself!
Kissinger knew nothing, but understood everything.
19
Fritz G. A. Kraemer
Missionary, Mentor and Pentagon Strategist
Fritz Gustav Anton Kraemer was born in Essen (Germany) on July 3rd, 1908.
He studied at the famous Arndt Gymnasium in Berlin, the London School of
Economics and the Universities of Geneva and Frankfurt before earning a
doctorate in jurisprudence at the University of Frankfurt in 1931 and a doctorate in Political Science at the University of Rome in 1934.
During most of the 30s he was Senior Legal Advisor to the League of
Nations at the Leagues Legal Institute in Rome. In 1933, he married his wife
of fifty-seven years, Britta Bjorkander, a Swedish citizen.
Dr Kraemer, a Lutheran with Jewish roots and a dislike for Nazis, escaped
Hitlers Germany for America in 1939, but had to leave behind his wife and
son. He was drafted and became a U.S. citizen as an inductee and joined the
U.S. Army in April 1943 with two PhDs and one monocle as an infantryman
in the 84th U.S. Army Infantry Division (the Railsplittter) to fight for freedom
in Europe on the American side.
As a gifted talent scout and teacher in 1944 he discovered the young
Henry Kissinger who joined his division. In the 70s he also discovered Alexander Haig, who was promoted to Military Assistant to then National Security
Advisor Kissinger. Dr Kraemer continued to influence their thinking. In a missonary-like role he discovered and encouraged young people throughout
his long life.
Dr Kraemer fought in the Battle of the Bulge and in the battles of Ruhr and
Rhineland, earning a Battlefield Commission and a Bronze Star in the liberation of his former homeland. In 1945 he was reunited with his wife and son
and returned to Washington D.C. in 1947. He left active duty in 1948 and
20
retired from the Army Reserve in

1963 with the rank of a Lt. Colonel.
From the early 50s until 1978,
when he retired from civil service, he
served as as Senior Civilian Advisor
to the U.S. Army Chief of Staff in the
Pentagon and influenced the Department of Defense during the Cold
War.
A graduate of the U.S. National
War College, he advised, taught,
and inspired generations of officers,
officials, and private citizens
throughout his life and made a substantial contribution to the cause of
freedom.
Dr Fritz Kraemer died on September 8th, 2003 at the age of ninety-five
in Washington D.C. and was buried
with Full Military Honors in Arlington
National Cemetery on October 8th.
He was honored by former Secretary
of Defense James R. Schlesinger, his
former students Dr Henry Kissinger
and Alexander Haig, and more than
100 friends and relatives.
21
Mentoring and Tutoring

Dr Kraemer Style
By Hubertus Hoffmann
From 1979 to 2003 I had the pleasure of listening to my esteemed mentor

Dr Fritz Kraemer and speaking with him about the foundations of foreign
policy. We met regularly in the evenings in his modest home in Fessenden
Street in Washington DC or in his beloved chalet in Icogne near Crans-Montana in the Swiss canton of Valais. He preferred to spend his summers there.
What gave him strength, confidence, and inspiration in the Swiss Alps were
above all the magnificent statue of Christ enthroned on a nearby hill, the fantastic mountain landscape, the intense sunshine, fresh air and the daily reading of his beloved Neue Zrcher Zeitung.
It is thinking in me.
Kraemer thought for hours at
a time, read the entire day.
He valued hours-long, intense discourse, mostly in the form of a long monologue. These were the history lessons and in-depth sermons of a great strategist and contemplator of world events. Occasionally, he spiced them up with
anecdotes or good humored comical phrases in the Rhineland dialect of his
home country. He spent his childhood years in the small village of Diethardt in
the Hintertaunus just 10 km away from St. Goar am Rhein from 1914 until his
days at university in 1928, living in the imposing villa Hubertushaus. This
made a lasting impression on him. He remained something of an unusual
high-minded Prussian from the Rhineland, with a pronounced portion of
adventurousness and the insuppressible courage to say what he thought.
Sometimes Kraemer said, It is thinking in me. He thought for hours at a time,
read the entire dayabove all the New York Times and Washington Post as a
substitute for the 300 cables he used to ingest on a daily basis at the Pentagon
until his retirement in 1978. He underlined every important word and created
folders in his basement for all of the important topics going on in the world. He
was amazingly up-to-date on events in every corner of the world.
22
Outwardly, he was always self-confident and strong; however, on the inside

he was a sensitive person, full of emotiona hard shell with a soft core
b
earing internal scars from his battles with world history during his life of
95years.
Our meetings were always deeply impressive because he was so different
from everyone else, not only being a Prussian officer at heart, but at the same
time an American soldier by choice, immersed in the present and in the past
of the 19th and 20th centuries. He had lived in history: the German Empire as
a young boy, the tragedies of a defeat in WWI and the Weimar Republic, the
Nazi dictatorship followed by the threat to freedom posed by the USSR and
communism in Europe and Asia, and the horror of 9/11. Kraemer was a
unique mixture of European and American intellectual influences, deeply
anchored in religion and spirituality, an energy-giving Prussian nuclear reactor paired with the sensitivity of a violin-playing musician of world politics.
However, he always remained in the shadows, avoiding the glare of publicity.
He preferred to pull the strings from behind the scenes.
My eyes often fell shut upon arriving in Washington DC from Germany suffering from jetlag with the mentor preaching without pause from 8:00 pm until
3:00 in the morning. I guess you are tired now, the very old man said to the
very young man as a sympathetic farewell. He was always thoughtful, polite,
and mild, never brusque or dismissive in his personal relations with others.
An energy-giving Prussian
nuclear reactor paired with the
sensitivity of a violin-playing
musician of world politics.
Sometimes one could sense that the old man was depressed and disappointed with the intellectual fatigue of the younger generation, who lacked
the inner fire, lost in materialism and superficial pleasures. With his 90 years,
he was still fresher, livelier, more active and passionate than most 40 year
olds. An endless fire burned within him. Throughout his life he sought out
young people who had that small but living flame and influenced them with
missionary zeal like bellows to a fire or a smith working glowing metal on an
anvil.
His eyes were fixed on his guest. He would often become excited, take up
his walking stick with its silver grip and pace dramatically back and forth. He
was like a volcano on two legs, spewing well-crafted doctrines rather than
lava. At the Pentagon, a general once said to him, Dr Kraemer, listening to
23
The patriots who tried in vain to kill the

nihilistic tyrant Adolf Hitler on July 20,
1944 in operation Walkre were all
like Kraemertrue believers in this old
Prussian way and True Keepers of the
Holy Flame of Prussian values in the
darkest days of their German Fatherland:
Wehrmacht Colonel Claus Schenk Graf
von Stauffenberg first placed the bomb
in Hitlers Headquarters and conducted
operation Walkre from the Bendlerblock in Berlin.
Wehrmacht Colonel
Claus Schenk Graf von
Stauffenberg
General Friedrich
Olbricht
24
you is like drinking heavy wine. And another said, You are like an untamed
stallion. They were right. He remained untamable, a white revolutionary in
the middle of the softened bourgeoisie, smooth career types, and opportunistic politicians without a core.
A fellow student remarked that he was already as powerful, committed, and
focused as a 20-year-old law student in Frankfurt am Main in 1928. Leading
U.S. business consultant Peter Drucker, who likewise emigrated to America,
writes in his book Adventures of a Bystander, Kraemer was not just brilliant
and knowledgeable. He could integrate political history, international law, and
international politics into a consistent political philosophy. He was extremely
modest. And he was in complete, uncompromising control. Prussian King Frederick the Greats nickname was Old Fritz and Kraemer was nicknamed Young
Fritz, Drucker noted. He was a Prussian monarchist as he believes the Germans need a strong father figure or otherwise fall victim to an alluring tyrant.
For Kraemer the good Germanmainly the liberal gemtlich (comfortable)
bourgeoisielacked the will to withstand the force of evil. The ugly German
arose in the new powerhouse of the united Germany after 1871 with too much
arrogance, still servile to any authority, capitalistically greedy, pushy, aggressive and too nationalistic, leading the new power into the disasters of WWI
and later WWII. I agree with Drucker who wrote that Fritz Kraemer promoted
a third German (and later focused on a responsible elite) with self-control
opposing barbarism with elements of the old Prussia which had passed away
when moderate Junker and later Frst Otto von Bismarck stepped down as
Chancellor in 1890 and the wilder, teenage years of the new German Empire
began. Kraemer maintained a Prussian way of life for another 75 years, which
included a strong pride in self-discipline, strict obedience to the law, a code of
honor, respect for others just as Fritz the Great had shown for his Huguenots,
the appearance of a gentleman with truthfulness, God-fearing Lutheran faith,
modesty and loyalty, backed by force of arms. For him, this was what it meant
to be conservative. The patriots who tried in vain to kill the nihilistic tyrant Adolf
Hitler on July 20, 1944 in Operation Walkre were all like Kraemertrue
believers in this old Prussian way and True Keepers of the Holy Flame of Prussian values in the darkest days of their German fatherland:
Wehrmacht Colonel Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg, who placed the
bomb in Hitlers Headquarters Wolfsschanze, and his more than 200 co-con-
spiraters and supporters inside and outside the Wehrmacht like First Lieutenant
Werner von Haeften, Colonel Albrecht Ritter Mertz von Quirnheim, General
Friedrich Olbricht, Colonel General Erich Hoepfner, Helmuth James Graf von
Moltke, his brother Berthold Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg, the former Mayor
of Leipzig Dr Carl Friedrich Goerdeler, Colonel General Ludwig Beck, Field
Marshal General ret. Erwin von Witzleben, Major General Henning von
Tresckow, Caesar von Hofacker, Fritz-Dietlof Graf von der Schulenburg, UlrichWilhelm Graf Schwerin von Schwanenfeld, Major General Hans Oster, Adam
Trott zu Solz, Albrecht von Kessel, Botho von Wussow, Ulrich von Hassell,
Peter Graf Yorck von Wartenburg, Lieutenant General Paul von Hase, Hans
von Dohnanyi, Rudolf von Scheliha or Wolf Heinrich Graf von Helldorf.
Among the more than 150 persons assassinated later or driven to death
were the two Field Marshals General Erwin von Witzleben and Erwin Rommel, 19 generals, 26 colonels, two ambassadors and seven other diplomats, one minister, three state secretaries as well as the head of the Reichs
criminal police, moreover, several supreme presidents, police presidents
and local government presidents. 600 people were arrested including family members.
Fritz Kraemers famous monocle remained his personal symbol of this Prussian elite world of honor, duty and human values based in Christianity; personalities ready to fight against a tyrantas Kraemer chose with the 84th U.S.
Infantry Divisionand even die for the good cause. As Stauffenberg shouted
out when executed Long live the Holy Germany! the true fatherland, opposed
to the nihilistic Nazis.
After the coup detat of the brave Prussian

officers had failed as Hitler survived the
bomb, Beck was shot, Stauffenberg, Olbricht, Quirnheim and Haeften were executed and later more than 150 plotters.
Col. Albrecht Ritter First Lieutenant

Mertz von Quirnheim Werner von Haeften
Major General
Henning von
Tresckow
Colonel General
Ludwig Beck
Field Marshal
General ret. Erwin
von Witzleben
Major General
Hans Oster
He was no dry professor, but more an impresario or a travelling evangelist

of geo-strategycompletely unique and totally compelling. With his monocle
in place, a proper dark suit and walking stick with its concealed rapier, he
had an imposing appearance that dramatically underscored his clear words
and articles of faith.
To some he seemed odd. For example, in the 1970s he would drive to the
Pentagon in a convertible pink Cadillac with the top down and a white scarf
trailing in the wind. He prohibited all photos and would draw his rapier during speeches. His voice shook while fixing his strong, almost threatening gaze
25
on the person opposite him. He seemed like a vision from another time, mysterious, strange, but always interesting. Hollywood could not have imagined
him better than he was in real life, as the man behind the scenes at the Pentagon. MGM Studios actually made the old Spartan a lucrative offer to film
his life story, which he rejected with indignation, as Nick Thimmesch wrote in
the first published article about him in the Washington Post of March 2, 1975,
titled The Iron Mentor of the Pentagon. Why even Henry Kissinger needs Dr
Fritz Kraemer.
Fritz Kraemers thinking and

concerns were coined by 80dark
years and the horrendous
personal experiences
He impressed all who met him with his universal knowledge as a walking
foreign policy lexicon. Throughout his long life he absorbed thousands upon
thousands of bits of information like a sponge and applied them fresh each
day to a global picture of truly important trends and overall contexts. In this
way, a detailed mosaic of world politics was created, a global puzzle, a oneman internet (according to Kissinger), a magnificent painting in the mind of a
genius of the dark and bright sides of human life, the political failures and the
few finest hours of humanity, of power, powerlessness, and diplomacy. By
comparison, most American generals and politicians appeared ill-educated
which increased his fame and renown and gained him even greater respect.
His world was more dark than light. Pessimism dominated his thinking, quite
the opposite to my own perspective as a young world policy optimist. To him,
the glass was always half empty, to me half full. The peaceful reunification of
Germany, the victory of freedom in Eastern Europe, the collapse of the USSR
in 1991 and the revolts in North Africa organized by young people in 2011
show that optimism is justified in world politics and that good foreign policy
should never give in to doomsday scenarios. We should all think more positively and put our hopes in a self-fulfilling prophesy to help improve the world.
The flame of freedom burns deep within all of the now seven billion people in
the world, and authoritarian regimes have become more hesitant and powerless in the face of the revolt of thousands. A new, future-oriented foreign policy
World 3.0 requires a consistent dual-strategy of power and reconciliation, of
hawks and doves, power and diplomacy. You will find more on this at end of
this book.
Fritz Kraemers thinking and concerns were formed by many dark years and
the horrendous personal experiences from his childhood in Germany up to
26
1991: the collapse of the good old imperial order of his home country with
the revolution in 1918, the failure of weak democrats against Adolf Hitler and
the rise of the Nazi party during the Weimar Republic, the takeover of power
by the Nazis in 1933 and the creation of a regime of terror which dominated
all of Europe and against which he, as a naturalized U.S. citizen, took up
arms: I had to stay with the side that was right. This was the reasoning upon
which he based his switch from the German to the American side. The dangers of the worldwide claims to totalitarian power on the part of communists
from 1945 until the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989 and the end of the USSR in
1991 dominated his thinking. He was a wary child of the 20th century, a displaced person, a man without a home, an alpha wolf who became more and
more lonely as his old friends passed away. He suffered especially from the
loss of his beloved wife Britta. A few good friends remained constant throughout his lifelike Edward Rowny for example. Few new students came into the
picture.
Even after his retirement from active service in 1978, he remained a unique
geo-strategist in the rapidly changing currents of power, interests, and vanities
in Washingtona lone remaining dinosaur from days gone by.
Enter the world of a last Prussian on the Potomac River who consistently
demanded passion, sacrifice, honor, and duty as a missionary for the cause
of right.
He was a wary child of the

20thcentury, a displaced person,
a man without a home, a lone
alpha wolf, who became more
and more lonely as his old friends
passed away. He suffered from the
loss of his beloved wife Britta.
Fritz Kraemers most significant messages for all of us are:

The code of honor one pursues is important, not material riches. Character
counts, not position and title. What is important is not pure power and ones
career, but inner independence and personal courage. Voters are not only
driven by their wallets; they also long for absolute, non-material values. Being
over-intellectual and over-educated leads to a loss of reality. Be an independent person and say what you think; work to form reality and take on tasks for
society. The individual has a soul; he is not merely a homo economicus.
Fritz Kraemer saw a spiritual vacuum in our highly developed democraciesa society which is rich and fat and has therefore become soulless and
unwilling to make sacrifices for the common good.
27
He criticised the cleverling people who know it all but understand nothing. He also disliked the intellectuals who can argue over everything and
nothing, pro and contra, right and left or exactly the opposite. Essential values
such as dependability, responsibility, and honor cannot originate from intellectual thinking, but from faith alone.
Lets be honest with each other, dont feelings move us more than material
things? Do worldly possessions really produce contentment? Dont many feel
the need for a satisfyingperhaps even a missionary taskthat brings satisfaction precisely because we are so well-off materially?
Kraemer expects of the professional managers in politics an internal fire,
courage and a portion of adventurousnessand above all an inner musicality and independence. A statesman should if necessary sacrifice his career to
remain true to his heartfelt convictions.
An enthusiastic and gifted talent

scout a committed soul catcher
and a spiritus rector (leader in
spirit) for a handful of totally
unknown young people
Fritz Kraemer was an enthusiastic and gifted talent scout, a committed

soul catcher, and a spiritus rector (leader in spirit) for a handful of totally
unknown young people, in whom he recognized a special potential. Over the
decades, he always spent a great amount of time with them.
He believed deeply that only an ever-renewed responsible elite of a few
chosen talents with character and self-sacrifice would be able to influence
world history for the good.
He fought against what he saw in egalitarian democracy, a dictatorship of
mediocrity could not accept anyone rising up through the masses and who
would thus perpetuate small-minded, bourgeois politics, incapable of facing
the tremendous dangers of totalitarianism as his experiences had taught him
during the Third Reich and Cold War.
He influenced the personalities of thousands of military men, scholars, politicians and journalists from the U.S. and Europea certain lucky few very intensely
over many yearsand many others through his words and his example.
There was only one man who discovered, mentored and inspired two later
U.S. Secretaries of State.
28
In 1944, he met the then 19-year-old Henry Kissinger, his master pupil and
the most famous of all his students. He supported, inspired, and developed
him for 30 years until he cut all ties and never spoke a word to him again.
Kissinger and Kraemer both had a Jewish background in their families.
Kissinger lost 11 relatives in the Holocaust and both only survived because
they fled their cozy homeland in time when it was taken over by a tyrant. Both
were drafted into the U.S. Army and fought for the idea of freedom and
against their own countrymen. Kraemer, as Kissinger states in this book, was
the greatest single influence during my formative years, and will be a part of
my life as long as I live. The story has been told many times and it reflects the
essence of tutoring and mentoring of Fritz Kraemer: looking for totally unknown
young talents, discovering their qualities and capacities, imparting a strong
message to them, and mentoring them for years to come not knowing if would
all be in vain and a waste of time.
Henry Kissinger was a nobody when they met, characterized by shyness
after he fled from Germany. Kissinger, who originally came from Frth in
northern Bavaria, was stranded in the Bronx with his very charming mother
and father, still more German than Jewish, both depressed at the loss of their
beloved homeland. His mother organized a private catering business to earn
money. His first modest aim in professional life was to become a bookkeeper,
and he studied this basic subject at City College of New York. Nobody would
have ever heard of him, nor would Henry Kissinger have ever discovered his
inner musicality for politics, if he had not met Fritz Kraemer. He became
Kissingers catalyst or as Kraemer summarized at the beginning of the book,
My role was getting Kissinger to discover himself. He knew nothing, but
understood everything.
Henry Kissinger was a nobody

when they met, characterized
by shyness after he fled from
Germany.
After emigrating to the U.S. via Great Britain in 1939, Kraemer was visited
several times by FBI agents who were hunting Nazi spies in Washington DC.
He could understand that they were suspicious as he looked like the Nazi
agents of the black-and-white propaganda movies. He praised them for being
polite and only doing their job. He went into voluntary exile from Nazi Germany to America because of his dislike for the barbarian Adolf Hitler. Kraemer could even have ended up in a concentration camp like his father because
under the Nazi regulations of the Nuremberg Laws he was fully Jewish, his
parents and grandparents having Jewish heritage. Nevertheless, his parents
29
had converted to Lutheranism and he was Lutheran as well. He was also a

monarchist, openly opposing the Nazi movement in his student days in Frankfurt. His patriotic father, who had fought as a captain in WWI for the German
Kaiser, was deported by the Nazis to the concentration camp Theresienstadt
in 1943 where he died. This was an important part of his background he
never talked about, not even to close friends like Ed Rowny.
In America he began a very isolated and lonely life. In the beginning, he
only got work as a potato harvester in the summer and woodcutter in the
winter in Maine and New Hampshire. There, the elitist learned to appreciate
the simple life of ordinary Americans.
General John W. Vessey

There was only one man who
joined the U.S. Army with two
PhDs and one monocle.
The U.S. then decided to draft foreigners into the armed forces, thereby
making them U.S. citizens. So, as the Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of
Staff General John W. Vessey once told an audience of generals and admirals
in the Pentagon, Fritz Kraemer became the only man who joined the U.S.
Army with two PhDs and one monocle. Instead of Germany the U.S. became
Kraemers new homeland with Prussia in his heart.
The young Henry Kissinger was sent to the elite Army Special Training
School and was later assigned to the 84th infantry division (The Railsplitters)
in camp Claiborne in Louisiana. There, Kraemer had started with simple jobs
like painting an entrance to the barracks. For his entire life he kept his helmet
with the insignia of his division and his uniform, which you can see in this
book.
When commanding General Alexander R. Bolling met Kraemer at an exercise where he was imitating a German officer making battle noises, Kraemer
was asked to join his staff in the headquarters where he was integrated into
the intelligence group. There, he became very useful as he could speak German. Kraemer began by telling young recruits why they must fight Hitler now
and perhaps even die for the good cause. He did very well and impressed a
newcomer named Henry Kissinger, who wrote about their first meeting in a
chapter in this book. Dressed in a German uniform, with a monocle and riding crop, Kraemer was talking about the moral and political stakes of the war
with passion, erudition, and overwhelming force. Henry Kissinger wrote a
short note to Kraemer in which he said, I was very impressed by your
30
speech. When Fritz Kramer read this he asked, Who is this Kissinger?, and
sought him out when he was next at the regiment. They began meeting at the
enlisted mens club and the elder spoke to his junior about history and politics,
the rise and dangers of Hitler, and introduced him to an unknown world of
politics for the first time. Kraemer got Kissinger transferred to the G-2 section
where they worked together and talked for many hours about history and
politics. Both men, the mentor and his new student, fought bravely with the
84th in the Battle of Bulge, and went on to Krefeld, Hannover, and to the Elbe
River. Both received a bronze star for their bravery. Fritz Kraemer was honored by a battlefield commission, which promoted him to the officers rank of
Second Lieutenant.
After the end of WWII, in 1946 they were both assigned to the new European Command Intelligence School in Oberammergau, Germany, where
Kraemer got Kissinger his first job as a teacher. In 1947, Fritz Kraemer
returned to the U.S. and began working at the Executive Office Building and
later the Pentagon.
Over the decades Kraemer shaped my readings and thinking, influenced
my choice of college, awakened my interest in political philosophy and history, inspired both my undergraduate and graduate theses, Kissinger wrote
in this book. He became a student of political science at Harvard (a good
bookkeeper lost), wrote his PhD which was strongly inspired by his mentor
(Peace, Legitimacy, and Equilibrium. A Study of the Statesmanship of Castlereagh and Metternich: a typical Kraemer subject) and became a professor.
For decades his tutor for private and political decisions was an integral and
indispensable part of my life, Kissinger explained.
From 1951 to 1971 Kisinger, like

his mentor, promoted a new
young elite in foreign affairs as
director of the famous Harvard
International Summer Seminar.
From 19511971 Kissinger, like his mentor, promoted a new young elite in
foreign affairs from Europe and Asia as the director of the famous Harvard
International Summer Seminar, which was founded by his next mentor professor William Elliott, who was his doctoral supervisor. Kissinger became responsible for recruitment and ideological rationale with most support coming from
the Ford Foundation. The aim was to create a spiritual link between the
younger generations in America and those in Europe and Asia by studying
American democracy. 40 leading young people (aged 25 to 40), half from
Asia and Europe, were selected out of hundreds of applicants and given an
31
opportunity to gain insights into the American way of life during three summer
months and to establish connections and understanding among this select
group of people who should assume top leadership roles in their countries in
the years ahead. Then unknown but later famous attendees included Premier
Yasushiro Nakasone from Japan, Pierre Trudeau from Canada, Frances Giscard dEstaing, Malaysias Mahathir Mohammed, Lt. Gen. and Deputy Prime
Minister Yigal Allon from Israel, Vice Chancellor Hannes Androsch from Austria as well as famous German writer Martin Walser and Oscar prize winner
and film producer Manfred Durniok from Berlin, who told me how impressive
their tutoring had been. There at Harvard, Henry Kissinger met the young
Social Democratic politician and later German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt,
who would become a close life-long friend, as well as hundreds of other politicians, professors, and intellectuals. This seminar became the best-practice
elite network in foreign affairs and a catalyst for promoting democratic values
in the 1950s and 1960s.
Dr Kraemer influenced many by

his legendary example of honor,
duty and patriotism. Thus, he
became The True Keeper of the
Holy Flame in the Pentagon.
After Henry Kissinger was nominated as the new National Security Advisor by U.S. President Richard Nixon in January 1969, Kraemer had the
opportunity to place a young lieutenant colonel next to his protg Kissinger
in the White House: Alexander Haig, who later went on to become Chief of
Staff in the Nixon White House in 19731974, SACEUR in Europe from
19741979 and even Secretary of State in the Cabinet of Ronald Regan
from 19811982. In this book you can read the unique way Fritz Kraemer
selected him and what role the 84th Division played. Alexander Haig writes
that when he was only a young major in the Pentagon, Dr Kraemer often
sat alongside my desk to speak both fervently and authoritatively on the
challenges imposed by the Cold War. I can think of no individual whose
patient tutelage made a more meaningful contribution to the shaping of my
own worldview.
From his small office in the Pentagon and mainly through personal meetings
and speeches Dr Kraemer influenced many by his legendary example of
honor, duty, and patriotism. Thus he became The True Keeper of the Holy
Flame in the Pentagon.
Some of those he often mentioned to me and praised for their contribution
to a free world include:
32
Lieutenant General and Ambassador Edward Rowny who was one of his
longest and best friends. Rowny met him more than forty years earlier in the
Pentagon and writes in this book about their friendship in the chapter Grand
Strategist in the Pentagon. As a soldier (World War II, Korea, and Vietnam)
and strategic thinker, Ed Rowny became Deputy Chairman of NATOs Military Committee and initiated the Mutual and Balanced Forces Reduction
(MBFR) negotiations under German Luftwaffe Ace (136 victories) and Chairman of NATO Military Committee General Johannes Steinhoff, who was
another of my mentors and to whom this book is also dedicated. Rowny was
later assigned as the Joint Chiefs of Staff Representative for SALT II in
Geneva. Under President Reagan he was appointed to the rank of Ambassador and became his chief strategic negotiator for four years and later
Special Advisor for Arms Control to Presidents Reagan and Bush until he
retired in 1990. In 2003 Rowny organized the funeral of Dr Kraemer at the
National Cemetery in Arlington close to the Pentagon as a noble gesture of
their friendship.
One of his dearest friends and army comrade was Lieutenant General and
Ambassador Vernon A. Walters (19172002), a member of the Military
Intelligence Hall of Fame; Deputy Director of the CIA from 19721976; U.S.
Ambassador to the United Nations from 19851989; and U.S. Ambassador
to the Federal Republic of Germany from 19891991 responsible for the
American support of the reunification of Germany. Walters spoke several
languages and was a unique cosmopolitan soldier. When we flew in his
official jet from Bonn to Berlin in the summer of 1989 he praised Fritz Kraemer and his dedication to the free world which had inspired him as well.
James Schlesinger, the U.S. Secretary of Defense from 19731975,
impressed Fritz Kraemer most of all of the Secretaries under whom he had
served for decades. The important memorandum On Elitism was hand-written
for Schlesinger. You can read it in this book. They maintained a close working
relationship. When Schlesinger asked him: But gee, you are a mystic arent
you? Kraemer replied, Of course, Mr Secretary, you do not use that term in
a pejorative sense. I must have my inner visions. I live with my inner vision.
When later the Secretary proposed to promote him from a GS15 to a political
GS16 position he replied: Mr. Secretary, I can only advise against it. Please
give the position to someone who needs it. When he asked to call him Fritz,
33
he said: I prefer to be called Dr Kraemer. Secretary Schlesinger described

him to Nick Thimmesch, Kraemer is a seminal influence here. He makes
people think at a time when many people dont want to.
Donald Rumsfeld, the 13th and youngest U.S. Secretary of Defense at 43
years of age from 1975 to 1977 and from 2001 to 2006 the 21st and oldest
at 74, benefited from his insights and valued his relationship, as he remarks
in this book. He adopted the phrase provocative weakness from him.
When Schlesinger asked him:

But gee, you are a mystic arent
you? Kraemer replied,
Of course, Mr. Secretary,
you do not use that term
in a pejorative sense. I must
have my inner visions.
I live with my inner vision.
34
Fred Ikle was influenced by Fritz Kraemer who admired him as well. From
1973 to 1977 he was Director of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency and later Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (19811988). There
he pushed for the deployment of the Stinger anti-aircraft missiles to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan to counter Soviet air domination. This was the most
important move to end the Russian invasion and war in Afghanistan and to
contain the USSR. As I supported the Mujahideen at that time while writing the
Afghanistan report for the European Parliament and urging the deployment of
Stingers in a meeting with Pakistani President Zia ul Haq in November 1985,
I knew that only a handful of movers and shakers like Ikle dared at that time
to make this clear step.
At the Pentagon Kraemer made friendships with a few leading army generals including William A. Knowlton, the father-in-law of General David Petraeus, who was the Director General Staff U.S. Army, Superintendent U.S. Military Academy at West Point from 19701974 and U.S. Representative
Military Committee of NATO until 1980, and Creighton W. Abrahms Jr.,
Chief of Staff U.S. Army 19721974. He worked closely with Secretary of the
Army (19711973) Robert Froehlke. He annotated, Fritz is fantastic as a
global strategist. I utilized him quite a bit because hes a highly intelligent
person who gave me an excellent reading on what was going on in the world.
Hes a showman and he plays it to the hilt. Fritz has pizzazz. In classical meetings, he was great.
Dr Walter Judd was a medical missionary to China in the 1920s and
1930s. He rose to national prominence as a crusader against Chinese communism and Japanese expansionism prior to World War II, became a Minnesota Congressman in 1942 and one of its most influential members on foreign affairs. He supported the stabilization of Western Europe through
economic aid after WWII. In 1981 President Ronald Reagan awarded him
the Presidential Medal of Freedom, calling him an articulate spokesman for
all those who cherish liberty. As another admirer of Kraemer, Judd praised
him in these words, Kraemer believes in chivalry. He would give his life for
his values. He believes a gentleman should only be afraid of hurting other
people. He has a realization of Communisms diabolical character. He sees it
as a cancer.
Helmut Sonnenfeldt was an immigrant from Germany born in 1926 in Berlin. He joined the U.S. State Department in 1952 and served under Henry
Kissinger in the National Security Council from 19691974. Later he worked
as a scholar at John Hopkins University and the Brookings Institution. He said
about Kraemer, Several generations of officers and civilians have sat at
Fritzs feet and received his views, insights and warnings. Hes been a fixed
point. Hes known by hundreds of people, but hes not a public personality.
Herman Kahn, who in 1961 founded the famous Hudson Institute as a policy research center in New York, praised Fritz Kraemer in a letter to him as
somebody who has stood for the good and the true with a sense of noblesse
oblige and service.
35
Pakistani Lieutenant General and Ambassador Sahabzada

Yaqub-Khanhere next to Henry Kissinger in a White House
meeting with President Fordmet Fritz Kraemer in 1973 when he
was Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan in Washington
DC. He was the only foreign diplomat whom he valued as a friend.
Kraemer was impressed that the general wrote poems in French as
well as speaking five other languages and was a noble man from
Pakistan. They were both gentlemen strategists. Kraemer admired that
he was a general as well as a diplomat. He served as ambassador
to the U.S., France, the USSR and the UN from 19721982 before
becoming Foreign Minister of his country from 19821991.
Yaqub-Khan fitted into Kraemers role model of a brave soldier of
the world and a polyglot with character rooted in his country.
Pakistani Lieutenant General and Ambassador Sahabzada Yaqub-Khan,

who met Fritz Kraemer in 1973 when he was Ambassador of the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan in Washington DC, was the only foreign diplomat whom
he valued as a friend. Kraemer was impressed that the general wrote poems
in French as well as speaking five other languages and was a noble man from
Pakistan. Kraemer wrote to him July 4, 1978 I cherish more than I can put in
words each and every encounter with you. He is a member of the royal family of the erstwhile Indian princely state of Rampur. His father was a statesman
and diplomat who at various points in his career served as chief minister of
the state of Rampur and as British Indias representative to the League of
Nations. Once Yaqub-Khan was even elected the best-dressed member of the
diplomatic corps in Washington DC .They were both gentlemen strategists. He
is a kind of Henry Kissinger of Pakistan and a national hero as he served as
the adjutant to the father of the Pakistani nation Muhammad Ali Jinnah in
1947, became a general and later took high positions in foreign affairs for
three decades with grace, style and success. Kraemer admired that he was a
general and the commandant of the Staff College in Pakistan and not only a
diplomat. He served as ambassador to the U.S., France, the USSR and the UN
from 19721982 before becoming Foreign Minister of his country from
19821991. Yaqub-Khan fitted into Kraemers role model of a brave soldier
of the world and a polyglot with character rooted in his country. His son
36
Samad is now editor of the World Security Network Foundation which was
inspired by Dr Kraemer as a global network for talented young men and
women.
His Imperial and Royal Highness Archduke Otto von Habsburg he met in the
Library of Congress in the 1940s when both men had just arrived as emigrants in the American capital. They shared the charm and inspiring atmosphere in this library as well their link to Old Europe and the period of the
German and Austrian empire and dislike for Hitler.
Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von Preussen, the Herrenmeister of the Order of St. John
(Johanniter), met Fritz Kraemer many times and valued him as a Prussian
conservative with clarity and conviction as he writes in his chapter in this
book A Prussian Throughout His Life. Fritz Kraemer was very proud to have
received a signed picture of the last German Emperor Wilhelm II from his exile
in Doorn in the Netherlands. A drawing of the famous Prussian king Fritz the
Great hung in his study. Throughout his life Kraemer remained a Prussian
royalist, although he knew that time would never return.
Dr Alphons Horten was an entrepreneur and CDU/CSU member of the German Parliament (19651972) and friend of German Chancellor Helmut Kohl.
This book is also dedicated to Dr Horten as he became another mentor of
mine via Fritz Kraemer. He was a noble and silent networker with strong
Catholic roots. Fritz Kraemer met him in Switzerland or in Germany. Horten
organized a meeting with the German Chancellor at the Rheinhotel Dreesen
in Bonn-Bad Godesberg where Kraemer urged Helmut Kohl to stay firm with
the plans for the deployment of Pershing II and Cruise Missiles starting in
November 1983.
Hans Graf Huyn, who was a diplomat, author of several books and a staffer
of the Bavarian Christian Social Union (CSU) in the German Parliament,
became a CSU member and its foreign affairs spokesman in the CDU/CSU in
the Bundestag from 19761990.
Fritz Kraemer met His Imperial and

Royal Highness Archduke Otto von
Habsburg (19122011) in the Library
of Congress in the years 194043,
where both emigrants from Europe liked
to do research. Here Otto von Habsburg
as a child with his father Emperor Karl I.
of Austria in 1917. He later became a
prominent promoter of a united Europe
as President of the International PanEuropean Union (19792004) and
member of the first European Parliament
from 19791999.
Jay Lovestone, the committed trade unionist of the AFL-CIO, was one of the
personalities Kraemer most respected. You only have to read the eulogy
printed in this book that Dr Kraemer gave on April 11, 1990 to understand
37
that he admired him. He never asked: Whats in it for me? He was intent only
on promoting the cause of freedom and dignity for all men.
He liked and supported Reed Irvine, who founded the NGO Accuracy in
Media (www.aim.org) in 1969, troubled by inaccuracy in the American
media which he and Fritz Kraemer had diagnosed as being one-sided.
Encourage, develop and

support young people so
that they will become a
responsible elite in all
aspects of life
Kraemers central concern was urging people to look for men and women
of excellence. Encourage, develop and support young people so that they
will become a responsible elite in all aspects of life and do great things for
society.
The long meetings with my geo-strategic guru seemed to me to be almost
spiritual encounters. His ego forced its way deep into my soul. He gestured
with his hands. Sometimes he stood up, walked back and forth and drew his
rapier from his walking stick. His deep, sonorous voice signaled strength and
determination.
When I met Old Fritz, after hours of listening to him, an almost metaphysical
power came over the heart and mind, a power that encouraged a young,
unformed person to follow his values and ideals. I compare this to a computer
program World 3.0 which, over years, was transferred onto empty hard
driveswindow washing by Fritz Kraemer, so to speak.
An almost metaphysical power

came over the heart and mind, a
power that encouraged a young,
unformed person to follow his
values and ideals. I compare this
to a computer program World 3.0.
He continually repeated his core statements according to the well-known

Latin phrase repetitio est mater studiorum (repetition is the mother of studies).
These missionary-style sermons of his doctrines and convictions, his impressive appearance, the intensity of his voice, the dramatic choice of words and
the fixation of his piercing gaze formed a total concept of systematic teaching
and inspiration to his students. Only in this way could one internalize his
moral concepts and views, and these were buried deep in the memory and
soul of the conversation partner. Students were spellbound by Fritz Kraemer.
In return, he required something of them, namely strength of character, work
for the good cause, courage, and the priority of duty over career. His mono-
38
logues were often too long, even for a patient student, and during the hourslong meetings one seldom had the chance to speak. But much positive energy
came acrossconfidence was imparted through language, gestures, repetitiona metaphysical meeting and psychological influence as from a psychologist. It was a geopolitical therapy session. One felt Fritz Kraemers thoughts
and absorbed his energy. When one said farewell after hours, one felt
exhausted due to the stream of ideas but at the same time strengthened within,
inspired, and determined to also struggle against the Zeitgeist and weak
nesses. When one was confronted with a political decision as to whether it
was better to stand and fight or choose the more comfortable way of getting
along, Fritz Kraemer stood at ones back cheering one on with his deep, piercing voice to stay the course and to take the rougher, stony path.
Medical research has intensively researched magnetic fields and auras of
the human body. According to the latest research on the magnetic field of the
heart, the emotions and subconscious will always prevail because the power
of these magnetic fields are stronger than that of the brain, of rationality. In
this regard, the vibrancy of charismatic individuals can influence others even
with their magnetic field, and can trigger feelings and thoughts. A persons
energetic vibrancy is measureable today and perceptible to others through
the subconscious. The emotions and subconscious play a significant role in
humans and thereby also in the area of political thinking and dealings, even
when we more often base this rationally. It was the charisma, the repetition
and the strong example that influenced the young people with whom Kraemer worked. For us, Kraemer was a beacon and powerhouse, radiating
morality.
Much positive energy came

acrossconfidence was imparted
through language, gestures,
repetitiona metaphysical
meeting and psychological
influence as from a psychologist.
It was a geopolitical therapy
session.
Mentoring through charisma? Conveying feelings and values through

hours-long missionary sermons? This seemed to be precisely the case during the meetings with Fritz Kraemer. He was palpably a moral recharger
and impulse generator who connected with the batteries deep inside his
students, who affected them positively and imparted strength. He was less
concerned with imparting pure knowledge as a professor in a foreign policy lecture might do; rather, his interest was in influencing rational and
emotional thought processes, and the spiritual, something in the fashion of
a foreign policy yoga session with a guru, or attendance at a foreign policy
mass.
39
He adjusted his students moral compass: do not think only of yourself but
rather of your country, have no fear, be courageous, go your own way not
that of the masses, believe in absolute values, serve without regard for your
own career, do not be materialistic but rather spiritual and fight against evil.
One could not always agree with Fritz Kraemer because he often thought
too negatively, assuming the worst case with his analyses often resembling
black-and-white pictures of good and evil. Some aspects of modernity
remained foreign to him. He did not own a television or a computer. He was
no manager of long-term political processes and wrote only brief memos, not
a single book after his two dissertations. All that was unimportant. His medium
was dramatic speech.
A guru has to limit himself, have

priorities. His core statements, his
brand essence are important.
A guru has to limit himself, have priorities. This means knowing what one
cannot do well; otherwise, one will have no impact. His core statements, his
brand essence in todays terminology, are important. I have never viewed his
sermons as a type of religion; rather, I have used them as an important element of analysis and for internal direction in the stream of time and have
supplemented them with other wisdom.
Kraemer, in his old age, seemed to be a fossil from a time gone by, a dinosaur and survivor of a collapsed imperial epochperhaps the last Prussian on
the Potomac River.
The historic turnaround of 19891991, as the now saved free world and
the oppressed people of Eastern Europe were able to harvest the benefits of
Kraemers courageous policy of strength and human rights, was a spectacular
confirmation of his sermons since 1945.
But personally time passed him by. His former companions had left the
Pentagon and were retired, mainly to the golf course as Kraemer complained.
And during the administration of George W. Bush few politicians sought his
advice. I was surprised when in 2002, when I invited him to the inauguration
of Joseph Schmitz as the new Inspector General of the Pentagon to Secretary
of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in the Department of Defense, he told me that he
had not been in the Pentagon for many yearsthe place where he had
worked each day for 40 years and where he had found his political home.
40
The Department of Defense, with its fixation on new high-tech weapons,

Special Forces, and a new generation of career-oriented officers and young
bureaucrats, had become alien to him. The old spirit of WWII generals had
disappeared. He missed the thoughtfulness, the anchoring in history and profundity. He would have focused more on the history and psychology of other
peoples like the Iraqis or Afghans than technology. Some decisions would
have been made differently had Old Fritz been asked to supply his analysis.
The Pentagon missed his deep rooted advice but forgot to ask.
We were brought together by coincidence almost a quarter century ago. In
1978, as a 23-year-old student and freelance journalist, I had published a
long article on the new Soviet threat through the SS-20 mid-range rockets in
the German monthly Epoche (SS-20: A New Strategic Threat Against Western Europe). During a visit by the publisher, Fritz Kraemer praised the analysis and asked who this Hubertus Hoffmann might be as he had heard nothing of me. Thus came an invitation to make his acquaintance in February
1979. We regularly discussed the topic of SS-20s and a possible reaction by
NATO to this provocation in the period of dtente. His suggestions were
included in the paper Armament and Disarmament in the Euronuclear
Sphere which I produced on the commission of German parliamentarian
Peter Kurt Wrzbach during four months in Washington and which I published
in May 1979 in Bonn and Washington DC. Here, for the first time, the stationing of Pershing II rockets and Cruise missiles was suggested as a reaction to
the Soviet SS-20 arms build up and at the same time an arms control policy
zero option. On December 12, 1979, NATO agreed on the historic doubletrack decision, which ultimately led to the reduction of all mid-range nuclear
rockets in Europe in the INF Treaty.
Up until his death, he imparted

his wisdom to me for 25 years,
which I recorded on tape or noted
down after visits. This book
containing his most important
statements was thus created, with
his support, which was to be
published after his death as a
stimulus for following
generations.
Up until his death, he imparted his wisdom to me for 25 years, which I

recorded on tape or noted down after visits. This book containing his most
important statements was thus created, with his support, to be published after
his death as a stimulus for following generations.
Fritz Kraemer actively supported me over two decades. For my dissertation
The Atomic Partners: Washington-Bonn and the Modernization of Tactical
Nuclear Weapons I wanted to come to Washington for research. He wrote a
kind letter of recommendation to David Abshire and supported my acceptance
41
The idea for a new elite network

for foreign policy, through
which the new generation should
be reached and networked
through the internet was coined
with Fritz Kraemer
as a research fellow in 1983/1984 at the Center for Strategic & International

Studies. As a financial gap of $100,000 remained, he organized a generous
private scholarship through his friend Alphons Horten. The idea of a new elite
network for foreign policy, through which the next generation should be
reached and networked through the internet, also came into existence during
a meeting with my 93-year-old mentor in 2001. He said energetically and
correctly, Now, Mr. Hoffmann, that you have earned some money, it is not
your choice but your responsibility to give something back to society! By this
time, as the founder of 20 internet start-ups, I understood something about
new media, and he was deeply concerned with the activation of a foreign
policy elite; we merged both approaches into a new social network. The
World Security Network Foundation began in 2002 as an international, independent, non-profit organization (www.worldsecuritynetwork.com). It became
the largest global elite network for foreign and security policy with the purpose of Networking a Safer World. It focuses on three goals: networking the
young global elite in foreign and defense affairs; providing fresh analyses,
ideas, and visions for the worlds most pressing problems; and promoting
designs for a safer world in politics, media, and academia and timely actions
to implement double peace strategies: power on one side, diplomacy and
reconciliation on the other. With its team now consisting of 300 authors, 100
mostly young non-profit editors in 34 countries and 71 experts in the international advisory board including 20 generals and admirals it aims to rouse
people from their apathy, to raise awareness of trouble spots before war
breaks out, to propose solutions, and to draw media attention to security
issues at an early stage. It was and still is inspired by the spirit and teachings
of Fritz Kraemer, a bridge from the old Prussian spirit to global social networking including Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in our diverse global village,
thus reaching the new generation and thousands of fresh thinkers all over the
world from different cultures and religious backgrounds.
Fritz Kraemer cared deeply, like a father, for the wellbeing of his students.
One could recognize then that a soft core was located behind the strong
faade, as with his role model Bismarck. One year before his death, on the
occasion of the birth of my daughter Chiara, he wrote, Always remain aware
that even under the best of circumstances, human life can be hard, and that
God and fortune will not serve harmony, success, contentment, and happiness
on a silver platter. Ultimately, everything must be worked for. Those who love
42
One of Fritz Kraemers

strongest inspirations:
Imperial Chancellor
Otto von Bismarck
(18151898).
Fritz Kraemer was a driver of

the anti-bourgeoisie and critic
of the soft masses who lack
will and thereby a white
revolutionary like his great
role model Otto v. Bismarck
their children must explain this to them early on, so that they do not grow up
to be bitterly disappointed by the immanent storms and worries of our earthly
existence. Those, who in their youth are left to believe that everything will
always turn out well will only poorly come to terms with themselves and their
environment.
Fritz Kraemer was a driver of the anti-bourgeoisie and critic of the soft
masses who lack willpower and therefore a white revolutionary like his great
role model Imperial Chancellor Otto von Bismarck. You have to shape not just
adapt to reality, he often repeated to me. Therein was a revolutionary element, which extended beyond the containment of totalitarianism.
43
He was a model of straightforwardness and self-discipline. For him, it was

not ones own reputation that was decisive, but rather whether one damaged
the interests of ones country. He emphasized the necessity of a genuine individualism, which for him meant that one must swim against the current.
Would you choose the same path again? I once asked him. He considered ones parents as being decisive. He grew up sheltered in a politically
upper-middle-class circle in Hubertushaus in the Rhineland, surrounded by
paintings of his beloved Emperor and Bismarck. If I would not have grown up
in this milieu, why would I have then read Bismarck 30 times and then gone
to Rome for seven years to smooth my rough Prussian edges with Italian realism? he answered.
What advice would you give to todays youth? You may only speak with
an elite, not the masses. History teaches us that truly decisive revolutions such
as the Reformation or Greek culture come about through tiny minorities, only
one out of a hundred who takes the message in him and gives it to others.
When, at 70 years of age, Kraemer

retired from active service at the
Pentagon, he gave speeches at the large
American military academy before 800
to 1,200 officers, and in the afternoon a
three-hour seminar for a maximum of
30volunteers. Afterward, he returned
with four to ten names of young gifted
officers, whom he recommended to the
general staff of the army with the words,
You should take a closer look at these
because they have it and can. Kraemer
regretted that no one cared for such
young people who were still nobodies.
His general staff praised him,
DrKraemer, nobody is looking as
a talent scout like you do.
44
When, at 70 years of age, he retired from active service at the Pentagon

because of regulations, he gave speeches at the large American military
academy before 800 to 1,200 officers, and in the afternoon a three-hour
seminar for a maximum of 30 volunteers. Afterward, he returned with four to
ten names of young gifted officers, whom he recommended to the general staff
of the army with the words, You should take a closer look at these because
they have it and can. Kraemer regretted that no one cared for such young
people who were still nobodies. His general staff praised him, Dr Kraemer,
nobody is looking as a talent scout like you do. He expected nothing for
himself in return for the immense exertion of energy. Where others sunned
themselves in the light of the many golden generals stars and commands in
order to increase their significance, he turned to the younger officers and
made it his task to find the gifted among them and to support them. Only very
self-confidentI would call it arrogantpersons can be so selfless wanting
nothing for themselves, he explained.
He focused on a few of the talented, That there is an objective contradiction
between excellence and mass education is either not understood or for ideological reasons not admitted. But the facts speak for themselves. I once asked
the young professor Henry Kissinger, How many especially gifted students
did you discover this year? His reply was, There are about 500 students in
my lectures and about 120 attend my seminar; that makes it impossible to
discover individual talent. Truly an impossible situation, since whole assemblies of people cannot be effectively lead, supported, advised, urged to
develop superior character and mental traitsfor that you have to concentrate
on individuals.
Colonel Jim McKnight, the Director of the Military Order of the World Wars,
thanked Dr Kraemer for his outstanding support for the fourth National Capital
Area Youth Leadership Conference at St. Johns College in Annapolis on June
2023, 2001, as an inspiration to all. Your insight, enthusiasm and wisdom mixed with your marvelous experiences and speaking abilities expanded
the minds of these highly motivated youngsters.
His essay On Elitism in this book is his main legacy urging us to look for
men and women of excellence, to encourage and foster those who truly excel,
giving them lasting support in every way.
Talent scouting of a very few with high potential, then tutoring them with a
steady injection of willpower over years as a missionary and fighting the new
forces of evil became his destiny.
Tutoring few talents with

a steady injection of willpower
became his destiny.
All highly civilized countries are going down a deplorable path unless
theyre engulfed by a wave of inner renewal and can reconstitute themselves
from within. I believe in Degeneration, but also in Regeneration, which is
always caused by an elite, a small determined minority. Ideals can be carried
to a breakthrough by a determined minority, Kraemer said with some silver
lining of optimism on his face.
45
46
Provocative Weakness by the ignorant European leaders Chamberlain

and Daladier (left) at the Munich Conference in 1938 opened the door
for Hitlers World War II which they tried to avoid.
47
The Kraemer Doctrine of

Provocative Weakness
By Fritz Kraemer
Do you know the Kraemer Doctrine of provocative weakness?

U.S. military weakness will provoke enemies to be aggressive because they do
not have to fear U.S. retaliation if they misbehave, while our friends (and neutrals too) are unable to believe in our ability to protect them.
It is a fact that weaknesseven apparent weaknessprovokes hostile
and fanatical elements to advance step by step, further and further because
they do not fear harsh and stern retaliation from a (perceived) paper tiger.
Gaining the reputation that the only surviving superpower would rely in
crisis essentially on diplomacy would deprive the U.S. of the capacity to
deter aggressive/fanatical elements in the international scene at an early
stage. The belief in diplomacy, without the implicit or explicit threat of being
backed by strong military forces and the will to use them, is an illusion. It was
precisely that illusion which guided Neville Chamberlain in his Munich deal
with the German dictator. It was the first step on the road toward WW II.
Brilliant fools never understood the devastating effect of provocative
weakness on a totalitarian dictatorship like the USSR.
Just as in the thirties brilliant fools didnt understand that their policy of
softness and relentingthe politics of appeasementsubstantially contributed
to the outbreak of the Second World War. The power-dictator Adolf Hitler
perceived softness as provocative weakness. It made him demand more and
more, let him break the Versailles Treaty without sanctions and ultimately led
him to march into Poland because he believed that England was too weak to
make good on its guarantees.
48
The principal misconception in the thinking of most politicians was to believe

that in dealing with a dictatorship, friendliness and yielding would produce
the same in the opposite side. In fact, in dictatorshipsas in sharksit causes
the opposite effect: their appetite increases and so does the danger of being
devoured.
This basic problem will persist in the future.
The West will never avoid the test of wills.
It is intrinsic to the history of peoples for thousands of years. It has always
been difficult for the fat, bourgeois West.
Brilliant fools and know-it-alls advocate provocative weakness, the fools
gold of world politics.
49
Jewish roots and drama in

Germanyfrom the Kaiser to Hitler
Dr Georg Kraemer and Anna Johanna

Kraemer with both sons Fritz (4 years old,
in front) and new born Wilhelm in 1912.
50
The late American hero and Pentagon strategist was born in the good old
days of German Kaiser Wilhelm II in the prosperous town of Essen in 1908.
This important city in the Ruhr Valley was home to the headquarters of the
Krupp steel conglomerate. Hard as Krupp steel referring to its feared cannons became a saying of proud Germans. At that time Central Europe had
enjoyed the longest period of peace ever. German troops had triumphed
against the archenemy France in 1871, a generation ago. Under the wise
leadership of Chancellor Otto von Bismarck Prussia took the lead in uniting
many smaller German states into one large and vibrant Reich with a population of 43m. The German Reich ushered in a new era of industrialization.
Millions of hard-working men and women, tens of thousands of innovative
engineers, and thousands of forward-thinking professors were responsible for
Germanys top ranking among all continental European countries. Germany
held a leading position in terms of economy, military power, science, and
culture and was at peace with itself for the first time. Perhaps this period of
peace lasted too long, and mixed with rising pride and nationalism, generated a mood of arrogance in the Kaiser and his entourage, nourishing confrontation with the maritime superpower, Britain, which ruled the world at that
time. The latecomer was pressing for equal status and a place in the sun like
the British cousins of the Kaiser, on the oceans and in the colonies. The favorite uniform of Wilhelm II was that of a British Admiral of the Fleet, an honor
awarded by his royal relatives in London in 1889. Berlin saw no need for
reconciliation with its archenemy France, which had lost Alsace-Lorraine to the
Germans after the Franco-Prussian War.
Kraemers father Georg was a Prussian and stern monarchist at heart. Due
to his Jewish background and Prussian roots from Berlin, he was perhaps even
more German than the average, an even purer Prussian than the Prussians, a
role model of a devoted citizen in the booming Kaiserreich. He was born in
Berlin on 25th August 1872, the son of businessman Gustav Kraemer and
Franziska Kraemer (ne Mendel). Both parents were Jewish. After graduating
from high school (Abitur) at the Friedrichs-Werdersche Gynasium and passing
the exams of the Royal Test Commission on 3rd September 1891, he studied
law at the universities of Berlin, Heidelberg, and Munich. While a student,
Georg was baptized as a Lutheran. After passing his first law exam graded
Good on 16th November 1894, and obtaining a PhD, he finished his bar
exam in 1899 and started work at the prosecutors office in Frankfurt an der
Kraemers father Georg was a

Prussian and stern monarchist
at heart. Due to his Jewish
background and Prussian roots
from Berlin, he was perhaps even
more German than the average
German, an even more purist
Prussian than the Prussians, a
role model of a devoted citizen in
the booming Kaiserreich.
51
Oder and in Memel. After getting his first job as prosecutor in Essen in 1903,
he began his career in public service and was promoted to the positions of
director of section in 1911 and to a first prosecutor in 1913.
In 1907, he married Anna Johanna Goldschmidt, who was very resourceful
and everything but an ordinary woman. Her son praised her as a power
Fritz Kraemers mother Anna Johannahere in front of her home

in Feldstrae 33 in Dsseldorf in Germany in 1903was very
resourceful and anything but an ordinary woman. Her son
praised her as a power woman. She had attended school
in Britain, travelled to Syria and Egypt and lived comfortably
as the daughter of industrialist and chemical factory owner
DrAnton Goldschmidt from Dsseldorf on the Rhine River. She
had also converted from Judaism to Lutheran Protestantism,
while both her parents remained in the Jewish faith. Peter
Drucker, a fellow-student of Fritz during their law studies at the
University of Frankfurt, described her in his book Adventures of
a Bystander: His mother was a belle laide and looked much
the way Eleanor Roosevelt looked as a girl and a young
woman. She was headstrong, independent and imaginative.
She had a great deal of money, values and taste.
52
In 1914 the parents were divorced and the

boys joined their mother in the small village of
Diethardt in the Taunus forest just ten miles from
St. Goar on the Rhine River. There the Kraemer
family lived in the large villa Hubertushaus
owned by Consul Hagedorn from Essen. Mrs
Kraemer was a good friend of his wife. The
house served as a hunting lodge with an annex
added in 1929.
woman. She had attended school in Britain, travelled to Syria and Egypt, and
lived comfortably as the daughter of industrialist and chemical factory owner
Dr Anton Goldschmidt from Dsseldorf on the Rhine River. She had also converted from Judaism to Lutheran Protestantism, while both her parents remained
in the Jewish faith. Peter Drucker, a fellow-student of Fritz during their law studies at the University of Frankfurt, described her in his book Adventures of a
Bystander: His mother was a belle laide and looked much the way Eleanor
Roosevelt looked as a girl and a young woman. She was headstrong, independent and imaginative. She had a great deal of money, values and taste.
Both parents lived happily for seven years with their first son Fritz and their
second-born, Wilhelm, in 1911.
1914 turned out to be a tragic year of destiny for the Kraemer family, derailing their lives much like a Wagner opera. World War I broke out and the
parents were divorced. Both events severely shocked Fritz. The boys joined
their mother in the small village of Diethardt in the Taunus forest just ten miles
from St. Goar on the Rhine River. There the Kraemer family lived in the large
villa Hubertushaus owned by Consul Hagedorn from Essen. Mrs Kraemer
was a good friend of his wife. The house served as a hunting lodge with an
annex added in 1929.
1914 turned out to be a tragic

year of destiny for the Kraemer
family derailing their lives much
like a Wagner opera. Word War I
broke out and the parents were
divorced. Both events severely
shocked young Fritz.
53
Georg Kraemer volunteered to

join the Imperial forces in World
War I ending his military career
as a Rittmeister of Reserve
(a captain in cavalry) with
honours as numerous officers
with Jewish backgrounds
fighting for their beloved Heimat
and the Kaiser had done.
Totalitarian dictator Adolf Hitler

betrayed them all: officers like Dr
Georg Kraemer, Prussias old
principles, fundamental Christian
values, and the German nation.
54
Georg Kraemer volunteered to join the Imperial forces in World War I ending
his military career honourably as a Rittmeister of Reserve (a captain in the
cavalry) like many officers with Jewish backgrounds fighting for their beloved
Heimat and the Kaiser. Years later they were all cheated by a private named
Adolf Hitler who had come from Austria and who had also fought in World War
I. They were driven out or killed under his racist dogma of Anti-Semitism: cleaning the Aryan blood from the negative Jewish. Georg Kraemernow a Christianwas a brave soldier fighting for Prussian values. He later served in the
Landwehr, and was promoted to the rank of major. The totalitarian dictator
Adolf Hitler betrayed them all: officers like Dr Georg Kraemer, along with Prussias old principles, fundamental Christian values, and the German nation.
At the age of 16, Fritz was sent to school in England followed by studies at the
London School of Economics. Returning to Germany in 1928, he studied law,
obtaining his doctorate at the University of Frankfurt, as his father had done
before him. Politically he supported Deutschnatio ale Volkspartei Party (DNVP),
n
led by Alfred Hugenberg who later, to Fritzs great disillusionment, joined Hitlers
first cabinet in 1933 for several months and supported the Ermchtigungsgesetz
(Enabling Act) in the Reichstag. Like millions of other young people, Fritz was
deeply disappointed by the Weimar Republics luke-warm and boring politicians.
He criticized the rampant nihilism of the profane and decadent new society of
the years following World War I and the vacuum of values and fighting spirit.
Peter Drucker was a peer of Kraemers at Frankfurt from 1928 to 1933. He
came from a Jewish family near Vienna which had converted to Christianity,
and later emerged as the nestor of business consultancy in the U.S. where he
emigrated in 1933. In his book Adventures of a Bystander Drucker provides
a good impression of Fritz Kraemer as a student. April 1929: with freezing
winds and blinding rains a kayak amid the ice floes on the Main River in the
middle of the city in Frankfurt. A cadaverous man naked except for the scantiest of black bathing trunks and a monocle, was furiously paddling upstream.
At the stern of the fragile craft flew the black, white, and red battle pennant of
the defunct German Imperial Navy People on the bridge watched: Here
he is again. A law student. His name is Kraemer. Even dressed Kraemer
looked odd. There was this monocle, worn with a white stock, a checkered
Tattersall vest, a broad-cloth coat, beautiful cut riding britches, and highly
polished black knee-length riding boots.
Drucker remembers that his friend was not just brilliant and knowledgeable
but could integrate political history, international law, was courteous, and in
complete, uncompromising control.
The ultra-nationalists and the Nazis were for Kraemer pure scum, proletarian rubble, motivated by resentments of their own inferiority and envy for their
betters. He considered himself a genuine conservative, a Prussian monarchist of the old Bismarck, Lutheran, and Spartan persuasion, he wrote. Fritz
Kraemer sent the Kaiser a birthday telegram every year. As a gesture of
appreciation Wilhelm II sent him back a signed photograph from his exile in
Doorn in The Netherlands. Kraemer took it all the way to America, placing it
in the center of his home in Washington on the coffee table. Viewing it each
day it became the spiritual link to the lost good old days and the Prussian
world of honor and duty, until his death in 2003.
Drucker recalled that young Fritz wanted to become the political advisor
to the Chief of the general staff of the Army: to the German army of course,
not to the Chief as an individual, however, because he considered himself
as a thinker not a doer. Two decades later he assumed exactly that position as Advisor to the U.S. Army Chief of Staff at the Pentagon, on the other
side of the Atlantic, embodying a unique mixture of a Prussian and an American soldier and advisor. In the footsteps of Baron von Steuben, who supported George Washington in the war of independence as first inspector
general of the army, Fritz was another influential Prussian coining U.S. Army
doctrine.
The years from 1918 to 1933 were highly frustrating in Germany due to the
unexpected defeat in World War I, the burdens of the Versailles Peace treaty,
mega-inflation, very high unemployment, severe poverty, and boring new
politicians with no vision for the future, with the permanent threat of a communist revolution on the model of the successful Russian Revolution in October
1917. The democrats had their opportunities but missed them in these chaotic
and difficult times.
On this dunghill of deep frustration and hopelessness, the Nazi movement
grew; first a small, obscure, and insignificant sapling, it developed into a
powerful force dominated by hate and aggression. The German herd of mil-
As a student in Frankfurt
Kraemer was not just brilliant
and knowledgeable but could
integrate political history,
international law, was courteous,
and in complete, uncompromising
control.
Young Fritz wanted to become

the political advisor to the Chief
of the general staff of the Army.
The German army of course, not
the Chief himself, however,
because he considered himself
as a thinker not a doer. Two
decades later he assumed exactly
that position as Advisor to
the U.S. Army Chief of Staff
at the Pentagon.
55
In the summer of 1934, Kraemer was vacationing in the Gulf

of Sorrento in Italy with the Imperial flag on his small kayak
boat. The Nazi naval attach, also present, protested
formally in the Italian foreign office against this assault,
since the Nazis had their own flag and rejected any symbol
of the Kaiserreich. Kraemer was ordered to take the flag
down. He refused and even went to court arguing he was
permitted to have his private flagand won. Kraemers case
received wide publicity and the whole of Italy chuckled over
the Nazi attach.
On the dunghill of deep

frustration and hopelessness, the
Nazi movement grew; first a
small, obscure bonsai tree, but
subsequently developing into a
powerful force dominated by hate
and aggression.
lions of subservient sheep had lost its imperial shepherd and was circled by
hungry red and brown wolfs.
For a couple of years Hitlers radical National Socialist Party (NSDAP) was
only one of several minor parties winning a mere 2.6 percent of the vote (12
parliamentary seats) in the Reichstag election in 1928. But it quickly rose to
18.3 percent in 1930 (107 seats), and became the strongest party by doubling its votes to 37.4 percent in July 1932 (230 seats) before dropping to
33.1 percent in November 1932 (196 seats). The moderate, centrist democrats were increasingly weakened, losing their majority in parliament, caught
between the radicals of the communist left (17 percent) and the Nazis (33
percent). They lost not only the majority in the parliament, but the initiative, the
power to change, and the hope of the people.
Most observers are not aware that Hitler never won a majority in any real
election. Even in the rigged election of 5th March 1933, he united only 43.9
percent of the Germans behind him with 56 percent voting against the NSDAP.
With 11.3 percent not participating in the election, merely 32.6 percent of the
Germans (17.3 million out of 44.7 million) stood behind Hitler. A power
vacuum of two-thirds offered these radical gravediggers an opportunity to
take over the whole country in a coup detat.
56
Nobody was willing to put his life at stake and fight Hitler either in or
outside Germany, Fritz Kraemer complained, criticizing the total cowardice
of the bourgeoisie. Wild men can only be stopped if naked force is impending. In Hitlers book Mein Kampf everything was written down in 1925. Discussion or compromise were not able to change his mind, Kraemer told me.
The German democrats, the elites, and the Prussian educated generals inside
the Reich all failed.
But so did the foreign governing elites, the passive politicians, and the general staff in France and Britain. Neither victorious power of World War I
stopped Hitler; they were disarmed, tired of war, and wanted to appease him
with substantial concessions. However, this policy was incapable of stopping
him; instead from 1933 to 1939 it stimulated his appetite and increased the
admiration of the German man in the street after many years of depression
and despair. Versailles became a lost victory and the theme of war in Europe
continued.
Winston Churchill sensed this historic drama and appealed in vain to wake
up his sleeping nation. Nothing happened when the Wehrmacht entered the
de-militarized Rhineland in March 1936 breaking the Versailles and Locarno
Treatiesa historic mistake by France and Great Britain, as the German army
was still very weak, Hitler uncertain about the outcome, and stopping him was
still possible. The last chance for peace through strength passed. Two years
later at the Munich Conference, Chamberlain and Daladier opened the door
for Hitlers World War II by provocative weakness, Fritz Kraemer said, when
they agreed to the Wehrmachts invasion of the borderland of Czechoslovakia
with its strong German population. These historical facts and personal experiences of weak forces versus radicals served as the catalyst of Fritz Kraemers
strategic thinking and gave birth to his theory of provocative weakness. Like
a match it sparked the deadly fire of another war in Europe.
In 1931, Fritzs father moved to Koblenz to be closer to his separated family. But only two years remained before his final tragedy started. On January
30, 1933, the Austrian proletarian became the new German Chancellor with
the conservative Franz von Papen as his deputy who naively believed that he
could control Hitler. There were only three Nazi members in the new cabinet
(Hitler, Gring, and Frick), confronted by a clear majority of allied conserva-
The German herd of millions of

subservient sheep had lost its
imperial shepherd and was circled
by hungry red and brown wolfs.
Nobody was willing to put his

life at stake and fight Hitler
neither in nor outside Germany,
Fritz Kraemer complained,
criticizing the total cowardice
of the bourgeoisie.
57
tive ministers, mostly independent technocrats and some from the Deutschnationale Volkspartei. In a conversation with his son Fritz, the prosecutor Georg
Kraemer displayed optimism: Hitler has only three votes in the cabinet and
we have trustworthy Baron von Papen. The conservatives will overrule him.
Now we have tied him into a cabinet with many more conservatives. They will
no longer exist in a year.
Fritz was skeptical, calling this optimism a bourgeois idea of the middle
class. He told his father: You underestimate the intensity of the brown proletarians revolutionary will. Hitler and the Nazis will not stop. One cannot
outmaneuver the Nazis because the conservatives are afraid of them. Both the
NSDAP and the SA take to the street with guns intimidating, incarcerating,
and killing people. I have seen this happen in 1933, Fritz Kraemer told
me. It was then that his strong resentment of bourgeois navet with regard to
fanatics was born.
The intellectuals biggest

mistake was the fact that they
were merely anti-Nazi and not
anti-totalitarian. Thats typical
for intellectuals.
Kraemer later declared: It took Hitler until 1935 to set up an army and
within four years it was capable of defeating Poland in six weeks. Would a
discussion with him have made sense? The intellectuals biggest mistake was
the fact that they were merely anti-Nazi and not anti-totalitarian. Thats typical
of intellectuals. Intellectuals enjoyed a high degree of freedom in the Weimar
Republic which was permissive concerning social and political issues. In such
a state a courageous and fearless individual such as Hitler was capable of
seizing power. Hitler had obtained the Iron Cross First Class from his Jewish
officer in World War I because he must have performed heroic tasks under
enemy fire, as this was a very rare decoration for a private. The bourgeoisies
cowardice was outrageous. It avoids any confrontation and simply backs
down when facing brute force and threats, Kraemer remembered.
When the important Prussian provincial government under Ministerpresident Otto Braun was thrown out by the central government on the 20th July
1932 by the then Reichskanzler von Papen with a decree of President of the
Reich von Hindenburg, they departed immediately adhering to the motto: We
will only give way to force and do that at once. The Social Democrats ruled
Prussia and had more personnel in the police (90,000) than the central government in Berlin. So this democratic power came into the hands of Berlin as
well. Moreover, the NSDAP was able to win street fights which, in turn,
58
impressed the bourgeoisie. No one else stood up against communist terror.

The intellectuals were undermining the Weimar Republic. A dictatorship can
be created easily, if the masses are confused and no longer know whom to
follow. Starting 1933 this was my situation analysis and I told my father shortly
after Hitlers seizure of power that I would not remain in Germany.
Following the burning of the German parliament (Reichstagsbrand) in Berlin in February 1933, the President of the Reich Paul von Hindenburg issued
an emergency law abolishing all civil and political rights, thus enabling the
new chancellor Hitler and his interior minister of the NSDAP to jail political
opponents. He did not hesitate and within months he was heading for total
control.
The Nazi Enabling Act (Ermchtigungsgesetz) passed by the Reichstag on
March 24 1933, provided Reichskanzler Hitlernot the conservative President Paul von Hindenburgwith unlimited power to rule through emergency
decrees (Notverordnungen). Within a single day, Germany thus turned into
the one man show of a devoted hate-monger. According to articles one and
two, the Hitler government could pass any law violating the constitution and
human rights without parliamentary approval. 124 members of the democratic DNVP and Catholic Zentrum (Centre) parties voted in the Reichstag with
the Nazis who needed their support. Thus a majority handed Adolf Hitler
absolute power on a silver platter. Now the vengeful Austrian ex-private had
succeeded. The door to hell was unlocked. In June 1934, the other two parties
supporting the Enabling Act were banned leaving the NSDAP the only legal
political party. From this moment on the dictator acted without restraint until he
committed suicide in April 1945, by which time 50 million people had died
in WW II including six million Jews and Germany and most of Europe was
smashed to pieces.
A dictatorship can be created

easily, if the masses are
confused and no longer
know whom to follow.
Using force and tricks, Hitler managed to outflank other political parties:
jailing their leaders, neutralizing any opposition and taking full control of
Germany in the few months of 1933a coup detat exploiting the weaknesses of his opponents. Several useful and nave bourgeois from the conservative political spectrum and from industry, such as the Krupp steel magnate,
assisted him in attaining the pole position of power. As the German emigrant
Sebastian Haffner wrote in his book Germany: Jekyll & Hyde, the leadership
59
vacuum and lack of courage predominant among leaders within and outside
of Germany, paved the way for Hitlers seizure of ultimate power.
By the time Hitler became Reichskanzler, Fritz Kraemer had finished his law
studies and obtained his doctorate in international law. He left Germany for
Italy as he anticipated the next logical steps in the exercise of absolute power.
In his book Peter Drucker relates a characteristic anecdote about him. In the
summer of 1934, Kraemer was vacationing in the Gulf of Sorrento in Italy
where he flew the Imperial flag on his small kayak boat. The Nazi naval attach protested formally to the Italian foreign office against this assault, since
the Nazis had their own flag and rejected any symbol of the Kaiserreich.
Kraemer was ordered to take the flag down. He refused and even went to
court arguing he was permitted to have his private flagand won. Kraemers
case received wide publicity and the whole of Italy chuckled about the Nazi
attach. The Nazis were not amused and when Mussolini later formed an alliance with Hitler in 1936, they demanded Kraemers head.
The tragedy was that

emigration was not made
easy by the receiving
nations including the U.S.
60
Fritz Kraemer had left his home at the right moment, because implementation of Hitlers ideological Pure Blood policy began in the spring of 1933
with the increasing persecution of the 500,000 German Jews. Up until October 1941, 360,000 Jews emigrated, including Henry Kissinger and his family. In this first phase the Nazis wanted to push the Jews out of Germany. The
tragedy was that emigration was not made easy by the receiving nations,
including the U.S. The Wannsee protocol of 20th January 1942 where the
Endlsung der Judenfrage (The Final Solution) was decided by 15 high
ranking officials lamented that the permanent tightening of the rules for Jewish immigrants and the increased charges for them made the exodus difficult.
Now most of the remaining 131,800 German Jews were systematically
deported out of the Reich, dying in inhuman conditions in the concentration
camps or murdered. From Hitlers viewpoint, the war created the possibility of
a Final Solution of the Jewish Question after the SS had assassinated many
thousands of individuals in Eastern Europe beginning in the summer of 1941.
Only a few thousand Jews survived the Holocaust hidden by friends in Germany, including Fritz Kraemers mother. In Germany, Fritz would have had no
chance of survival being a Jew under law and moreover a rebellious and
outspoken political opponent.
The systematic and increasing restriction, discrimination, and strangulation of Jewish life in Germany, first by the Nazi Party and organized thugs
of the SA, then, from 1933, by state institutions as well, was a perfidious
act. The Jews were worn down, excluded from jobs and public life, suppressed or beaten, because they were supposed to leave the country. But
other nations refused to admit them all so easily. Neither the U.S. nor the
South American countries displayed sufficient generosity or solidarity in this
tragedy; it was very hard for Jews to obtain visas to emigrate to freedom
and survival.
Within a few months after Hitlers seizure of power, law turned into injustice
and injustice against Jews became law. New laws were conceived rapidly
and implemented without mercy. The Banality of the Evil (Hannah Arendt)
was able to vent its wrath on those deprived of their rights. From a Nazi viewpoint, this was a just cause consistent with the Nazi doctrine of the Purity of
the Aryan Race. According to this theory, the least educated unskilled worker,
having Aryan blood, was more valuable than clever Professor Einstein. Every
Jew, posing a threat to the purity of the Aryan race, had to be singled out and
eliminated. Normal human beings turned into perverse mass murderers. The
Nazi dictatorship quickly demonstrated how human beings can be turned into
objects and how hate propaganda is able to create inhuman monsters out of
normal citizens within a few years, even in a highly educated cultural nation
like Germany.
Only a few thousand Jews

survived the Holocaust hidden
by friends in Germany, including
Fritz Kraemers mother.
Georg Kraemer experienced this perversion of thinking even towards Jewish heros and officers of World War I.
National Socialist actions against Jews encompassing exclusion, deprivation of rights, forced emigration, physical persecution, and expropriation spiralled from 1933. The steps on the path to Auschwitzs hell were
the Nuremberg racial laws of 1935, the Reichskristallnacht of November
1938, the brutalization of World War II and the invasion of Poland in
1939, resulting in the so called Judenstern in that country and throughout
the Reich from 1941. This sparked ghettoization, deportations, and mass
murders in the militarily occupied areas of Eastern and South Eastern
Europe.
61
The Nuremberg race laws were passed on 15th September 1935 during the
NSDAPs 7th Party Convention in Nuremberg with the pompous title Law for
the Protection of German Blood and German Honor and the First Order of
the Reichs Citizen Law.
According to National Socialist belief, an individual with at least three
Jewish grandparents was classified as a full Jew. Personal merits and conversion to Christianity played no role in this racist ideology. Hence the Kraemer family came under the eye of Nazi racial mania. Individuals who had
served as officers in World War I could still hope for a little mercy, but not for
long.
Starting in 1933 the Kraemer

family came more and more
into the focus of the racist
blood ideology of the National
Socialist movement
On 1st April 1933, due to the boycott on the Jews, Georg Kraemer was
dismissed from the Koblenz prosecution office and given leave of absence by
the Prussian Justice Department, having held the position of first prosecutor
implementing the law for twenty years. His world was turned upside down.
On the same day, he received a sick note for four weeks from the physician
Dr Lindpaintner diagnosing a nervous breakdown accompanied by grave
fatigue.
Subsequently the senior public prosecutor addressed the General Prosecutors office in Cologne in a note requesting a replacement. But within several
months Georg Kraemer had to be re-hired. As a soldier who had served on
the front line during World War I, he could not be dismissed due to the Law
on Restoration of Civil Service of 7th April 1933. This temporary front fighter
privilege was the result of an intervention of President Paul von Hindenburg
on 4th April 1933. This World War I national hero had called it entirely intol-
National Socialist actions against Jews encompassing exclusion, deprivation of rights,

forced emigration, physical persecution, and expropriation spiraled from 1933. The
steps on the path to Auschwitzs hell were the Nuremberg racial laws of 1935, the
Reichskristallnacht of November 1938, accompanied by the brutalization of World
War II and the invasion of Poland in 1939 resulting in discrimination with the so
called Judenstern in that country and in the entire Reich starting in 1941.
62
63
erable that those Jewish civil servants were being dismissed. If they were
worthy of fighting and bleeding for Germany, then they ought to be considered worthy of serving the fatherland.
Consequently a special regulation was added to 3 paragraph 2. Accordingly, Jewish civil servants, who had been civil servants since August 1st,
1914, and had fought in World War I at the front for the German Reich were
not affected. Jewish servicemen later had to prove their participation in military action. To the Nazis surprise, half of all Jewish civil servants were able
to prove they had fought for Germany as well as occupying their jobs in
1914.
Dr Georg Kraemer, being nonAryan himself and having a

Jewish spouse, does not identify
with the new state, but is making
an effort to fulfill all political
requirements. In terms of
character, his love for justice must
be emphasized., wrote the proNazi senior prosecutor of Koblenz
to his First Prosecutor in 1934.
In December 1934, Georg Kraemer was congratulated by the senior prosecution of Koblenz for his 40 years of work. The final official assessment was
a cynical display of the Nazi mentalityEnergy and decisiveness are low,
particularly since he was dispensed from service due to his non-Aryan descent
for several months in 1933. Dr Kraemer, being non-Aryan himself and having
a Jewish spouse, does not identify with the new state, but is making an effort
to fulfill all political requirements. In terms of character, his love for justice must
be emphasized.
The Reichsbrgergesetz (Reichs Citizen Law) finally abolished the front
fighter privilege in 1935 and those Jewish civil servants, to whom it applied,
were forced to give up their positions. According to 4 of the Reichs Citizen
Law a Jew could not be a Reichs Citizen and occupy a public position. The
protective hand, Paul von Hindenburg, had passed away in 1934 and his
successor was Adolf Hitler. On 30th September 1935, the Reichs Minister of
Justice issued an order (1a 10712/35) forcing Georg Kraemer, classified as
a full Jew, to take a leave of absence.
The Senior Prosecutor knew that Kraemer had joined the Protestant church
on 28th March 1892. According to 5, paragraph 1 of the Reichs Citizen
Law, he was considered a Jew, because both parents were of full Jewish
descentthis was the wording of a letter of the Senior Prosecutor addressed
to the General Prosecutor on 6th December 1935. At least he received a pension as a participant in World War I. His affluent life had been destroyed and
he was alone, isolated, persecuted, and intimidated, but he unfortunately did
64
The Gestapo record card of Major ret. Dr Georg Kraemer from Koblenz.
65
In a noble gesture, the city of Koblenz

honored its former Jewish citizen Dr
Georg Kraemer on 27th August 2011,
with a so called stumbling block which
was set into the sidewalk in front of his
former home in the Bismarckstrae 6b.
In 1996, the Cologne artist Gunther
Demnig initiated the laudable human
action with his bronze-coloured
stumbling blocks remembering these
NS victims in front of their last homes.
In 650 German municipalities and also
in The Netherlands, Belgium and other
European countries more than 30,000
bronze stones serve as a reminder and
give the victims back their names and
memory after the were dehumanized as
pure numbers in the concentration camps
(see www.stolpersteine.eu).
66
not emigrate. Four years later, at the start of World War II, this option no longer existed and he was caught in a trap in Koblenz.
On 2nd December 1941, Georg Kraemer was seen in Koblenz without a
Jew star. On 15th January 1942, he was jailed by the Gestapo and released
on 4th February with a warning. His Gestapo file (II B3 715/41) still exists. It
speaks of his Jewish confession, although he was baptized as a Protestant
Christian. In order to stigmatize him as a Jew, Israel was added to his first
name Georg.
On 20th January 1942, the fate of the Jews living under German jurisdiction
in Europe was sealed. The high-level, secret Wannsee Conference in Berlin
focused on discussions and plans to resettle, assemble, and kill this unwelcome portion of the population in ghettos and concentration camps. Under the
Wannsee Protocol, the systematic murder of six million Jews all over Europe
by hard labor, inhumane conditions, and straightforward murder of the survivors started.
Theresienstadt (Terezin) in Northern Bohemia was designated as a so called
senior persons ghetto and transit camp for the extermination camps in the
East. Reinhard Heydrich, the responsible SS-Senior Group Leader, announced
that Jews possessing war medals were to be brought there. These Jews were
offered house purchase contracts assuring adequate housing, food, and provision of medical care thus enabling the Reich to confiscate their assets. Deportations began with the order to relinquish their homes and to assemble at
specific places.
The Wannsee conference decided

on 20th January 1942 the Final
Solution of the Jewish Question.
Now most of the remaining
131,800 German Jews were
systematically deported out of
the Reich, died in inhuman
conditions in the concentration
camps like Dr Georg Kraemer,
and the rest murdered.
On 25th April 1942, a Gestapo order forced Georg Kraemer to give up his
own home at Bismarckstrae 6b, in Koblenz at the Rhine, where he had lived
for eleven years, and to move to the house at Hohenzollernstrae 146, reserved
for Jews. The Gestapo file read: The Jew Kraemer was ordered to give up his
apartment to the Aryan family Cornelius and move to the Jew Feiner. On 20th
May he was ordered to move to the Jewish House An der Liebfrauenkirche
11. On 27th July 1942, the fourth transportation order (Number III-2) crammed
him into a livestock wagon with 77 other Jews at the Koblenz freight depot in
the Ltzel district deporting him over several hundred kilometers to the Theresienstadt ghetto and concentration camp. In a cover-up attempt, the Gestapo file
67
spoke of evacuation to a seniors ghetto, thus deceiving the victims. The file
notes that the Koblenz finance office confiscated Kraemers assets for the Reich.
On 1st November 1942, Georg

Kraemer, Major of the Landwehr
and First Prosecutor, died at the
age of 70 in the Theresienstadt
ghetto. Nobody knows the cause of
his death, but it was almost
certainly a broken Prussian heart
and deep disappointment about
the shabby betrayal of his honor
and his fatherland.
The transports took several days and were conducted through assembly
points. They transformed human beings into mere numbers, depriving them of
their human rights and human dignity. At numerous different counters they
were forced to give away remaining items and fill out questionnaires. These
individuals were systematically humiliated by shrieking, violent SS men. In
large trains transporting 1,000 persons each, the Jews arrived in Theresienstadt at a debilitated condition, in the waiting hall of death. 34,000 people
died in the ghetto. The highest fatality rate of more than 100 deaths a day
was recorded in the fall of 1942, because the camp was entirely overcrowded
with 60,000 people and sick and elderly Jews still arriving from Germany.
They were no longer able to tolerate the degradation as well as the catastrophic conditions of illness, scarce food, unheated and crowded accommodation, too few sanitation facilities, and daily humiliation. This was part of the
perverse Wannsee plan to kill by inhumanity first and later by gas.
On 1st November 1942, Georg Kraemer, Major of the Landwehr and First
Prosecutor, died at the age of 70 in the Theresienstadt ghetto. Nobody knows
the cause of his death, but it was almost certainly a broken Prussian heart and
despair about the shabby betrayal of his honor and his fatherland.
In a noble gesture, the city of Koblenz honored its former Jewish citizen on
27th August 2011, with a so called stumbling block which was set into the
sidewalk in front of his former home at Bismarckstrae 6b. The association
Memorial for the Victims of National Socialism in Koblenz, founded in
1997, organized this action. In 2001, the memorial was inaugurated. Exhibitions dealing with this dark period followed. Joachim Hennig, the associations deputy chairman declared: My memorial work is directed at remembering the NS victims and to give them a face. As the saying goes: A human
being has really passed away if nobody thinks of him or her anymore. Furthermore these NS victims can serve as a reminder as well as a role model in
an increasingly complex world. The Cologne artist Gunther Demnig started
this fine initiative in 1996 with his bronze-colored stumbling blocks remembering these NS victims placed in front of their last homes. In 650 municipalities
in Germany and also in The Netherlands, Belgium, and other European coun-
68
tries more than 30,000 bronze stones serve as a memorials

to the victims whose names they restore after they were
dehumanized as pure numbers in the concentration camps
(see www.stolpersteine.eu).
In the small village of Diethardt, Georgs wife Anna
Johanna Kraemer was able to escape Nazi persecution,
although she was also Jewish according to the race laws;
the authorities were aware of her existence and that of her
daughter-in-law Britta Kraemer, who, having lost her Swedish citizenship following her marriage and having acquired
German citizenship, had been interrogated repeatedly. Her
escape was A great miracle, according to her granddaughter Madeleine Bryant Kraemer, who was born after
World War II. Later Johanna Kraemer moved to Washington, D.C., where she started a new life at the age of 60.
During the war, her other son Wilhelm lived safely in
Great Britain, working there as a physician. A year after his
fathers death, Fritz joined the U.S. Army and in 1945 liberated the concentration camp at Bergen-Belsen near Hannover with the 84th U.S. Infantry Division. He then took a
jeep and found his mother, his wife Britta and his son in the
Hubertushaus. First they moved to Ober mmergau in the
a
Alps, where Fritz Kraemer worked for two years with Henry
Kissinger at the newly founded European Command Intelligence School, before taking up residence together in Washington, D.C., in 1947.
In the small village of Diethardt, Georgs wife Anna Johanna
Kraemer was able to escape Nazi persecution, although she was
also Jewish according to the race laws, the authorities were
aware of her existence and her daughter-in-law Britta Kraemer
had been interrogated repeatedly. Her escape was A great
miracle, according to her granddaughter Madeleine Bryant
Kraemer, who was born after World War II. Later Johanna
Kraemer moved to Washington, D.C., where she started a new
life at the age of 60.
69
Infamous Conspiracy
Theory
There were three German officers who bear the name Fritz Kraemer, as I
do, he told me. A highly decorated Lieutenant-General, a Major-General of
the Wehrmacht, and SS Brigade-fhrer Fritz Kraemer, a general in the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitlers, my opponent during the Ardenne offensive of 1944.
He was the thoughtful brains behind Sepp Dietrich, Commander of the Leibstandarte, a general staff officer by training.
America is teeming with conspiracy theories suspecting hidden powers. It
was Fritz Kraemers bad luck that an SS Brigade Fhrer bearing the same
name also fought in the Ardenne offensive (Battle of the Bulge). On the opposite side stood Fritz Gustav Anton Kraemer with the 84th Infantry Division
(nicknamed The Railsplitters) under Maj Gen Alexander R. Bolling, whereas
SS-Brigadefhrer Fritz Kraemer was Chief of Staff of the 6th SS Tank Army
under Sepp Dietrich.
Members of the Leibstandarte Adolf Hitler had killed 87 American soldiers
in confused fighting near Malmedy in the Ardennes in December 1944, even
though they had already surrendered. The Malmedy trial, dealing with the
crimes of SS troops from December 1944 to January 1945, started one year
after the end of World War II in Dachau near Munich. On this occasion, the
SS commander named Fritz Kraemer was sentenced to ten years in prison. In
1959, he died in Hxter, North Rhine-Westphalia.
Mae Brussels, a Californian woman, suspecting that a Nazi group was
behind Kennedys assassination, used the fluke of the identical names as an
opportunity to address the Pentagon, asserting that the Defense Departments
geostrategic advisor and the SS General were one and the same person who
70
had merely exchanged identities. Of course every monocle is considered a

Nazi accessory by conspiracy theorists.
Obviously this infamous and slanderous insinuation could not be taken
s
eriously. It was an absurd notion to imagine an SS General, speaking only
German, slipping into an American soldiers uniform, not being recognized
by his student Henry Kissinger and, bearing his own name, fighting on the
U.S. side against German troops. Still this sordid denunciation angered and
strained Dr Kraemer because he had risked his life fighting against the SS and
the Nazi dictatorship; and because his father, a Jew, was deported to and
later died in the Theresienstadt concentration camp in 1942 on the grounds of
the Nuremberg race laws.
In the United States everybody can utter nonsense about everyone else by
invoking freedom of opinion. The prospects of legal redress against slander
are slight and merely create unnecessary publicity. Thus the only option for
Fritz the fighter against Nazism was not to be troubled by these impertinent
insinuations but to ignore them.
America is teeming with conspiracy

theories suspecting hidden powers.
It was Fritz Kraemers bad luck that a
SS Brigade Fhrer bearing the same
name also fought in the Ardenne
offensive (Battle of the Bulge). On the
U.S. side stood Fritz Gustav Anton
Kraemer with the 84th Infantry Division
(nicknamed The Railsplitters) under
Maj Gen Alexander R. Bolling,
whereas SS-Brigadefhrer Fritz Kraemer
(picture) was Chief of Staff of the 6th
SSTank Army under Sepp Dietrich.
71
72
The Woman behind the Man

By Madeleine Kraemer Bryant
My parents met in Geneva when he was seventeen and she was nineteen. He
immediately decided that they would one day marrymuch to the consternation of
his mother who said, as any mother would, that at age seventeen he couldnt ossibly
have found his lifes partnerbut he had. They where engaged for seven and married for fifty-seven years.
My father relished having an equal partner for profound conversations on many
topics. A spiritual person himself, he drew strength from her deeply spiritual nature,
and her cheerful optimism countered his innate pessimism.
He was proud of her inherent courage: leaving her family and moving to Italy with
him; surviving admirably well the hell and great personal danger of WW II Germany
(and being a single parent caring for their young son during that time); beginning
a whole new unknown life in the U.S. with him and their two young children; stoically
facing serious health problems; and just generally dealing well with lifes hard road.
She lived seventeen years in Sweden, ten years in Germany, nine years in Switzerland, five years in Italy, and more than forty years in the U.S.A., and was fluent in
five languages.
Both could spend hours in deep discussion of psychological and spiritual matters.
She was an excellent inspirational speaker in her own right. She always held her
ownand could energetically defend her positions. But fundamentally, they were on
the same wavelengthstrong spiritual beliefs, deep ethical values, commitment to
country.
My father often said he would not have achieved what he did in life without her.
Britta was absolutely the right wife for me. She was not superficial.
She was creative, imaginative, intelligent, spiritual.
73
Personality plays a decisive roll.
Fritz Kraemer with his wife Britta

in Iscia (Italy) in the 30s.
74
The quality of decisions made is very questionable if

you dont have personalities.
Personalities must be able to oppose the iron will of
revolutionary fanatics.
75
A Daughters Impressions
By Madeleine Kraemer Bryant
As my fathers only daughter, I have a unique perspective on this remarkable man: Fritz G. A. Kraemer. It is said that fathers and daughters have a
special bondthis was surely true in our case.
Probably the one word I would

use to describe my father as I
grew up was strength. I felt
totally protectedthere was no
problem he couldnt handle.
Probably the one word I would use to describe my father as I grew up was
strength. I felt totally protectedthere was no problem he couldnt handle,
whether the solution required intellectual, emotional, or physical strength.
While easily annoyed by small, everyday irritations, in time of any crisis Dad
was immediately totally calm and completely focused on the resolution.
Years of individual sports and especially paddling his treasured kayak,
gave him tremendous physical strength. He insisted that a strong, fit body was
essential to balance ones intelligence. When I was a small child, he would
place me in his right hand and raise me high above him. Throughout his life,
he loved to impress us with his ability to lift a heavy suitcase with his little finger. The story is told that on one occasion he bounded out of his airport
wheelchair, grabbing his suitcase back from the dumbfounded young skycap
who had made the mistake of grumbling about the items weight. For his 80th
birthday, he bought himself an exercise bikeand cycled over 2,300 miles.
At age ninety-five, he still hiked his beloved Alps and walked his Washington
neighborhood, albeit with great pain. Until just before his death at age ninetyfive, and still planning a trip to Europe, he disciplined himself to perform fifteen to thirty minutes of floor exercises several times a week.
But his strength was far more than merely physical; a fiery core of strength
radiated from within. We knew exactly what his values were, what he believed
and he never wavered from these absolutes. Integrity, reliability, and honesty
impressed him, while a persons background or position generally did not.
Native intelligence and common sense meant far more than any parchment
76
The soldier-father with

his daughter Madeleine in the backyard
of their Washington
home in the late 40s.
degree. Appearing at times to take his own intellect for granted, in later years
he indicated very clearly to me that he saw his intellect, his physical strength, his
talents, as gifts from God whom, he knew, demanded that To whom much is
given, much is required. Although in European fashion, he was not a regular
churchgoer, his Christian faith was deep and affected all that he was and did.
I never had any doubts about his expectations of medo your best, always
display the highest integrity, stand up for what is right, defend those weaker
than yourself, be proud of yourself and of your heritage, be a patriot, and
never bring shame to the family. He expected us to be strongcrying or whining was strictly frowned upon. (I discovered early that he was actually rather
Native intelligence and common

sense meant far more than any
parchment degree.
77
tenderhearted and tears and whining were unnecessary.) My deep-rooted

desire not to disappoint him was stronger than any urge of youth to go a bit
astray. True, he was short on patience and could be harsh and judgmental.
Anyone who figuratively stepped on his toes could be blown back by his
immediate angerunfortunately, sometimes his disappointment in someones
conduct led to a temporary or permanent break with that person. This was
never an issue in our relationship. He was saddened by events which made
my life difficult, but never appeared disappointed in me as a person.
Once, I discovered a pink

convertible in his driveway. He
walked to a car lot and bought the
first convertible he saw. Color and
style were unimportant. I know
who I am! What do I care what
people think about the car I
drive! I can only imagine the
effect at the Pentagon on those
who, rightly, considered him
conservative.
Both my parents favored a modesthe preferred the word austerelifestyle. Dad, who didnt learn to drive until we came to the States, drove only
second-hand cars. Once, I discovered a pink convertible in his driveway. It
turned out his old car had given up. He needed a car and had no intention of
investing valuable time in the search. He walked to a car lot and bought the
first convertible he saw. Color and style were unimportant. I know who I am!
What do I care what people think about the car I drive! I can only imagine the
effect at the Pentagon on those who, rightly, considered him conservative.
Perhaps because of the simplicity of our surroundings, I didnt realize that
our household was, nevertheless, a bit unusual. Looking back, I recognize that
this modest house entertained remarkable visitors from around the U.S.,
indeed the world. Conversations flowed easily from one ancient or modern
topic to anotherin any of several languages. Even listening to the conversations between my parents was like observing a tennis match. Neither had use
for small talk. In some ways they grew up togetherthey met when she was
nineteen and he was seventeen. Mother was one of the few people who didnt
hesitate to disagree with him and could hold her ownsomething he didnt
always like but admired and respected her for. He often said she was the
ideal mate for him. She strongly supported his lifes work, but also built a life
around her children, her church, and her community. He didnt easily show
affection, but he loved her dearly and as her health deteriorated, he cared for
her at home until she died in 1998.
Dad expected us to understand that, unless we had an emergency, his lifes
work took precedence. After ten or eleven exhausting hours in the Pentagon, he
would demand absolute quiet when he returned home in the evening. However,
after recuperating a bit with a shot of whiskey and a cigar, he would present at
78
supper an animated, if pessimistic, global strategic analysis of the day. My brother

and I would be the recipients of the fierce and famous Kraemer glare those rare
times when we dared to indulge in childish antics during these speeches. Dad
delighted in occasionally stopping momentarily, fixing his eyes sternly on me (all
of age nine or ten) and demanding, You do know where Okinawa (or some
other locale) is!? Another favorite of his during my teen years was to require that,
before I could enjoy a bite of pizza, I had to decline it in Latin first.
Three most important women in Fritz

Kraemers life: His wife Britta, daughter
Madeleine and his mother Anna Johanna
(around 1960).
In later years, Dad would sigh and say he had not been a good father
because, I never took my children to the zoo like other fathers did. Fortunately, my dear mother, as mothers so often did in the 1950s, took responsibility for all those childhood events like PTA meetings, recitals, Scouts, medical
appointments, etc., for Sven and me. My marvelous grandmother, too, shared
in many of our special moments and provided us with a listening ear, much
affection, and her gentle wisdom. I sometimes gave Dad a hard time because
he wouldnt permit us to have a television. But he and his younger brother had
grown up in the countryside and creatively invented their own games. You
must be able to entertain yourself and not just push a button to get canned
entertainment from a loud box. Read a book or do a crossword puzzle or play
outside! Their first TV was actually purchased by Sven and me in the 1970s
79
as a gift for my mother. Dad promptly banned it to the upstairs. I doubt if he

watched TV a dozen times in his entire life.
Dad read voraciously

newspapers in several languages
as well as books. To help him fall
asleep at night, he might select
Shakespeare or Goethe or
The Odyssey or Julius Caesar
all in its original!
Instead, Dad read voraciouslynewspapers in several languages as well

as books from his large and varied collection. To help him fall asleep at night,
he might select Bismarck or The Three Musketeers or Shakespeare or Goethe
(in the original) or The Odyssey (in its original!) or Julius Caesar (in its original!). Often, he would look up something in an atlas or encyclopediaand
be lost in the book for hours, long after he had found the original item. Speaking of an atlas, when he was a grade school student he took his own atlas and
corrected all the national boundaries that had changed following WW I.
During his years in the Pentagon, evenings were often consumed by his newspapers. Most weekends he would sit in his garden and read for another eight
to ten hours. Because of his overwhelming sense of duty and mission, he never
took a vacationwhich meant that the family didnt either. By the time I was
in high school, my independent mother simply decided that she and I should
travel on our own for a week or so every year. It wasnt until the late 1960s
that Dad would finally travel with Mother to Europe each year, eventually
building a chalet in the Swiss Alps after his retirement.
Nevertheless, I thought he was a splendid father. I recall many deep conversations with him on our long walks together through the neighborhood or along
the C & O Canal. As a family, we would make spontaneous excursions to Great
Falls, to Lee Mansion, to Arlington Cemetery. One of my favorite outings was to
accompany him to a local used bookstore where we would lose ourselves for
hoursand then compare our finds on the way home. To this day, his highly
dramatic readings of my childhood storybooks, as I nestled on his lap or sat at
his feet, bring a warm feeling of pleasure. He was a fantastic teller of stories,
whether real or invented. His bizarre sense of humor, often displayed in the
hilarious limericks and poems which he created, or in the singing of old university songs, would have us laughing until the tears ran down our cheeks.
Surrounding himself with nature, both in the unique Washington garden
which Mother joyfully designed and tended, and later in the magnificent setting of his chalet, soothed his soul and brought a measure of balance into his
life. Hardly a tree hugger, he nevertheless loved and respected nature.
Years ago, when he noticed that a neighbors substantial, decades-old tree
80
was about to be removed simply to make more space in the yard, he actually
purchased the house to save the tree. This grand old tree continued to shade
that house for another thirty-three years, until fatally damaged by Hurricane
Isabel a mere ten days after Dad died.
I miss himnot only as the larger-than-life man others knew him as but as
my father and my dearest friendthe one who, in later years, was greatly
interested in the smallest details of my life. He could demonstrate great psychological insight; he truly knew life. I could always rely on his wisdom as I
dealt with various issues. We spent each Saturday together and spoke long
distance nearly every evening. He always remembered when I had an important event or deadline at work, or if I had a medical appointment, or if I was
seeing friends (and he would ask about them too even though he had never
met most of them). During our evening talks, I would, of course, also receive a
briefing on the world situation, a summary of that days NYT or WT articles
hed read (for better or worse). He then wanted to know from me what the
latest news was to have come over the wire after the newspapers had gone to
press. (I better have listened carefully to the evening news!) He permitted
himself to vent to me details about his miserable existence, so that when
communicating with others, he could focus with energy on his missionary
tasks. But he always worried that I was sacrificing too much in giving him
all this time. I assured him it wasnt a sacrificeI treasured every moment we
had together, especially in the last years of his life.
His total commitment to the United States was a both a joy and a burden to
this great patriot. He served her proudly in the 84th Infantry during WW II,
though like other soldiers, he primarily related positive anecdotes and rarely
spoke of the horrendous experiences fighting in the Battle of the Bulge. He
expressed only the highest praise and respect for General Alexander Bolling
who trusted this strange man with the monocle and ultimately enabled him
to begin his amazing career in the U.S. He deeply loved his adopted homeland but worried constantly about her. He, who had such behind-the-scenes
influence for so long, began to feel, in recent years, that he could no longer
help to keep the nation on track. This weighed heavily on his soul through the
very end of his life. He prayed that his legacy would live on in the generations
that followed him and that men and women of excellence would continue to
carry the torch. Let us make that happen!
He could demonstrate great

psychological insight; he truly
knew life. I could always
rely on his wisdom as I dealt
with various issues.
His total commitment to

the United States was a both
a joy and a burden to
this great patriot.
81
Enhance Patriotism and Overcome

Provocative Weakness
By Klaus Naumann
With his book Hubertus

Hoffmann has created a
monument to a man for whom
valuesa moral/ethical system of
coordinates and convictions
comprised the hallmark of his life,
values that Fritz Kraemer would
not surrender under any
circumstances. People of this
caliber are the exception in all
ages, but today among our
superficial, value-free, me
generation they ought to be a
protected species.
82
With his book about Fritz Kraemer Hubertus Hoffmann has created a monument to a man for whom valuesa moral/ethical system of coordinates and
convictionscomprised the hallmark of his life, values that Fritz Kraemer
would not surrender under any circumstances. People of this caliber are the
exception in all ages, but today among our superficial, value-free, me generation they ought to be a protected species.
To think about values anew seems particularly necessary in light of recent
events. Fritz Kraemer is more up-to-date than ever. It is worth reflecting on this
transformation, if one takes the effort, so as not to widen the gap between
Europe and the U.S.A. In this respect, the book is appearing on the market at
just the right time.
One of Fritz Kraemers values was patriotism. I never had the chance to
speak at length with him about this, but after reading this book I am convinced that it was patriotism which drove Fritz Kraemer from Germany. And
moreover that, as a German patriot who could not accept an unjust German
regime pulling his nation into the abyss, he took up arms in order to fight
against the Germans who had devoted themselves to the Nazi regime. I can
appreciate what an enormous weight this decision carried, as in my own life
I too was confronted by it in my mind. Being a soldier in a divided Germany
ultimately meant having to fight against the soldiers of the former GDRthe
unjust German regime of the second half of the 20th century. I am thankful that
a fortuitous turn of historical events that began with the fall of the Berlin wall
fifteen years ago today, combined with a diplomatic policy that relied on
strength and dialogue, spared me of having to honor my fundamental commitment.
It is patriotism and standing for inalienable values that makes people ready
to put their life on the line. Patriotism means more than the love of a country
and its people; patriotism develops through the knowledge of the achievements
of a country seen in the entirety of its history. Further, patriotism is based on
respect for human beings and their rights. Patriotism can develop only where
there is law and order and where the citizens of a country are protected against
the power of the state by the power of law. Patriotism never places itself above
others, and patriots never allow themselves to be misused in the suppression of
the free will of other people by violence. Fritz Kraemer recognized this was no
longer possible in the Germany of the thirties, and therefore he went to America. He became an American patriot that never asked what the state could do
for him but always and only what he could do for his stateanother distinguishing mark of patriots, who always place serving before earning.
Fritz Kraemer saw with great clarity that a weak state and a disoriented
society do not stand a chance of survival in a world where power is used to
impose ones will upon others. From this arose his theory of provocative
weakness. Fritz Kraemers central argument in this regard is as follows: If
our state becomes so weak that its enemies no longer fear retaliation, then its
enemies will become aggressive and our friends will no longer believe in our
guarantee of protection.
His conclusion was clear and simple: One must stay strong and powerful if
one wants to protect oneself and to pursue ones goals. Power is not a privilege, he once said, but an obligation. I would like to add that power is not
an evil as some in Europe would make it out to beprovided it is grounded
in law and order. Power without law and order becomes arbitrary; preventing
this is the duty of the powerful. Fritz Kraemers advice to Secretary of Defense
RumsfeldNo provocative weakness, please!was perhaps not all that
necessary with respect to Rumsfeld himself, but instead towards we Europeansand first and foremost towards the Germans.
Provocative weakness, like a coin, has two sides. One side is the will of a
state to sustain its position and to protect its values and convictions; the other
side is the practical capability to do so. Europe lacks both. The willingness to
avoid conflicts at any price is large, perhaps because the instruments necessary for the exercise of power are missing.
Speech of General ret. Klaus Naumann,

former Chief of Staff German Federal
Armed Forces (19911996) and
Chairman of NATOs Military Committee
(19961999), at the presentation of the
first book Fritz Kraemer On Excellence
in Berlin at the Parliaments Association
December 8, 2004. He is a member of
the International Advisory Board of the
World Security Network Foundation.
Provocative weakness, like a coin,

has two sides. One side is the will
of a state to sustain its position
and to protect its values and
convictions; the other side is the
practical capability to do so.
Europe lacks both.
83
The U.S.A. does not lack either military power or the will to use it; however, it
does lack the insight that none of the problems of this world can be solved by
military power alone, and that problems cannot be solved by giving priority to
the protection of America over the protection of individual rights and freedoms.
The transatlantic balance has been lost in the debate over the question of
the balance between hard and soft politics. Americas problem is the provocative use of one-dimensional power, but Europes problem is provocative weakness and this at a time in which the dangers and risks are greater and more
unpredictable than they were at any moment of the Cold War. We stand, as
do our American allies, in a conflict with an enemy who wants no more and
no less than to force us to give up our social and legal order. In such a situation, one cannot allow oneself to succumb to provocative weakness as it produces vulnerabilityit downright attracts terrorismit forces the U.S.A. to
unilateralism, and it makes us Europeans at the same time powerless but
dependent on the U.S.A. Admittedly, there is the one or the other show-off in
world politics who drivels about a multi-polar world in which Americas power
is supposed to be hemmed in. But they overlook in this instance that a multipolar world can hardly ever be a stable one.
This book should prompt us Germans to contemplation. Nevertheless, we
are the ones who are ready to throw values over board. Here, it has become
the trend to first ask what the prevailing opinion of the moment is and then to
make decisions accordinglyeven those who vaguely remember that the
founding fathers of this state wanted to create and protect a foundation of
values because they had firsthand experience of where things lead to when all
values disappear.
Where are the voices in the public sphere who dare to hold up a value like
pride in the incredible reconstruction and reconciliation efforts of the Germans as a basis for a new German patriotism, or have the courage to mention
a completely different subject: to refer to marriage as an institution worthy of
protection? Where are the politicians who meet the fundamental requirement
of our parties to find majorities for the solution to problems instead of satisfying
the masses with comfortable but increasingly unaffordable promises? Is it not a
sign of an alarming provocative weakness that we accept all this? We stick our
heads in the sand, and this at a moment in which the powers of persistence and
84
of earlier times want to bomb our postmodern world into a

global conflict. Fritz Kraemer was right when he said:
When he fears for his existence, the bourgeois has only
one wish: acquiescence to the power that threatens him.
We must remember that giving in to violence and injustice never produces calm and peace, but rather more injustice and more violence. We must develop the political will
to overcome provocative weakness in Europe, and we
must realize in this respect that the real problem of Europe
is Germanys powerlessness. However, in this case, will
alone does not move mountains; we also have to do something regarding the other side of the coin, namely the
instruments. Lets think of Fritz Kraemers assertion: Nothing is possible without power. That is not an appeal for a one-sided orientation towards military power; rather, it is a stimulus to think about whether we
can meet our political demands in Europe and in the world if we continue to
disregard the military power of Germany as seen since 1992.
I think it is high time to remember Fritz Kraemer and to take this book to
heart. We have to consider how one can repair the transatlantic relationship
not by simply and unconditionally agreeing to everything that is concluded in
Washington, but by finding ways where one can or must act together for the
protection of common interests. I think Europe should try to use Americas
power in order to balance its provocative weakness. In this way, Europe could
gain time to take long overdue steps in pursuing the elimination of the most
urgent weaknesses, thereby gaining time to consider how one could restore
the balance between hard and soft politics in the thinking of the transatlantic
partners. Once these steps have been taken, we would then be able to and
indeed would have to consider how to defy the tempests of the restless years
ahead of us together with the U.S.A.
Change of command in ISAF RC North

in Mazar-e-Sharif February 24, 2011
where 5000 German soldiers are
deployed in North Afghanistan. From left
to right: U.S. Lieutenant General David
Rodriguez (Commander of ISAF Joint
Command), departing RC North
Commander Major General HansWerner Fritz, Lieutenant General Rainer
Glatz (Commander German Forces
Command Potsdam), and new RC North
Commander Major General Markus
Kneip.
Fritz Kraemer knew the situation: To fanatics, heroism means a fight they
know they will lose. But he also had the answer, an answer that he formulated following 9/11: May we develop the spirit, the will, the courage, and
the lasting tenacity to make it obvious to the destructionists that we are no
paper tigers.
85
A Man of the
Performance Elite
By Friedrich Merz
Even today, in some quarters of Berlin, one can still see the extent of the
wounds and destruction left behind by the Nazi regime and the extent of the
losses to lament, in particular for Jewish families and splendid personalities.
I would like to congratulate my friend of many years, Hubertus Hoffmann,
on his book about his mentor. Kraemer was a man who would certainly have
become one of the new democratic intellectual elite in Germany following the
Hitler regime. This is what most impressed and occupied me during my reading of the book.
Even in the first paragraph of the contribution by Henry Kissinger, the word
values occurs. Values are precisely what characterize this book from the first
page to the lasta book about a man with values, and about a man who
lived by them. He did not belong to an ancestral elite, but to a performance
elite. His grounding consisted of three terms: substance, excellence, and character. We find this in all of the stages of his life. And out of this arose the
conflict with his pupil Henry Kissinger. Fritz Kraemer lived the role of a moral
ethicist, his pupil the role of a practical politician with an ethic of responsibility
who had to accept essential compromises, the judgment of which must be left
to history. Both of them, however, are distinguished by independence of
thought and action.
There are indeed some parallels to todays world in the contents of this
book:
86
First of all, there is Kraemers commitment to serving both the state and
societythe demand not to consider ones own needs first, but to think first of
the democratic community and to be of service to it.
Weakness provokes, only strength stabilizes peace. That was certainly the
most important and pragmatic understanding that shaped American post-war
politics and the transatlantic relationship.
Had this American policyinspired by Fritz Kraemer in the Pentagonnot
been persistently maintained and grasped for four decades, we would not be
standing here today in the historic building of the Parliamentary Society in
Berlin, which stood exactly by the wall in East Berlin. After 1989, we would
have stayed in Bonn with the German Bundestag because Germany would still
be divided. The 9th of November, the day of the fall of the Berlin wall, should
also be a day of gratitude to our French, British, and American friends who
never let themselves be distracted from this course.
Had this American policy

inspired by Fritz Kraemer in the
Pentagonnot been persistently
maintained and held on to for
four decades, we would not be
standing here today in the historic
building of the Parliamentary
Society in Berlin, which stood
exactly at the wall in East Berlin.
The 9th of November, the day of
the fall of the Berlin wall, should
also be a day of gratitude to our
French, British, and American
friends who never let themselves
be distracted from this course.
Friedrich Merz, Chairman of the Atlantik Brcke,

served in the European Parliament from 1989 to
1994 and the German Bundestag from 1994
2009, where he was Deputy Chairman (1998
2000 and 20022004) and Chairman of the
CDU/CSU (20002002).
Speech at the presentation of the first
book Fritz Kraemer On Excellence in
Berlin at the Parliaments Association
on 8th December 2004.
87
You Have to Struggle

against Evil
By Paul D. Wolfowitz
I know that there are hundreds

and hundreds of people who have
been touched by Fritz Kraemer
and who not only still cherish his
memory, but I believe have had
their lives affected by his ideas
and his example. It is a privilege
to be counted among them.
My recollection of the first serious conversation with Fritz Kraemer is when I

went to work in the U.S. Defense Department. I had one of those experiences
like Ed Rowny described when somebody said, You had better go talk to Fritz
Kraemer! And I went to that little office, and I became a recipient of his
incredible, copious reading of intelligence. I only recall that it always seemed
to me that he was one or two steps ahead, if not more than that, of the kinds
of products coming out of our official intelligence community. And Fritz was
almost invariably right. I was a great beneficiary of that.
And I am sure there are many people who have benefited from his inveterate teaching, because Fritz was a teacherhe was constantly teaching.
The other thing I remember: he was never interested in being an uppergrade. I think he considered it dangerous to accept any higher commissions.
And the third thing which I remember vividly, though I never saw it, but only
heard Sven and Fritz describe it, is that image of the young Fritz Kraemer with
his Imperial flag and cross going out in the middle of swastika-bearing fascists
and hammer and sickle-bearing communists and getting himself beaten up
and doing it over and over again.
That is what his life is about: a recognition that there is evil in the world and
you have to struggle against it.
I dont think it is doing him an injustice to say he seemed always to be a
prophet of gloom. He was, I think, a pessimistic man. And it is remarkable,
given that outlook, how much of what he spoke for, fought for, and defended,
88
ultimately triumphed. I suppose he would say that is because I was always

thinking about how things could go wrong. And Im not sure that they
didnt.
The other day, I stumbled by accident on an article from 1984 that appeared
in Foreign Affairs. It talks about how, apparently, judging from opinion polls,
the Americans think their President is doing a great job and is reasserting
American leadership in the face of aggressive Soviet expansion. But what
they dont understand is that he is an idiot and 70 percent of Europeans recognize that he is. And that it is difficult to describe to Americans just how low
they have sunk in the esteem of Europeans. If you didnt know that it was written about Ronald Reagan, you would have said: how little things change.
The thing that has not changed, unfortunately, is that there still is evil in the
world.
It is a fascist totalitarianism not fundamentally different from the way it was
in the last centuryno more God fearing than they were.
They are people who worship death, frankly, and not life.
Speech by U.S. Deputy Secretary of

Defense Paul D. Wolfo itz at the book
w
party by Dr Hubertus Hoffmann presenting
the first limited edition of Fritz Kraemer
On Excellence in the Army and Navy
Club in Washington D.C. in 2004.
People who worship the devil, I believe, and not God.

They are an evil that has to be confronted.
And fortunately, we do have a president that is prepared to see it that way.
I think Fritz Kraemer would have seen it, and is prepared to confront it. I
believe his spirit still lives.
In the Talmud, I think somewhere it says that those who have passed away
still live among us in the deeds that they have done and in the hearts of those
who have cherished their memories.
People who worship the devil and

not God. They are an evil that has
to be confronted.
I know that there are hundreds and hundreds of people who have been
touched by Fritz Kraemer and who not only still cherish his memory, but I
believe have had their lives affected by his ideas and his example. It is a
privilege to be counted among them.
89
Godfather of the
Neocons?
In their interesting and comprehensive book

The Forty Years War: The Rise and the Fall of
the Neocons, from Nixon to Obama, the
authors Len Colodny and Tom Shachtman
provide substantial coverage of Fritz Kraemers political activities in the inner circles
of Washington D.C. Roger Morris writes
in the preface: At the heart of the
drama stands arguably the most
important unknown figure in recent
American history, the redoubtable Fritz G. A. Kraemer
a bureaucratic-political as
well as ideological godfather of the neocons.
U.S. Secretary of Defense

Donald Rumsfeld in his retirement-speech December
15th, 2006: It should be
clear that not only is weakness provocative, but (that)
the perception of weakness
on our part can be provocative as well.
90
The book starts with a quotation from the retirement speech of Secretary of
Defense Donald Rumsfeld on December 15th 2006, when he said: It should
be clear that not only is weakness provocative, but (that) the perception of
weakness on our part can be provocative as well. A conclusion by our enemies that the United States lacks the will or the resolve to carry out missions
that demand sacrifice and demand patience is every bit as dangerous as an
imbalance of conventional military power. The authors link this farewell statement to Fritz Kraemer who coined the term provocative weakness and made
him the unacknowledged godfather of the George W. Bush administrations
ways of relating the United States to the rest of the world. The book goes on
to describe the influence and longevity of ideas that Kraemer disseminated in
tutorials of Rumsfeld, Kissinger, Haig, Wolfowitz, Perle, and many others from
the 1940s until his death in 2003 with his militaristic tenets on the ideologues side of the U.S. Foreign Policy in a forty years long war against a
pragmatist side. Are these assertions correct and can Fritz Kraemer be characterised as the mentor of the neocons?
Fritz G. A. Kraemerthe most

important unknown figure in
recent American history.
Donald Rumsfeld wrote an acknowledgement for the first limited edition of

this book Fritz Kraemer On Excellence, published in 2004. Both of them
knew each other well from Donald Rumsfelds first tenure from 1975 to 1977
as the then youngest Secretary of Defense under President Gerald Ford. Fritz
Kraemer at that time held the position of the Pentagons Special Advisor to
the U.S. Army. Rumsfeld praised the True Keeper of the Holy Flame in the
Pentagon: What a special person Fritz Kraemer was. His courageous and
brilliant career was an example for us all. I had the highest respect for him
and valued my relationship with him greatly. I feel fortunate I was able to
91
Why didnt Kraemer consider

himself a neocon?
benefit from his insights. In 2002, I picked up Fritz Kraemer at his home in
Fessenden Street to attend the inauguration at the Pentagon of my friend
Joseph Schmitz as the new Inspector General of the U.S. Department of
Defense, a successor of the legendary German-born Friedrich Wilhelm Baron
von Steuben, the first Inspector General of the United States under George
Washington. Henning-Hubertus Baron von Steuben, now head of the Steuben
family clan and a long-time friend from my hometown Goslar in North Germany, joined the ceremony. Returning to his former sphere of activities for the
first time in many years, I was surprised that hardly any member of the general staff had sought the advice of Old Fritz in recent years. The new generation of generals did not know him, and, due to their daily briefing stress,
there was hardly any room left for extended geostrategic deliberations. In the
fine floor of the Secretary of Defense he met Rumsfeld again after so many
years. Energetically clinging to and raising his silver-handled walking stick
with his left hand, Fritz Kraemer admonished him: No provocative weakness
please, Mr. Secretary! I was able to take a photo of this encounterone of
the last of the great strategist.
During the Munich Security Conference in February 2005, I presented the
Secretary of Defense my new book on Fritz Kraemer with his acknowledgement and the joint photo, as well as that last exhortation of the Pentagon
guru.
In general Fritz Kraemer was pleased by the foreign and defense policies
of Rumsfeld, Vice President Cheney, and the two Bush Administrations. But
when I asked him: Are you a neocon? his short and brief answer was a
simple No. This came as a profound surprise to me, given the fact that several neocons referred extensively to Fritz Kraemer and his dogma of the need
for power, many of them cherishing him as the deepest individual inspiration
of their life-time.
So, why didnt Kraemer consider himself a neocon?
His friend Ed Rowny pointed out that Kraemer had always rejected labels
and titles. When he was supposed to be given the title of a Senior Advisor,
he simply remarked that Dr Kraemer would be sufficient.
92
He was certainly no neocon, but rather an oldcon: he had preached

and lived the traditional Prussian ideals since the beginning of the 20th century, for nine decades. Therefore the label of a new conservative must have
looked absurd to him.
Kraemer avoided being pressed into a specific school of thought with others; instead he remained committed steadfastly to his own ideas and ideals.
As far as they were congruent with other views, he welcomed it. He always
remained a personality in his own right as well as a loner, who refused to be
subsumed by any group. On the contrary, he considered it important that others understood and adopted his principles, following him as the Pentagons
missionary and not vice versa.
There were commonalities with the American neocons, but several differences too with regard to analysis and strategic thought. Most of the actors in
this group knew and respected him. He appreciated their commitment to a
strong America in an unsafe world as well as their focus on sufficient means
of military power and their employment wherever necessary. Honor, patriotism, and faithfulness as well as a firm belief in God were the convictions
Kraemer appreciated. Moreover, their active engagement for democracy
and human rights worldwide corresponded with his view that the Forces of
Evil had to be restrained by the Good and that this task required adequate
means of power as well as the resolve to employ them. He regarded both
Saddam Hussein and Iran as great dangers which were granted too much
leeway.
However, he never uttered typical slogans like The Axis of Evil or War
on Terror. As a true intellectual behind the scenes he was not party to the
simplifications that politicians must make. He was much more sophisticated in
Kraemer avoided being pressed into a

specific school of thought with others;
instead he remained committed to his
own ideas and ideals.
93
A show of modesty combined

with moral and political
leadership and sufficient power
is needed when you are the
Number One on a diverse globe.
the old European way of thinking, because he had learned to view and analyze every country diligently and thoughtfully from a historical, cultural, and
psychological perspective taking into consideration its regional roots. Consequently his analyses were comprehensive, deeply rooted in history and the
psychology of the different people he avoided simplistic arguments. That distinguished him from any America-centric world view, responsible too often for
inadequate implementation as well as lacking intuition for the local needs of
foreign people, tribes, and other religions.
A show of modesty combined with moral and political leadership and sufficient power is needed when you are the Number One in a diverse world.
The Washington super-power perception of the world became an offside trap.
It lost its moral leadership. Well-intentioned can thus become the opposite to
well done and too much pride can come before a fall.
Kraemer lived in his own profound and historically rooted world of ideas,
in which the psychology of human beings and different people played a substantial role. His insights resemble a very large circle sharing significant common ground with the neocons thinking, particularly concerning the necessity
of power, but also reaching far beyond.
For most contemporaries, his concept of avoiding provocative weakness
took center stage.
Personal ambition or material

self-interest never interfered with
Kraemers active engagement for
freedom, democracy, and human
rights. The policy favoured by him
was ultimately peace policy
without a spark of naivety.
94
His pupil Henry Kissinger even called him right wing in a conversation
with U.S. President Nixon in 1972. But I consider this perspective much too
narrow. Kraemer was more than just a promoter of sufficient defense capabilities. Unlike most others, personal ambition and material self-interest never
interfered with his active engagement for freedom, democracy, and human
rights. The policy he favoured was ultimately peace policy without a spark of
naivety. This included pressing for a soul in politics as well as connecting with
the desires and fears of individuals. He was aware that a better society can
not be erected in countries in which the new partners squander their moral
credibility through corruption and the West places its hopes in a fake elite
which seeks to enlarge its wealth rather than act responsibly. These other
dimensions in Kraemers thinking and the resultant warnings were not taken
seriously enough when the U.S. started to deploy abroad with the military in
unknown territories with all the ego of a super power when more modesty and
musicality was needed.
Personally I consider the term neocons inappropriate because it lacks
precision. There are liberals committed to strong defense and freedom as well
as U.S. Democrats with similar views such as Senators Henry M. Scoop
Jackson or Sam Nunn and the now independent Joseph Liebermandoes this
make them neocons?
The term reveals a contradiction, because being conservative is nothing
new and cannot be by definition. Moreover, the personalities labelled as
neocons differ strongly and dont adhere to a unified ideology; instead they
follow their own plans.
Fritz Kraemer had no illusions about the bureaucratic process in Washingtonwhoever was in powerand about the lack of political deliberation
and analysis in the Pentagon or the White House, even during the rule of
neocon ideas. The Achilles heel of insufficient intellectual penetration and
wisdom all different aspects of defense and foreign policy disquieted him,
whether it was pre-9/11 or in the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq. What he
missed was the required depth and consideration of all aspects from a historical perspective as well as that of those currently engaged or affected.
Unfortunately Kraemer was right in this case as well. The lethal seed of the
problems following the occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq lay in their
superficial planning, after both military interventions had been concluded
rapidly and successfully. Sloppy planning quickly turns good objectives into
lost victories when an honorable policy is implemented by an incompetent,
and perhaps even ignorant and arrogant bureaucracy. Naivety towards
fanatics as well as complacency and lethargywhichever party occupies the
White Housepose the basic dilemma of bourgeois societies, according to
Kraemer. This is a core problem of the foreign policy in the U.S. and other
countries.
The term neocon reveals a

contradiction, because being
conservative is nothing new
and cannot be by definition.
He considers honor a central value which must be preserved under all circumstances. That applies to the American armed forces as well as to local
allies. Here is his red line for what an American soldier should never do and
what he must do for his country and the cause of right.
95
Building up a new elite assuming

responsibility in the respective
countries is of crucial importance.
Foreign policyaccording to Kraemer must have a soul not just instru

ments of power. It is soul that reaches human beings the tribes in Afghani
stan or in Iraq as well as the U.S. citizens; if it is missing all together it results
in the failure of foreign policy.
Shape realitynot only adopt it; an active, forward-looking foreign policy is Kraemers credo. That implies not only the use of armed forces, but far
more, encompassing all aspects of affected peoples lives.
Building up a new elite assuming responsibility in every country is of crucial
importancean aspect that has been subordinated and neglected in American foreign policy.
Provocative weakness describes perfectly the situation of American and
Western weakness according to Kraemer. It originates mainly in the perception of insufficient military strength.
But it also occurs through unsteady and weak diplomacy, weakness of
resolve, lack of deliberation, and the deficiency of high moral standards and
the beacon of freedom which are attractive to all. Every time U.S. or Western
policy lacks power, a soul, the will to shape reality instead of only adapting
to it, or profound and detailed planning and a humane character, radicals
feel encouraged to take advantage of this weakness.
96
Dr Fritz Kraemer was buried with Full Military Honors in Arlington National Cemetery
on October 8th, 2003. His legacy:Provocative weakness represents the entire
situation of American and Western weakness. It originates mainly in the perception of
insufficient military strength. But it also occurs through unsteady and weak diplomacy,
a weakness of resolve, a lack of deliberation, and the deficiency of high moral
standards and the beacon of freedom which are attractive to all.
97
Character counts,
not position and title.
98
If you meet someone who

truly excelsa rare eventthen
encourage them, foster them,
and give them lasting support
in every way!
100
We have such an abundance of distinctly mediocre characters flooding the

highways and byways of power, that not only the Marines but society as a whole
does have to look for a few good men (and women).
The reservoirs from which men and women could be chosen for high office
have become tiny. Now, we dont just have democracy everywhere, we have
egalitarian democracy. We dont want people to be exceptional, to tower
above others, we want mediocreand with time increasingly mediocre
people that dont differ from each other. In other words: we want a deeper
and deeper average.
Throughout history there have always been astoundingly small groups that
caused new beginningsespecially changed mental attitudes. It is not the
masses which are necessary to emerge from a period of degeneration into an
epoch of regeneration, but a few men and women of excellence, personalities
of substance, who by competence and character are able and determined to
serve a cause with energy and devotion.
101
102
103
On Elitism
By Fritz Kraemer
Look for men and women

of excellence!
I am calling for an elite on which we can draw, even in a democratic

s
ociety, to fill important positions not only in government, but also in business,
education, and many other fields. Changing my terminology, but not my
meaning, I might simply say that, however democratic we might happen to
be, we should always at least look for men and women of excellence when
choosing people for key functions in the political, economic, academic, or
even religious spheres.
While in our modern agein the U.S. as well as in Europethe word elite
is suspect, everybody is calling for excellence. But only lip service is being
paid to this lofty concept. Excellence in Latin means to stand out, but we do
not really look for genuinely outstanding people who are taller than the
average. There is, on the contrary, a desire for sameness, for comfortable
mediocrity, for conformity, which is inherently intolerant of any kind of superiority. This alone is a great obstacle to the selection of the nonmediocre.
I am calling for an elite on which

we can draw to fill important
positions not only in government,
but also in business, education,
and many other fields.
104
Something else, however, isin practiceeven more important: those who

have to pick others and who, by chance, are sincerely trying to find the best,
the most excellent, do not know any longer what criteria to apply in their
search. In an age of facts and figuresin which, moreover, ethical values are
no longer considered absolute but merely relativemen find it difficult to base
their judgment regarding candidates for office, or for jobs, on intangible, nonquantifiable personality traits such as strength of character, fortitude, conscientiousness.
Not in theory, perhaps, but certainly in practice, modern society looks at
labels and paper credentials rather than at substance. In the Civil Service, for
example, it has become a custom to admit only PhDs to the more important
positions, although individuals who never had the time or money to acquire
such a degree may actually be infinitely better qualified. Due to the vicissitudes of my life, I obtained two doctorates, and this academic record has
unduly facilitated my government career. In reality, of course, they do not

show at all who I am and who I am not; they are not even a sign of intellectual
prowess, because they might well have been bestowed by a mediocre faculty
on an equally mediocre student. A double PhD may mean little more, in fact,
than a nicely patented nobody.
We also accept a former Ambassador to Bangkok or Moscow as a prestigious authority on Thailand or Russia, even if his ever-repeated anecdotes and
stories of personal experiences reveal him as irretrievably superficial. And
a professor of political science from Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc., will be
quoted as a certified expert almost regardless of the true quality of his writings
and teachings. Thus, looking for excellence has degenerated into asking for
individuals with easily discernible license plates.
In the purely political field, especially in the selection and election of candidates, there is an additional problem for the voting public. The speeches and
other utterances of candidates are ghost-written and carefully concocted; the
real personalities are hidden behind a veil of pure imagery; there is little visible spontaneity and much staging. Reviewing the Democratic and Republican
presidential candidates, for example, I would not dare to say, with any degree
of certainty, what and who these men really are and what convictions, if any,
they hold in their hearts.
Modern societies look at labels

and paper credentials rather than
at substance. In reality, they do
not show at all who I am and who
I am not.
We are facing a very real growing danger that the American people will
get so bored, or apathetic, or cynical and disgusted with the artificiality and
hollowness of politics that they will simply refuse to participate! In our 1992
national election, only 37.3% of the eligible voters actually took the trouble of
going to the polls, which means that almost 2/3 of the electorate did not find
it worth their while to cast a ballot. If the normal, legitimate but dehydrated,
politicians can no longer move or attract people, they are leaving a void, an
ever more yawning gap, which will be filled, inevitably, by demagogues
speaking fiery words with shining eyes; and the massesfeeling empty, unled,
and disorientedwill turn to the false prophets with their seemingly inspired
and therefore rather inspiring messages.
My fear regarding the inner corrosion of the very successful politician
(President, Senator, Representative, Governor, etc.) is not, by the way, that
105
My fear regarding the inner

corrosion of the very successful
politician is not, by the way, that
during a long career of
compromising and sailing with
the wind he will lose his
aggressiveness, cleverness or even
the capability to command, but
that he will leave part of his soul
on every rung of the ladder
leading him to the top.
during a long career of compromising and sailing with the wind he will lose
his aggressiveness, cleverness, or even the capability to command, but
thatto quote a formula I have used for many years nowhe will leave part
of his soul on every rung of the ladder leading him to the top. The harsh school
of the upward struggle may, in fact, have made him a master tactician, but the
Holy Fire, the inner passion, the vision has gone, had to go, in a world of
make-believe and ghost writers, of continuous accommodation to public opinion polls, of dependence on such non-events as caucuses in Iowa in which
only a tiny fraction of the voters take part anyway. It seems revealing to me
that the word emotional has assumed a pejorative meaning, as if deep
convictions could actually be held in some nicely abstract, coolly detached
fashion, untainted by the very strong feelings of the individual holding such
convictions.
My ultimate reason, however, for postulating the necessity of an elite is
the observation that in everyday reality, the ideal of an egalitarian society
has quite simply led to a loss of quality. Since, for example, virtually everyone now goes to high school, the demands made on high school students
had to be lowered, inevitably, to such an extent that the business world as
well as colleges complain bitterly about the number of high school graduates needing remedial courses in reading and orthography, to say nothing
of history and geography. And since college education has become a mass
enterprise, very many can obtain an academic degree today who formerly
would have had to be satisfied with a high school certificate. I do admit that
the classical high school curriculum of my youthnine years of Latin
(every day of the six-day week) and six years of Greek (every day of the
The harsh school of the upward struggle may, in fact, have

made him a master tactician, but the Holy Fire, the inner
passion, the vision has gone, had to go.
106
six-day week), plus one modern foreign language in addition to mathematics, physics, chemistry, geography, and historyis no longer feasible,
although it did accustom me and my classmates to become acquainted,
very early in life, with subjects (Greek, Latin) of no visible practical value
which, however, broadened my vision greatly and opened windows to distant landscapes.
Yet, even today, one could certainly demand that a high school student
taking Spanish or French as his one foreign language, has to learn the
grammar of that language, instead of acquiring merely a basic and primitive vocabulary. One could likewise demand of a college graduate in
political science a knowledge of world history in general outlines and an
awareness of internal developments of a few key countries in some depth.
And such a graduate should also be expected to have a very precise
idea of where on the map Indonesia, Nigeria, Honduras, or Bolivia are
located. As regards professional diplomats, would it be unjust to ask that
henceforth they must be well grounded in international law and demonstrate familiarity with global, political, and economic trends? One might
even insist that a professor of comparative government be well acquainted
with the actual constitutions of perhaps a dozen important nations and
that a priest or pastor have some knowledge of Hebrew and Greek,
enabling him to look, on occasion, at the original text of the Bible. In
other words, one could, without becoming undemocratic, raise the level
of requirements for students as well as for teachers and professors, etc.,
and thus eliminate the very large and clogging number of those who are
making it through the educational system only because that system is
In practice, we do not know any

longer the criteria to apply in the
search of excellence. The
difficulty is regarding intangible,
nonquantifable personality traits
such as strength of character,
fortitude, conscientiousness.
I do not consider a formal education a necessary precondition

for genuine achievement.
107
geared to mass production rather than to the development of any personal excellence, to some specialties rather than to the acquisition of a
broader understanding of even their own general field of endeavor.
Personally, I do not consider a formal education a necessary precondition
for genuine achievement. Eric Hoffer, a bona fide dockyard worker until his
65th year, who never went to college, had a far deeper grasp of historico-political reality than most learned professors.
Seek out individuals. Guide, help,

assist, encourage them!
His book, The True Believer, shows an extraordinary breadth of knowledge

and a depth of insight into history, past and current, which I for one can only
admire and envy. Hoffers dictum: Where the yearning for freedom destroys
order, the yearning for order will destroy freedom, is a splendid, pithy formulation of a basic truth that very few of the learned ones could have produced.
If I suggest a more demanding educational system aiming at excellence
rather than the mass delivery of graduates to society, it is only because I am
aware of the fact that our society simply will not talentscout for the untutored
genius who cannot present some paper credentials, some formal card of
admission. All I can realistically propose, therefore, is to make that plastic
card more substantial and more intrinsically meaningful.
I have fewer misgivings concerning our excellence in the natural, i.e., the
exact sciences (mathematics, nuclear physics, electronics, etc.) than in the
field of political and social sciences which are by no means exact and
where superficiality, lack of knowledge, even fakery cannot so easily be found
out and shown up. A political columnist, a political candidate or officeholder,
even a professor of political science may have a long record of wrong predictions and of faulty analyses and of eloquent but ill informed views, especially
on foreign affairs, and he may very well survive as a respected oracle. An
engineer on the other hand, whose design for a bridge is faulty, a mathematician or physicist whose equations do not equate will soon lose prestige and
professional standing.
That there is an objective contradiction between excellence and mass
education is either not understood or, for ideological reasons, not admitted.
The facts, however, are very clear. I once asked a young professor Kissinger
(political science): How many especially gifted students have you discovered
108
this year? His answer: There are about 500 students in the class I teach and
120 in the seminar I conduct; it is impossible to seek out individuals. It is,
indeed, an impossible situation, since one cannot effectively guide, help,
assist, encourage whole assemblages of people to achieve superior qualities
of mind and character; one has to pay attention to individuals.
Pay Attention to Individuals?

Modern educators, whatever they may loudly proclaim, actually cling to a
childlike faith that, with the right method of instruction, you can make virtually
any normal group of students quite proficient in practically any subject. I
remember a spirited discussion with faculty members of a renowned institute
of higher learning where the professors heatedly bore down on a chance
remark of mine that my own gifts were strictly limited to the socalled humanities, while from high school days on I had proven strikingly inept in natural
sciences. They insisted that everybody, myself included, could do very well
indeed in mathematics, physics, etc., if taught in the proper fashion. This professional belief assumes implicitly that, in the ultimate analysis, people are not
too different in their natural giftedness and that it is all lastly a question of
presenting a subject to them in a pedagogically correct manner.
We can teach our own children

that success as such is by no
means a hallmark of excellence
and that they do not have to prove
their worth by collecting high
grades and impressive degrees at
college or by climbing to
prestigious positions later in life.
A young Italian peasant with a splendid natural voice who cannot even
read music may be trained at a conservatory and, finally, become a leading
opera singer; but ten years or more at that same conservatory will not make
a singer of him who did not have such a natural (if untrained) voice in the first
place. Similarly, you can teach historical facts, but you cannot teach a sense
We can teach our children that, while everyone has to earn

a living, material riches are a rather minor reward to
strive for. A life of contemplation, active missionary work
for a cause is infinitely more desirable than an existence
earnestly geared to the making of money.
109
of history to those who do not possess a natural, inner musicality for history.
Nor can you teach psychological understanding of people and peoples to
those not endowed with vibrating antennae for intangibles and imponderables that are outside and beyond the facts and figures zone.
An individual with an innate potential for excellence in foreign or military
affairs may be totally ungifted in business. A business genius, on the other
hand, may have no inner affinity whatever for the peculiar realities prevailing
in international relations and in matters of national defense. To recognize that
talents are very unjustly distributed among human beings (and that the natural
aptitudes of individuals differ from person to person) is, perhaps, anti-egalitarian, but it is certainly realistic.
How can young men and women

even strive for excellence if the
huge and soulless educationmanufacturing plants make the
students feel that all that is
expected of them is an effort to
obtain credit points, work more or
less diligently for an upcoming
test, and finally, get some degree
(preferably from a big-name
institution)?
How can young men and women even strive for excellencebe it only
within the parameters of their own special giftednessif the huge and soulless
education-manufacturing plants make the students feel that all that is expected
of them is an effort to obtain credit points, work more or less diligently for an
upcoming test, and finally, get some degree (preferably from a big-name institution). In fact, in such an atmosphere an originally independent and highly
endowed personality will be discouraged rather than permitted to develop in
depth, because profundity and higher ethical aspirations would simply not fit
the purpose of that costly education: to achieve visible, practical results.
(I have not yet read a recent book by Allan Bloom, professor of political
philosophy at the University of Chicago, The Closing of the American Mind,
subtitle, How Higher Education Has Failed Democracy and Impoverished the
Souls of Todays Students, but the impoverishment of the soul part does
sound quite remarkable coming from a man who has actually observed the
system from within for decades.)
It is entirely possible that no preaching on my part, or on the part of anybody else, will change the existing educational situation and that high schools
and colleges will continue to be swamped and smothered by having to serve
too many.
Yet, there are two things each of us can do in his own circle of family and
friends.
110
First: We can teach our own children that success as such is by no means
a hallmark of excellence and that they do not have to prove their worth by
collecting high grades and impressive degrees at college or by climbing to
prestigious positions later in life. When my son went off to college, I warned
him that he might get straight As simply by writing papers cleverly refleting
a professors pet views, while he might get Cs (and less) as a result of
expressing original and well-conceived but unpopular ideas. I assured him
that he would never have to bend and bow, and sacrifice his convictions and
his soul out of a feeling that his father would expect him to show something,
i.e., a fine-looking paper record, for money spent on the sons education. If
your academic record is far less than splendid, even if you fail, I told him,
you will always be received by your father with pride and approval, provided you can answer Yes to two questions: Did you work hard? Did you
stand up for your convictions? I have reasons to believe that it would be most
helpful, especially to the more promising of the younger generation, if their
parents (grandparents, uncles, etc.) would let them start out in the world with
no doubt whatever that character and self-discipline, rather than showy report
cards, are expected of them.
Second: We can teach our children that, while everyone has to earn a living, material riches are a rather minor reward to strive for. According to a
persons value system and individual nature, political power, inner independence, a life of contemplation, active missionary work for a cause, fulfillment
as an artist, challenging historic or scientific research may beeven from a
most egotistical point of viewinfinitely more desirable than an existence
earnestly geared to the making of money. We have come to a point today
where people who are not innately money-directed feel a kind of moral obligation, nevertheless, to be successful financially, just to show to themselves
and to the world that they are not laggards.
Do you stand up for your

convictions?
With high income becoming a measuring rod of a persons worth and

social prestige, why should anyone voluntarily choose such materialistically
unrewarding careers as civil or military service to the nation?
What normal, prudent father in this day and age would actually advise a
son or daughter to dedicate his or her life to a cause rather than to the eminently practical and sensible goal of receiving maximum pay and very tangi111
ble remuneration for decades of work? How can we dare to direct those gifted
and promising youngsters toward professions and occupations which clearly
demand very considerable personal sacrifices for but modest rewards? What
answer does one give to the brilliant man or woman who wants to get out of
the military or of an important position in government so as to provide (at last!)
better for himself and his long-suffering family by making some real money
in business? How, in other words, can one recruit and retain individuals of
excellence for public service? The age-old answer to these questions is a
rather simple one: noblesse oblige. Please do note that I am not recommending this adage for public preaching but that I am referring to it as something
we should teach our children within the family. And this is the meaning of the
noblesse oblige shorthand message!
Noblesse oblige: If you truly

belong to the excellent ones, then
you do have a special obligation
nay, a missionto bear heavier
burdens and make greater
sacrifices for a cause, e.g., good
government, than the common
herd.
Any average person may, indeed, think primarily of himself and his clan,
but human beings are endowed differently by God (or by chance) and if you,
my son or daughter happen to be particularly well endowed, if you truly
belong to the excellent ones, then you do have a special obligationnay, a
missionto bear heavier burdens and make greater sacrifices for a cause,
e.g., good government, than the common herd.
I recognize, of course, the arrogance involved in such an elitist approach.
Yet, it is an arrogance which does not demand privileges and rights for the
elite, but imposes on it abnegation and duties.
My quarrel with egalitarianism is not that it denies special privileges to all
and sundry, but that it does not admit the existence of special duties for
some.
112
Great interests are at stake

but small interests govern.
Special duties for some.

The dehydration of men is one of the
characterizing phenomena of this age.
113
Even large talents require a talent

scout to discover and support them.
114
115
For our high, late culture and our excessive standard of living we pay the
historically common price: general decadence, decay of customs, incessant
questioning of all traditional values, always ending in relativism that ultimately
denies all absolute values andhaving become incapable of believing in
Godnihilistically and without religious affiliation clings to opportunism and
crass materialism.
Of course there are periods of regeneration as well as degeneration.
But history teaches us that this recovery is not served upon a silver platter,
that it requires the efforts of an elite inspired by a sense of its mission. For the
masses never bring about the great spiritual changes.
116
Yet there can be no doubt that further sinking into decadence is inevitable
without the nurturing of elites.
Those of us that are aware of this have the outstanding and lasting purposethe missionin family, profession, and in other encounters with people,
to stimulate, encourage, strengthen, and foster those that stand out through
excellent character and mental powers, for they must falter in a cruelly egalitarian society if no one comes to their spiritual and mental aid.
117
118
Which code of
honor one pursues
is important.
119
120
I am not a miserable salesman

of intellectual wares but a missionary
of and for absolute values
and for a cause.
Never in my life have
I taken one cent for any
speech I happened to give.
121
I have always been a great admirer of

General MacArthur and General Patton.
I occasionally joked: Only General MacArthur
and Major Kraemer would dare to say such a thing.
At one time I refused to work under a general who,

before drawing up his papers, always eloquently
and elegantly inquired which way the wind
blew before telling his staff what to write.
122
I have worked as a farmhand in Maine and New Hampshire, and especially

in the two years as a common soldierbefore becoming an officerI became
acquainted with the previously unfamiliar thinking of ordinary people.
From the early 1950s until 1978, I was geo-strategic advisor to the army
general staff, in the rank of a GS 15, not a political GS 16 to 18. In the 70s,
Secretary James Schlesinger wanted to promote me to a political GS 16. To
which I replied: Mr. Secretary, I can only advise against it. Please give the
position to someone who needs it.
Prestige doesnt depend on whether one is a GS 15 or 16. I also didnt want
to be politically dependent.
There are no quickie analyses

as there are no quickie solutions.
123
He is so tactically minded that he can

even be philosophical for tactical purposes.
If furthering your career is all you want,

you are nothing, because you must be
capable of jeopardizing your career.
Thats the dividing line.
He has mastered the art of yielding in

such a way that the strategic defeat
appears as a tactical victory.
124
During my thirty years in the Pentagon
I never had power

but only influence.
125
The individual personality
can accomplish much in modern

states, provided it makes the right
courageous decisions at the right time.
126
Within large bureaucratic organizations

like the Pentagon, everything depends on
whose spirit animates the machine.
In order to assert oneself in a large

bureaucracy, one needs above all:
exceptional knowledge, quick-wittedness,
and endurance. I, for one, never tired.
127
The Willingness to Believe

Anything
The worst part of the loss of faith is not that people stop believing, but that they become willing to
believe everything. In other words: they become
willing to fill the vacuum of their unbelief with all
kinds of foolishness.
A remark from a work of the Catholic English writer
Chesterton is only too apt.
128
Mass Societies
My great fear has been and remains that in modern, egalitarian, more or less affluent mass societies,
individuals of truly broad range, who could understand the outside world, are very difficult to produce. The
normal products of our educational systems in advanced countries at any rate are irretrievably bourgeois.
They are not stupid, nor wicked, but provincial to the core. They do not know historynot even of their own
countrieshave only the vaguest sense of world geography, master no foreign languages and are, in effect,
trained to be concerned primarily with facts and figures and the materialistic elements of life.
When is to come that imaginativeness, that sensitivity, that comprehensive knowledge which would even
permit them to conceive of the fact, for example, that others may be genuinely and totally different, that
there are outside their own smug little neststrue believers (i.e., fanatics)who feel they have to save the
world by imposing their secular or religious totalitarianism on everybody else?
Assuming we do find the men and women who do possess the necessary insights, there still stares us in the
face the near ineradicable aversion of the aforementioned societies to permitting their leaders any firm policy
that would, of needs, require sacrifices and/or risk-taking.
One of the major problems of our time is provincialism

in foreign policy, the include me out mentality.
129
It is important to speak out about

things and to represent them in the
manner one deems correctand
not the way superiors might like.
Fritz Kraemers famous walking sick he used for

more than fifty yearsa present from a Russian
soldier in 1945, who most probably got it from
an old lady during the occupation of Germany.
130
Independence as Goal
Particularly, this kind of independence has always seemed

an unshakeable goal to me. And I achieved it, albeit in a
somewhat unorthodox way: by refraining from a personal
career and personal gain. Surely there are other ways, but
for decades it gave me the wholly unusual freedom to steer
a surprisingly individual and uncompromising course.
131
The Swiss Mountainscape

Around Me
The mountainscape around me is fabulous and breathtaking, my chalet a dream come true, and I
have every reason to thank God for the blessings Britta and I enjoy as private beings. But I do suffer
from political nightmares. Being as well informed as ever, I read three newspapers (English, French,
German) every day for several hours. I cannot help noticing that the all-important power and influence
of the U.S. are deteriorating at ever increasing speed. The policies of our Alliesand not only in
Europebegin to be dictated by fear, fear that we can no longer protect them, the Mid East (oil), the
southern African ores, or even our own backyard: the Caribbean. But people here (in Switzerland) are
no less the victims of their own affluent societies, and this typically bourgeois preoccupation with personal matters, than we are: it is businessand internal politicsas usual on both sides of the Atlantic.
Yet, I cannot simply stand by passively and gaze at the snow-capped peaks. I have seen very many
people and shall still see many more compatriots as well as Europeans who share my apprehensions
and are, at least, willing to ask the right questions as to what each of us could do to stem the tide.
Some important people have also stuck to their habit of phoning me (here on my mountain top!) for
the usual consultation on international developments. I have refrained, though, from initiating any such
transatlantic conferences on my part. That is the vacation luxury I have granted to myself.
132
Fritz Kraemers chalet

overlooking Valais near
CransMontana in Switzerland
As you will note with a knowing smile, man does not change whatever the environment. I remain
deeply involved and I am still waiting for indications of that detachment which allegedly comes with
my biological age.
If only I could inject my own intensity into leaders here and in Washington. These modern technicians
in high places do not grasp the reality that never has anything been presented to nations on a silver
platter and that great and difficult goals have never been attained without passion and a flame of true
conviction.
Mere high IQs mean nothing, when the question is not just one of administering and manipulating but
of governing and leading.
133
The Overestimation
of Intelligence
and Brilliancy
I would be grateful, not to be considered either as a learned

professor, whose meager authority rests on some pleasant sounding academic titles, nor as a rare receptacle of classified information. The degrees as well as the accumulation of facts from intelligence reports are only in the nature of tools and nothing more.
But you may consider me as a careful and alive observer who
is deeply convinced that he should communicate his observations
to those who might find them useful. In answering your questions I
shall not make any attempts at brilliancy but merely to describe the
reality that is to the best of my knowledge and convictions. And
whenever I dont know the answer, which may be the case more
often than I should like, I shall say so and not try to cover up.
As a matter of fact, I feel that this is such a unique occasion for
a mere lieutenant to try to convey some of his ideas to so outstanding a group that I shall use every minute of this hour to merely give
you unadorned facts and experiences. It so happens that I feel
more like a missionary than like a scholar (or) a political scientist,
and many things have been on my mind for a very long time so
that I am only anxious to know and to report the truth as I see it.
For this very reason I will not try to please either, and should I see
that some of my facts or interpretations of them do not find favor
with this group, I shall not try to withdraw by diplomatically
worded statements, but it will be my endeavor instead to convince
134
The overestimation of academic degrees

The overestimation of intelligence and brilliancy

The real important factor: personality which includes
character and diligence
he overestimation of top secret and secret information. Specific information
T
in long-range work much less important than basic conditions and main trends.
135
by additional arguments. The task of junior intelligence officers is,

in fact, not to cautiously report what they feel will be easily
accepted but to lay the facts before their superiors. This is one of
the reasons why character in intelligence work is at least as important as education and brains. I do hope, however, that if I cannot
convince you that I am right, you will still have the feeling that
there is sincerity in my answers.
Of course, the understanding is that there shall be no limits
whatever to the type of questions to be asked, but I would like to
point out that sometimes the task of intelligence is conceived of in
rather narrow terms: I have often heard it said that the facts, not
guesswork, are important, but true as that is there is no such thing
as a naked objective fact which will not assume its true importance
by interpretation. The mere selection of some and omission of
other facts is already in the nature of an interpreting process. The
endeavor to relate only facts and nothing but facts frequently leads
to fence ridingon the one hand but on the other handwhich
leaves the reader bewildered as to the true implications, as to the
actual situations.
I would be particularly happy if you would subject me to questioning on these intangible factors and spiritual problems, for instance,
the meaning of religion (not of the church) in presentday Europe, or
the survival of concepts of liberalism in the minds and souls of the
intelligentsia, or the interesting problem of how the Russians were
psychologically able to convince the Prussian generals.
Intelligence must advise commanders on the psychology of the
observed nationsthat means not only on what they are thinking
and doing now, but on what they might think and do in the light of
their past history and mental makeup.
Speech of Fritz Kraemer at a Department

of Defense conference, the Pentagon 1948
136
Intelligence must advise commanders on

the psychology of the observed nations.
The task of intelligence officers is not to report what

they feel but to lay the facts before their superiors.
Character in intelligence work is at least
as important as education and brains.
137
138
Dr Kraemer:
The True
DrStrangelove?
Was Dr Fritz Kraemer the inspiration for the legendary Dr Strangelove, the
Pentagon expert of German ancestry advising generals and the U.S. president
on the use of nuclear weapons in Stanley Kubricks cult comedy film? Several
friends familiar with the film posed this question after reading the first edition
of this book on the Pentagon strategist.
In 1964 the star director Stanley Kubrick brought this figure to the screen in
dramatic and bizarre fashion in the classic British black-and-white film Dr
Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. The film
is a black comedy about nuclear war and the (il)logic of He who shoots first,
dies second. Only two years after the Cuban missile crisis and at the height
of the Cold War, Kubrick dared to produce a film about what would happen
if someone indeed pressed the button. The result is a dark satire with impressive performances. Peter Sellers played the unique Dr Strangelove with his
bizarre ideas, confined to a wheelchair and wearing dark glasses. He delivered brilliant performances in his three-part role, also playing Captain Lionel
Mandrake, a sensible British exchange officer, and the levelheaded but overwhelmed U.S. President Merkin Muffley.
Dr Strangelove is a comedy
dealing with nuclear war and the
(non)logic of He who shoots first,
dies seconda dark satire with
impressive performances.
The film is based on the novel Red Alert, published in 1958 by Peter George
under the pseudonym Peter Bryant. The author collaborated with satirist Terry
Southern and Stanley Kubrick on the film script. The character Dr Strangelove
does not even appear in the book version. He was first introduced into the film
script by Southern. Dr Strangelove is portrayed as an advisor and scientist of
German descent who says a few phrases in German during the film.
139
In the pentagon war room General Buck Turgidson asks if Strangelove is

a Kraut name. Muffleys assistant Stains reports that it had been translated
from Merkwrdigkeitsliebe. Occasionally his arm automatically shoots up in
a Nazi salute. At the end, Dr Strangelove departs with the words: Mein Fhrer, I can walk!
An advisor in the Pentagon, obviously of German descentdid Dr Kraemer
provide the inspiration for Dr Strangelove?
Officially Columbia Pictures included a disclaimer at the films beginning:
It should be noted that none of the characters portrayed in this film are meant
to represent any real persons living or dead.
Five persons are named as models

for the figure of Dr Strangelove:
Hermann Kahn, John von
Neumann, Henry Kissinger,
Edward Teller und Wernher von
Braun. Dr Kraemer does not
appear.
In film literature five persons are named as models for the figure of Dr
Strangelove: Hermann Kahn, John von Neumann, Henry Kissinger, Edward
Teller and Wernher von Braun. Dr Kraemer does not appear on this list. Only
a few Pentagon insiders knew of him and his decades of immense influence
on foreign and security policy in the U.S.A. This is no surprise: Kraemer
avoided publicity and never allowed himself to be photographed. It was only
on 2nd March 1975 that a long article appeared about him in the Washington
Post under the title The Iron Mentor of the Pentagon. In this article, Nick
Thimmesch wrote that MGM Studios had even offered Kraemer a film contract. Is this the hot lead pointing to the actual inspiration for Dr Strangelove?
Or was it someone else?
Was it Hermann Kahn? He had a high regard for Kraemer and wrote, I
am honored to count Fritz Kraemer among my friends and as a source of
inspiration and guidance. Both complemented each other ideally in their
analysis of security policy. Kahn had examined the theory of nuclear deterrence instead and in 1962 published his thoughts in the famous book Thinking about the Unthinkable. In 1961 he founded the Hudson Institute in New
York, which became an influential think tank. It was only between 1966 and
1968 that Kahn officially advised the Pentagontwo years after the film. He
was a kind, supportive scholar but not a charismatic Pentagon advisor in the
image of DrStrangelove. He was not from Germany, but from the Bronx in
New York. So he does not come into consideration as the inspiration for the
film. When Kahn was once asked about the character, his cynical reply was:
140
Dr Strangelove would not have lasted three weeks at the Pentagon he

was too creative.
Even as a child John von Neumann was a legend and a genuine mathematical genius. He was born Janos Lajos Neumann in 1903 in Budapest, in the
then Austro-Hungarian Empire, the son of a Jewish banker who was elevated
to the aristocracy in 1913 and given the name von Margitta. He amazed
Nobel Prize winner Eugene Paul Wigner with his ability to divide eight-digit
numbers in his head at the age of six. He could also recite Goethes Faust from
memory. Janos Neumann was a student at the German-language LutheranerGymnasium (secondary school) in Budapest, which still exists today under the
name Fasori Evanglikus Gimnzium. He went on to study at the ETH in Zurich
and at the age of 23 became the youngest associate professor at Berlins
Friedrich Wilhelms University (now the Humboldt University of Berlin). Within
a few years, he had published pioneering work on the problems of mathematics in areas including quantum mechanics at the leading university of the day
in Gttingen, Germany. Through this work he came to the attention of Princeton University which invited him to the U.S.A. in 1929. Following the Nazi
takeover in 1933, he worked there at the newly founded Institute for Advanced
Studies alongside Albert Einstein and Hermann Weyl as professor of mathematics. In 1943, he joined the top secret Manhattan Project at Los Alamos
where he worked on development of the atomic bomb and then the hydrogen
bomb. John von Neumann, as he now called himself, was a fun-loving mathematician who relished formulae and the challenges of mechanics. He worked
as a mathematician in research institutes and at the nuclear weapons center
at Los Alamos, but not in the bureaucracy let alone the highest staff at the
Pentagon. Nor was he a strategist or a dynamic political advisor; rather, he
was a pure scientist. He spoke perfect German, but as a displaced Jew he
was obviously unsuitable as the role model for someone with a compulsive
Nazi salute.
Edward Teller was certainly the

most prominent nuclear weapons
specialist with great influence in
the military.
Was it Henry Kissinger, Dr Kraemers most prominent student? A consideration in favor of this position is that at the time of the films production his book
Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy published in 1957, had already
received considerable attention. I cherish this book as one of the finest works
on nuclear weapons and as the basis for the subsequent NATO strategy of
flexible response. The then Harvard professor came from Germany and
141
through his phenomenal intellect comprehended all the twists and turns of
atomic strategy. At that time, however, Kissinger was somewhat shy and
reserved, a thinker of the quiet sort, careful, and neither paranoid nor by any
stretch of the imagination sympathetic to the Nazisthey had after all murdered ten members of his family and had forced him to flee with his parents
to the U.S.A.
Wernher von Braun and his SS

rocket production team were
responsible for the inhuman
conditions in Mittelbau-Dora ,
where 20,000 forced laborers
died. They were ice-cold
technocrats.
How similar was Edward Teller to the film character? This scientist who had
fled from Hungary worked on the first atomic bombs at Los Alamos and later
on the development of the first hydrogen bombs. As the director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and promoter of the Strategic Defense
Initiative under President Reagan, he was certainly the most prominent
nuclear weapons specialist with great influence in the military. When I met
him in Washington, he made a strong impression with his Hungarian kindness, charm and knowledge. He viewed nuclear weapons during the Cold
War as a means to contain the threat from the totalitarian USSR and therefore
not as morally repugnant, but, rather as something good. As another Jew
who fled from the Nazis, he does not enter the frame as the model for
DrStrangelove.
Was Wernher von Braun perhaps the German Dr Strangelove? In his
book Moonfire, Norman Mailer wrote: German scientists and engineers
brought to the U.S. via the controversial Operation Paperclip made enormous contributions to Americas military arsenal and the development of the
Saturn V. U.S. General H.N. Toftoy was instrumental to bring the Wernher von
Braun team to the U.S.
In Nazi Germany, von Braun was the director of the Wunderwaffe
(Wonder-weapons) V-1 and V-2 rocket program. He had been the Wunderkind (Wonder-child) engineer of the Nazi regime. In London alone more
than 6,000 people were killed by V-1 and V-2 air attacks.
At the behest of Reichsfhrer SS Heinrich Himmler, the SS took control of the
mass-production of this impressive new weapon, hidden against air attacks in
underground tunnels 20 kilometer long in the chalk cliffs of Kohnstein near
Nordhausen/Ellrich in the center of Germany since 1943. About 12,000
rockets (6000 V-1 and V-2 each) had been assembled there under extremely
142
inhumane conditions. The SS controlled

these new concentration camps in MittelbauDora which started as a branch of the KZ
Buchenwald, near my small home-village
Walkenried in the southern Harz mountains.
The rotten remains of this place of horror
were only five kilometers away from the kindergarten I attended in 1960, still fascinated
and horrified by the ruins of the barracks
and tunnels, located near the border that
divided Germany for 40 years. When I met
the chairman of the German Jewish Association Mr Heinz Galinski in 1989 he told me
about the harsh conditions there. It was
even worse than in Auschwitz where I had
been before. The Austrian SS troops were
horrible. We had to sleep underground in
the 15-degree-Celsius cold tunnels under straw pillows with lice and bedbugs
and we only saw daylight every few days. I only survived because I reported
as a specialist needed for the rocket production. We were given daily production goals. Those who did not fulfill these goals were immediately severely
punished for sabotage. As I have two left hands, the production of rockets was
difficult for me. Only because a higher ranking German technician assisted
me in fulfilling the production goals was I able to survive Dora.
Wernher von Braun and his employees responsible for the production
knew of the inhumane conditions at the Mittelbau-Dora, where a minimum of
20,000 forced laborers died under agonizing conditions. 60,000 prisoners
from 21 nations, mainly from the Soviet Union, Poland, and France, worked
on the Wunderwaffen. Von Braun and the director of the Mittelbau GmbH,
Arthur Rudolphemployed by the U.S. Army missile program from 1946
and later the Saturn program of NASAdid nothing to prevent this and
were therefore complicit. However, they were completely absorbed in the
work of rocket technology and did not feel any responsibility for political
and moral questions. The deaths of millions of peoplerelatives, friends,
strangers, millions on the front, and hundreds of thousands in the firestorms
of the bombing raids during the warturn one numb. They were ice-cold
In Nazi Germany, Wernher von Braun

was the director of the Wunderwaffe
(Wonder-weapons) V-1 and V-2 rocket
program. He had been the Wunderkind
(Wonder-child)the engineer of the
Nazi devils.
The cold technocratic

unscrupulousness and
resourcefulness of a Dr
Strangelove was close to the
character of Wernher von Braun
and his Peenemnde team during
the war years.
143
About 12,000 rockets (6000 V-1 and

V-2 each) had been assembled under
extremely inhumane conditions underground in KZ Mittelbau-Dora in 18
months in 1944 and 1945. Wernher von
Braun and his employees responsible for
the production knew of the inhumane
conditions, where a minimum of 20,000
forced laborers died under agonizing
conditions. 60,000 prisoners from
21nations, mainly from the Soviet Union,
Poland, and France, worked for Hitlers
Wunderwaffen. Von Braun and the
director of the Mittelbau GmbH, Arthur
Rudolphemployed by the U.S. Army
missile program from 1946 and later the
Saturn program of NASAdid nothing
to prevent this.
144
technocrats, men without hearts for the weaker links in the rocket production
chain. At some point the forced laborers were no longer seen as men with
rights; instead they were mere production robots of which the SS was able
to acquire tens of thousands from the concentration camps. When thousands
died, new trainloads arrived immediately, because this supposed miracle
weapon was intended to bring about the final victory for the Nazis. Von
Braun and his people were not fanatical Nazis; rather they were passionate
scientists who would have served anyone who provided the means to construct rockets, even the SS. During the war, Wernher von Braun mutated from
a brilliant inventor into a morally dubious Dr Faust of rocket technology.
After the end of WWII, von Braun was needed, and he took his chance. In
a clever move, he buried boxes of files containing his entire body of knowledge of world-leading rocket technology and negotiated cooperation with the
new power, the Americans. U.S. General Tofty had an urgent mission (Opera-
8000 people died in 1944 and 1945

by V 2 /A 4 (picture) and as well V 1
missiles which hit mainly London and
Antwerpen.
tion Overcast until the end of WWII, afterwards called Operation Paperclip)
to find such men and bring them to America before the Russians captured
them, because rocket technology would play a decisive role in new nuclear
weaponry. I met a U.S. officer from his team in 1978 who told me about this
fixated hunt for rockets in the 1940s. The Russians had assembled a similar
special task force with orders to bring the German rocket team to the USSR
the sprint for the German rocket experts was on. Von Braun wanted to bring
as many of his specialists as possible to the U.S.A. with their families. In negotiations, a figure of 100 was agreed upon, along with amnesty for crimes
carried out during the Third Reich, like the devils work of Arthur Rudoph in
Mittelbau or the bombing of London. In Fort Bliss, White Sands, New Mexico
the von Braun team continued what they had started in Peenemnde on the
Baltic coastto develop better and better rockets. Initially in 1946, they
assembled old German V-2s in Project Hermes. Then, over the next two
decades, they constructed a new family of 12 different rockets crowned by the
145
Saturn moon rocket. Dr Rocket became an American hero enabling the

landing of the first man on the moon in 1969.
The cold technocratic unscrupulousness and resourcefulness of a Dr Strangelove was close to the character of Wernher von Braun during the war years.
In the film Dr Strangelove considers leaving hundreds of thousands of Americans in underground bunkers in order to save the human race in the event of
nuclear warthis is something of a reminder of the enormous tunnel systems
of Mittelbau-Dora.
But von Braun was no military man, nor was he a political Pentagon strategist; rather, he was an obsessive technician with NASA. His attitude separated technical advancement and moral responsibility, and he placed career
opportunities above confronting his SS superiors on questions of morality
moral relativism.
And what about Dr Kraemer?
In 40 years there was only one German in the Pentagon who was taken
seriously at the highest levels of the military and who was often asked for his
advice. The phrase, Youd better ask Dr Kraemer! was an expression that
was heard in the long, pale green hallways of the Pentagon when important
strategic decisions were involved, as Paul Wolfowitz, Edward Rowny and
Alexander Haig agree unanimously in this book.
Dr Strangelove pales in
comparison, as he is missing both
Kraemers depth and moral
credibility.
There was only one German whose appearance was so dynamic and who
could speak as convincingly as he could.
There was also only one civilian Pentagon advisor who mastered all the
rules of nuclear deterrence and who understood the psyche of the Russian
opponents.
On the other hand:
Dr Kraemers trademark was his monocle. Dr Strangelove wore normal dark
glasses. Fritz Kraemer always carried a walking stick with a silver grip in
146
which a rapier was concealed. This impressive accessory of Dr Kraemers

would hardly have been overlooked by the filmmakers as it would have underscored the drama magnificently.
Kraemer was not bound to a wheelchair; he was physically fit and loved to
pace back and forth the length of the room during his speeches.
A compulsion to give the Nazi salute could under no circumstances be
expected from him. He fled the German barbarians, forced to leave behind
his wife and son, he lost his father in Theresienstadt concentration camp, and
he fought against them, placing his own life in danger, with the 84th Infantry
Division. In the 1920s, during his days as a student and later as an emigrant
to the U.S.A. and as an American soldier Kraemer was an especially active
Nazi opponent.
The cold-hearted Dr Strangelove

throws into even sharper relief
what was important to the
moralist Dr Kraemer: which code
of honor one pursues is
important; the greatest danger is
moral relativism. Power and
morality should never be
separated.
In relation to the true Dr Kraemer, the film character of the invented Dr

Strangelove pales in comparison, as he is missing both Kraemers depth and
moral credibility. Dr Strangelove remains in any case comical and exaggerated satire.
Furthermore, the cold-hearted Dr Strangelove throws into even sharper relief
what was important to the moralist Dr Kraemer: power is not a privilege;
character counts; which code of honor one pursues is important; the greatest
danger is moral relativism. Power and morality should never be separated.
147
Absolute and Metaphysical Values
Thinking of myself as a lonely fighter, I do tend to forget, at times, my very

own conviction that underneath the shoulder-shrugging negativism of
m
odern people stirs an eternal soul and an intense yearning for faith in a
transcending cause and in absolute and metaphysical values.
Do not believe the clich that Americans vote only their wallets.
The voters actually have a deep yearning for absolute, nonmaterial values
and for the transcendental. They do not just want to hear about budget deficits
and taxes.
Let us endeavor, therefore, to touch the souls of women and men, instead of
reciting to them phrases cleverly concocted by professional speech writers.
If we do not learn to move peoples souls, only the Lord God knows what
utterly false prophet the bored-to-death and totally alienated electorate is
going to vote in one day.
148
On Science and Faith

By Britta Bjorkander Kraemer
Creator of all things,

Source of all life, all love.
Lord of History, who gives meaning and purpose to life.
Ultimate Reality, Supreme Being, Infinite, God.
He who cares for you and me.
Science
Wonder of the human mind,
Reaches across the universe
Lands man on the moon,
Probes the macrocosm, the microcosm.
Splits the atombut never found a soul.
Science searches and asks, why and how,
But never gives answers to ultimate questions
And new evidence may prove it wrong.
Faith
A gift of God
It doesnt ask, it is, it accepts, it trusts.
It transcends science.
It liberates and brings lifelife eternal.
Faith leads you to God.
Britta and Fritz Kraemer in front of their

Washington home for over fifty years.
149
Spiritual Destitution, Soulless

Societies, Relative Truths
By Fritz Kraemer
The destitution in question, the rotting of state and society in affluent democracies, is spiritual. The
economically successful societies of North America, Western Europe and Japan have become rich, fat,
and comfortable. The fatter and more comfortable they become, the more soulless they become and
necessarily so. They become less willing to commit to immaterial values, make sacrifices, and confront
evil. This is simply inevitable since the majority of intellectuals incessantly denies the absoluteness of
ethical values.
Nowadays the only absolute truth people in the so-called advanced societies will settle for is that
everything is relative. However, the limits of the human brain are such that anythingwhich in turn
means nothingcan be proven by purely rational argument. Every argument for something can be
refuted by a dialectician with a counterargument.
150
151
The answers to decisive existential questions like, Should I be reliable or

unreliable, courageous or cowardly? can by their very nature only come
from belief, not from brilliant thought. But for us humans, from belief can
only mean: from religion and tradition.
The current generations relativistic wavering, facing the world with a seemingly cynical but actually desperate shrug of the shoulders, is not their own
fault. They were offered neither religion nor tradition. Now they stand in a
vacuum, a complete emptiness.
Even the leading figures in todays world are predominantly hollow figures.
The crucial aspect of numerous modern politicians is their invisible super
ficiality, their incurable lack of antennas for the transcendental and metaphysical.
Pure intellectuals, even renowned

professors at Harvard and
Oxford, know nothing of the
psychological, even deny the soul.
And yet it plays an important
part in the foreign and security
politics of states and alliances.
152
In my observation, the only way to resist the howling masses and the
cheered whirling dervishes of demagogy is to unshakably believe in absolute
values and to be prepared to live to the death against fashion and the masses,
the majority and victorious mediocrity. One should not understand everything; because tout comprendre is always tout pardonner. And there are
many thingsespecially all inhumanity and the killing of souls, even when the
tyrants let the body livethat must never be forgiven. It is in the nature of
liberalsat least of modern ones to always prefer a clever compromise to
a staunch position. Nowadays, we often see that flexibility, adaptation to a
given reality, is considered virtue itself while strictly sticking to ones opinion
is deemed stupid. It begins with objective and unemotional, balanced
people ultimately understanding even Nazis or Communists and refusing to
demonize anyone or anything. For that would be positively medieval, a
relapse into the categories of good and bad, although by now every
educated person knows that there is no such thing and that sociology and
psychology can explain everything much more rationally and understandably. Thats how it starts. And once this first step has been taken, if good
and bad no longer exist, why should one oppose evil and in the process
possibly endanger ones career or even life itself? For the sake of a mere chimera? No, then its preferable to play along, to emphasize the good sides
of evil and maybe even use ones brillianceand the status acquired by playing alongto slightly improve the irredeemably bad.
In the long term this is a general syndrome of our ever-so-civilized Western

world. A deep malady is rampant in Germany, England, Sweden, and the
U.S. We, who are so smart, so brilliant, so intellectual and analytical, have
debunked everything. We have taught people to equate religion with superstition, reliability with a mere lack of flexibility, heroism with narrow-mindedness,
and feeling with immature emoting. And, naturally being much more eloquent
than all the others, and controlling newspapers and pulpits, we intellectuals
have enthroned unbelief and relativism. In the better social circles nowadays
one may not remark that one rejects cynicism and considers physical cowardice a vice.
This may work for a while, but then people rebel against being deprived of
their soul and its deeper significance. They start looking for inspiration, for
emotions, for an ideal to relieve them of bleak materialism and rationalism.
And since we who are decent and educated and so terribly smart have neither
god nor ideal but only dissolution to offer them, the majority will most probably rush into the open arms of those I call political holy-rollers. This is no fault
of the masses; it is our very own. The zealous liberals dont even know that the
masses will be outraged, the unfettered mediocre petit bourgeois, who was
told that anything goes and that lack of discipline is a sign of freedom, now
actually acts accordingly but not in order to become communist, as the liberals
might possibly conceiveand cries for law and order, for belief and ideals.
I greatly fear that even in this country a spreading nihilism may suddenly
convert to its dialectical opposite: the peoples raging will to believe again at
any price and to strike at anyone that doesnt share the new belief.
You wont find the word soul in foreign-policy analyses,

except in mine. Successful policies need an internal
energy, a drive in the metaphysics of the soul.
153
I define an intellectual as someone who actually believes that intellect is the highest of values, who is naively convinced that our little
human brain can provide the decisive answers and that rational,
quantifiablepreferably economicfactors are the only, or at least
the governing, components of human reality.
The crucial faults of countless modern politicians are their latent superficiality, their incurable lack of receptivity to the transcendental and the
metaphysical, and lack of inner cultivation.
We are a modern nation stressing facts and

figures rather than the politico-psychological.
In Fritz Kraemers library were hundrets of books

as well as a drawing of old Fritz, the famous
German Prussian King.
154
We are beholden to Anglo-Saxon pragmatism,

flexibility as a virtue unto itself to solve
a problem on its merits.
In politics, the human soul must be addressed. It is therefore wrong to

believe that useful and practical arguments are sufficient. In politics,
there is always more at stake than just the rational; it concerns peoples feelings and longings as well.
We do not look at consequences in time or space.
We have always been essentially more apolitical

than others in the Western world.
155
A One-Man, Handmade Internet

By Henry A. Kissinger
I spend every day, approximately ten hours, devouring information. My marked copies of the
New York Times are cut and my folder system kept up. A special addition to my house will be
constructed to give me more space for my files.
The Kraemer files in his house.
156
157
Relativism in
Modern Societies
By Fritz Kraemer
A few words about frustration with current political developments. I hardly

have to assure that I totally share disgust with the most visible of our politicians. The stage is not just an American one. I am a global strategist and can,
therefore, from an acute awareness of the international scene, tell that not only
in North America (U.S. and Canada) but equally so in the similarly highly
civilized and economically advanced countries of Western Europeand
even in culturally quite different Japanmodern societies are sick.
First of all, intellectuals the world over have preached for a very long time
that everything is relative and that there are no absolute values; that a brilliant
person is capable of looking at any given issue from twenty different points of
view and, if he/she is very brilliant, from twenty-one different points of view.
This kind of education does

not, to put it mildly, tend to
produce genuine personalities,
principled individuals,
wishing to stand for ideas
and ideals rather than for
success through flexibility
and smart maneuvering.
158
This relativism, this idea that for a sophisticated person everything goes,
and that for him/her anything can and must be tolerated, has left the normal
citizen in a world of total confusion, despair, uncertainty, disorientation, and
chaos.
When basic qualities like reliability for example, are steadily being ridiculed, fewer and fewer people will even try to be reliable.
In a society in which nobody can trust anyone, the most essential element of
human coexistence, mutual trust/confidence, is being destroyed. Everybody
becomes willing to cheat, hoping he will not be caught; should he be caught,
however, the consequences will not be too serious, since the commandment
Thou shall not cheat is, from the enlightened point of view, as relative as
those ten commandments of old.
Intellectuals the world over have preached for a

very long time that everything is relative and
that there are no absolute values.
159
From this pervasive relativism springs, of necessity, a pervasive opportunism, an unrestrained willingness to swim with any stream and sail with any
wind.
Examining the present state of affairs in Italy, Sweden, France, the UK,
Spain, Holland, Belgium, etc., you will find the same political climate, the
sameand now comes the decisive wordspiritual emptiness. The leaders
as well as the led live in a vacuum. This state is simply intolerable to the human
soul and ruins the health of any society.
Formerly, there were in the governing class at least some outstanding
personalities (excellere in Latin means to stand out), but modern, egalitarian
democracy will not elect women or men of excellence; they will vote for people who are like us who are in no way different and not towering personalities but comfortably mediocre. I have long used my own formulation:
Democracy is splendid; egalitarian democracy is deadly.
All the modern (high standard of living) egalitarian democracies are subject
to double jeopardy:
First: The pervasive relativism and opportunism tells the citizens from kindergarten on that to get along they must be adaptable, flexible, moldable; that
character, fortitude, sticking to convictions, standing alone are by no means
the most desirable qualities in sophisticated modern beings. This kind of
education does not, to put it mildly, tend to produce genuine personalities,
principled individuals, wishing to stand for ideas and ideals rather than for
success through flexibility and smart maneuvering.
Second: If by chance, however, women and men of excellence do (miraculously) emerge from this educational climate, they have a small chance of
being approved and accepted by the voters. Actually, many of the few who
have come out of the wringer as personalities of excellence, will, under the
conditions of mass society, refuse to run for political office.
160
In Sum: Egalitarian modern societies are for inherent reasons predestined to

find mediocrities as leaders on the political stage.
My own unceasing effort, therefore, happens to remain one directed at talent scouting for people who are excellent and who need to be encouraged
and strengthened in their desire to serve rather than to promote only their
own careers.
Opportunism: To swim with any stream and sail with any wind.
Modern, egalitarian democracy will not elect women and men
of excellence; they vote for people who are like us.
161
The True Keeper

of the Holy Flame
in the Pentagon
What a special person

Fritz Kraemer was.
By Donald Rumsfeld,
U.S. Secretary of Defense
His courageous and brilliant career was an

example for us all.
I had the highest respect for him and valued
my relationship with him greatly.
I feel fortunate I was able to benefit from his
insights.
September 10, 2003
162
Encouraging the Secretary of Defense,

Donald Rumsfeld, swinging a stick
with his sonorous voice:
No provocative weakness, please!
at the reception for the newly
appointed Inspector General,
Joe Schmitz, at the Pentagon in 2002.
163
Over the years you have brought me back again and again to those fundamental principles so clear to you but obscure to many. You have wisely counseled me not to be overly impressed byor to try to compete withthe intellectuals. You have taught me that there is no reason why we should behave
like bourgeois pragmatists, giving way to self-styled idealists who neither
believe in the dignity of man nor accept the principles we consider to be selfevident. You have pointed out time and again that the appeal to the lowest
common denominator results in disorientation and that the greatest need is for
the uncommon leader who dares stand alone in championing the right. You
have demonstrated that the only person who can influence others is one who
cares nothing for rewards or honorshe is influential because he cannot be
influenced. Most importantly, you have reinforced my conviction that we are
citizens of a great country, founded on precepts unsurpassed by any other.
As the Pentagons only global strategic thinker and as the countrys only
philosophethe philosopher interested only in those truths useful here and
nowyou have every reason to look back on your stewardship and say that
you, too, have fought the good fight.
164
Grand Strategist
in the Pentagon
By Edward L. Rowny
I met Fritz more than forty years ago when I was an assistant to General
Twining, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The General asked me to draft
a reply to a sensitive question put to him by the President. He told me to check
it out with the Pentagons grand strategist, Dr Kraemer.
I located Dr Kraemer in a small windowless room in the Pentagon. I had
to weave my way through stacks of the New York Times and Neue Zrcher
Zeitung. Since it was before the days of copying machines, Fritz bought
three copies of each issue of the two papers. These he filed behind his desk
in six file cabinets, which contained three cross-reference copies of each
clipping.
Dr Kraemer read my draft and gave me several excellent suggestions. I was
immensely impressed by his broad knowledge and understanding. Over the
years I frequently went back to seek his advice.
In August of 1958, I was assigned as a student to the National War College
and was pleased to find Fritz was selected to attend the College as a Pentagon civilian employee. Not surprisingly, Fritz was more often the teacher than
student. The college offered a prize each year to the best term paper. The
good news is that I won. The bad news is that I tied with Dr Kraemer. Instead
of having an hour to present the paper to the staff and faculty, Fritz and I were
each allotted half the time. Fritz won the coin toss and went first. His half hour
Ed L. Rowny serving in Vietnam.
165
lasted fifty minutes, leaving me only ten minutes. When he spoke about General Foche he put on a beret, placed an unlit French cigarette between his lips
and spoke in French. When he spoke about Ribbentrop he put on his monocle
and spoke in German. When he spoke about Mussolini, he gestured widely
with his hands and spoke in Italian. It was a performance worthy of John
Barrymore.
Getting to know Fritz, I learned that he earned certificates from Berlins
Arndt Gymnasium, the London School of Economics and the University of
Geneva. He was subsequently awarded a doctorate in law from the University
of Frankfurt and a doctorate in political science from the University of Rome.
During the 1930s he served as a senior legal adviser in international law to
the League of Nations.
When Hitler came to power, Fritz left Germany and came to the United
States in 1939. Four years later he entered the U.S. Army, and became an
American citizen. To my knowledge, he was the only enlisted man permitted
to wear a monocle. Entering combat with the 84th Infantry Division, in November 1944 he fought in the Battle of the Buldge, and was awarded a Bronze
Star medal for single-handedly achieving the surrender of a German city. He
also received a battlefield commission. Displaying his Prussian ancestry, Fritz
carried a captured leather riding whip. He fought with his unit until their meeting with the Russians at the Elbe.
Kraemers Division Commander decided that Fritz should indoctrinate the
division on why we fight. At the end of one of his lectures, a soldier told him
his speech was highly inspiring. This young soldier was Henry Kissinger, with
whom he struck up a lasting friendship.
I asked Fritz about his first impressions of the young Henry Kissinger, he
said: Kissinger knew nothing but understood everything.
In May 1945, working through General Patton, he was able to rescue his
Swedish wife and his English-born son, who had been held in Germany by the
Nazi regime throughout the war. After VE Day, he remained in Germany for
two years serving as an intelligence officer and helping analyze war crime
documents in preparation for the Nrnberg trials. He brought along Kissinger
166
President Ronald Reagan appointed Lieutenant

General Edward Rowny to the rank of Ambassador as the Presidents chief negotiator on
Strategic Nuclear Arms (START). During his
second term, President Reagan appointed Rowny
his Special Advisor on Arms Control. He was
awarded the Presidents Citizen Medal with the
citation: Rowny was one of the chief architects
of Peace through Strength.
as one of his assistants. At the end of their stay in Germany, Kraemer convinced Kissinger that he should study political science at Harvard. Kissinger
had been reluctant to do so, saying he preferred to follow his fathers career
as an accountant.
Returning to the United States, Dr Kraemer was assigned to the Pentagon.
He became editor of a series of handbooks designed to acquaint soldiers with
the customs of various countries to which they would be assigned. In 1948,
he resigned his commission as a Lieutenant Colonel and became a Department of the Army civilian and simultaneously a Reserve Officer. In my first
If you cant get your idea

across in one page, you have
not given it enough thought.
Important is emphasis.
167
meeting with Fritz at the Pentagon in 1957, I asked him to comment on a letter
I had drafted for my boss, Chairman of the JCS to the Pentagon. He read it
and said something like: Your letter is too bourgeois and should be more
aristocratic. It is too long. Remember what General Marshall said, If you cant
get your idea across in one page, you have not given it enough thought. As
for style, Fritz said it lacked unity, coherence and emphasis. The most important of these is emphasis, he said in a loud voice.
In referring to his wife Britta, Fritz said: I love, admire and respect her. She
is a woman of strong faithwho else would live with me?
I once asked Fritz what he thought of a four star friend of mine and he
replied: He is an overeducated idiot. He tries to be intellectual but should try
harder to be a good soldier.
Fritz was a great admirer of general MacArthur and once remarked to me
about him: He is a true product of West Point. He reeks of duty, honor, and
country.
Fritz told me that the best decision I ever made was to take off my lieutenant
bars when I graduated from Johns Hopkins as a reserve officer and decided
to go to West Point.
The United States Military Academy, he said, has been the most elitist institution in the country and must never lose that status. Duty, honor, and country
are all important, but the most important is honor.
Away from the office he also offered advice to Dr Henry Kissinger when he
became National Security Advisor and subsequently Secretary of State. Fritz
cultivated relationships with a large circle of foreign leaders. He impressed all
with whom he came in contact with his encyclopedic knowledge and sound
judgment. He often reinforced his statements with quotations from Sun Tzu,
Thucydides, Clausewitz, Metternich, Bismarck, and Churchill.
Fritz helped me in my work as the chief strategic arms negotiator with the
Soviets through his insights as to how totalitarian leaders think. He also introduced me to persons he considered to be leading strategists in their respective
168
fields, such as the State Departments Seymour Weiss, and AFLCIOs Jay
L
ovestone. Among his many admirers were Secretaries Haig, Rumsfeld, and
Schlesinger, who kept in touch with him until the end. Dr Kraemer was not only
a global strategist but a philosopher. He often questioned displays of cynicism
or opportunism as reflections of bourgeois mentality and lack of transcendental values.
The likes of Fritz Kraemer come along only once in a century.
U.S. Ambassador Rowny met

Pope John Paul II in the Vatican.
169
A Medieval Knight in
the 20th Century
By Leslie Upton
Hidden in a small office in the Pentagon sat a man behind his desk poring
over a newspaper, underlining some parts in red, others in blue or yellow. This
seemingly unimportant procedure assumed importance when the summary of
several papers was typed and sent to the Secretary and the Chief of Staff of the
Army. The author, special assistant to the Secretary of the Army, confidant and
intellectual stimulator of high ranking government officials, was Fritz Kraemer.
It is worth summarizing the background of this astute geo-political analyst,
uncompromising seeker, teacher, and practioner of honest truth. He is one of a
kind. He is a medieval knight in twentieth century attire. His impeccable character constitutes his shining armor. Unhappy when Hitler came to power, he left
Germany and eventually came to the United States. Dr Kraemer has two PhDs,
speaks seven languages, was educated in Germany and Italy, a man of
extraordinary memory with a vast knowledge of current and past world events
and geopolitics. I met Fritz Kraemer, Lt. Col. Retired, in the early fifties.
His unparalleled detailed knowledge of the most distant obscure spot on the
globe always surprised me and filled me with respect for this unusual man. I
heard him lecture in the Pentagon to the military without notes or slides where,
monocle on one eye, long sword in hand he demonstrated different areas on
the map.
He was very sure of himself, often remarking that humility was not one of
his virtues, and yet he was a humble man. When his superiors approached
the subject of getting him promoted he always turned it down. His needs were
modest, he said, and he did not need any more money. Give it to the needy,
he said. He and his wife Britta lived in Washington in a small, very modest
house. Though in good physical condition and mentally as sharp as ever,
because it was mandatory, he retired at age seventy.
170
171
Dr Kraemers Soft Power Elements

of Peace-Making
At first glance, one might assess Dr Kraemer as a power-obsessed U.S.

officer and Department of Defense advisor who preached the use of military
power in all situations and nothing else. His doctrine of provocative weakness seems to point in this directiona strategist with a Prussian mindset,
with a focus on weapons as the instruments of power, confrontation, and even
conducting strategya missionary of the war god Mars in the Pentagon.
I am absolutely no warmonger,
for anyone who has been a
soldier in wartime, as I have,
cherishes peace and knows
what war means.
This narrow and superficial perspective does not do justice either to Kraemers character or to his profoundly unique system of historical analyses,
beliefs, and teachings. His role models in the art of statesmanship were
above all Otto von Bismarck and Winston Churchill, two effective leaders
with far-reaching analytical abilities combined with artistic elements, emotion, and imagination, who were anchored in the spiritual. According to
Kraemers own testimony, he had read Bismarcks memoirs 30 times, thereby
internalizing his distinctive way of thinking. He admired his courage and his
artistic element.
Fritz Kraemer was a complex man and appeared to be not only a disciple
of the Roman god of war Mars (or Ares in Greek) in the Pentagon, but also a
promoter of Apollo, the Greek god of truth and prophecy. He described his
position on the use of military power thus: I am absolutely no warmonger, for
anyone who has been a soldier in wartime, as I have, cherishes peace and
knows what war means.
His policy of change through intransigence and strength in the face of totalitarian communism, until it collapsed due to its own inner weakness, was the
basis for the self-liberation of the East Block and its 350 million citizens. In this
172
Fritz Kraemer was complex and not only appeared as a disciple

of Mars or Ares in the Pentagon (statutes on the left and right),
but rather also as a promoter of Apollo, the Greek god of art
and prophecy (statute in the center).
173
regardfrom a moral perspectivethis was a very good deed, and freedom

prevailed with no shot fired.
The largest steps toward nuclear disarmament took place under President
Reagan with the proposal on a true reduction of strategic nuclear weapons
initiated in 1982 in the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START, signed 1991)
negotiations. General Rowny, a close friend of Fritz Kraemer, was appointed
to the rank of ambassador as the Presidents chief strategic negotiator to
START for four years and later Special Advisor for Arms Control to Presidents
Reagan and Georg H. W. Bush until he retired in 1990. In the INF Treaty, the
destruction of all Soviet and American mid-range rockets was agreed in 1987
by U.S. President Reagan, including Moscows SS-20 rockets which were
aimed at Western Europe.
Truly good foreign and security

policy is comparable to Mozarts
Kleine Nachtmusik. It is a work
of art which demands inner
musicality.
This was in no way a merely coincidental peaceful outcome for a strategist fixated on power and the military. Much of what goes into todays peace
and conflict research under the title of soft power elements of peace-making
can already be found in many forms in Kraemers writing and speeches. Truly
good foreign and security policy is comparable to Mozarts Kleine Nachtmusik. It is a work of art which demands the inner musicality called for by
Kraemera special talent. It comes into being as an effective and harmonious
whole though the application of various instruments. Kraemer searches for the
proper mix of hard and soft factors of peace-making, i.e., the drums and
trumpets of war but mixed with harps and flutes. First and foremost, the proper
mix of these factors is different for each political conflict. This is where the
actual art of the political conductor comes into play.
In his speeches and letters, the great strategist emphasized again and again
the importance of such instrumentation with an orchestra of power and soul.
Politics must appeal to the soul.

Fritz Kraemer made important stresses with respect to human nature and its
ability to be influenced: Times have changed tremendously; however, when
one considers our 4,000-year history, the needs of people have not changed.
In politics, the human soul must also be appealed to. It is wrong to believe that
174
only useful or practical arguments are sufficient. Politics not only involve the
rational but also feelings and desires. Man is not logical, but psychological.
You must understand the metaphysical.
Look at the whole global and politico-psychological picture

We have not many who see the global picture in its entirety. Needed is a
politico-psychological approach in foreign affairs with a global perspective
instead of a view from Washington only. Placing yourself in the thoughts and
feelings of an opponent or friend is just as essential as having an impact on
his thoughts and feelings.
Shape realitynot only adapt to it

Politics requires a dose of adventurousness. For many years it was Kraemers goal to change the world for the better, thereby creating a better framework for peace. Such work should strengthen the forces of freedom and curtail
evil. The foreign policy of the U.S. and the European nations is, however,
often too static and limited to reactions and crisis management; this influenced
his demand that we Shape realitynot just adapt to itappeal to reason
and emotions! In opposition to that in the U.S., one also finds, the includeme-out attitude which is visible whether a Democrat or Republican resides
in the White House. In democracies little tacticians dominate security and
foreign affairs, strategists are rare. He was continually frustrated by the trivial
and merely reactive in thinking, planning, and acting.
Willpower needed
Modern man is characterized by tiredness of willpower. The figures in
todays world were for him predominantly hollow figures exhibiting superficiality without antennas for the transcendental and metaphysical.
The sleeping bourgeoisie will no longer fightit is faint-hearted. In our
world few do anything against evil. Even scoundrels can be incredibly coura175
geous, like Fidel Castro or Saddam Hussein. For us, from our perspective,
scoundrels are always cowardlybut this is not true, explained Kraemer.
Character counts
The most important selection criterion for Fritz Kraemer was a persons character. Who looks for it? People with character in politics, the military, and in
bureaucracies have been rejected in democracies according to Kraemer. We
have distinctly mediocre characters flooding the highways and byways of
power, he complained. Mediocrity begets lukewarm politics.
Nothing but the truth
We have distinctly mediocre

characters flooding the highways
and byways of power. Mediocrity
begets lukewarm politics.
You have to report the truth as you see it and not please others. It is important to speak out about things and to present them in the manner one deems
correct and not the way superiors might like. Regardless of what a U.S.
President or his deputies or the Secretary of Defense wants to hear because it
fits and confirms his view of the world, the true patriot is only bound to the truth
and must speak this clearly and courageously. Otherwise he will lead the
nation down the wrong path. This is an age-old conservative precept, with
numerous connections to Jewish and Christian thought. While modern relativism ultimately holds that what is true and false can be determined through
majority decisionsa notion that Kraemer truly detestedit has long been a
pillar of conservative thought that there are absolute truths, which exist independently of whether they are shared by a majority or whether they are recognized by anyone at all. Christianity identifies these absolute truths with
Jesus Christ, thus ultimately with God.
Like a planned chess gameconsider things carefully

A good politician needs mature reflection and much time to think, to ponder
a number of influences, and to consider historical experience. Only with such
care will decisions be mature ones, like an an excellent wine. Fritz Kraemer
often criticized the great superficiality of thinking and the cold administrative
176
machinery of decision-making in Washington. The biggest mistakes proceed

precisely from this source, which mutate from the originally well meant into the
poorly made. I am more and more certain that the fundamental malady infecting all our doing is a terrifying lack of depth, an ineradicable trend to deal with
matters of destiny at a hurried working breakfast or a one hour appointment
with some harried cabinet member, in short in circumstances where no scenario
discussed is ever played out like a planned chess game, Kraemer argues.
It thinks in me, Kraemer often said. He was so good because he thought
things over again and again over many years and tested them against his
body of knowledge. Through its numerous filters, his mind processed the
events of the day and sorted them in his treasure trove of experiences. In this
way he developed a truly matured approach to things. The advice of the great
strategist is to Consider intensively again and again ideas, actions of military
and political operations, from various perspectives and that often in leisure.
Dont be a brilliant fool

He was suspicious of the super-smart and overly intellectual who believe
they know it all, the brilliant fools. Only the medium brilliant can afford to
be impressed by his own brilliancethe truly brilliant know that brilliance is
nothing, he often taught. This is also a warning against overestimating ones
own thinking and creating an appearance without modesty. He demanded
humility and down-to-earth analysis, planning, and management in foreign
and defense policy.
I am more and more certain that

the fundamental malady infecting
all our doing is a terrifying lack of
depth, an ineradicable trend to
deal with matters of destiny at a
hurried working breakfast or a
one hour appointment.
The intellectual is the root of all evil

I see in todays intellectuals the root of all evil in modern times. They are
continually capable of squashing everything, of discussing everything to death
and thereby wrecking it. What they lack is soul, spirituality, and romance. We
suffer today under an over intellectualism.
The moral soul in our relativistic-opportunistic age cries out for belief and
absolute values, not for intellectualism and know-it-alls.
177
When someone today asks, Is Mr. X. infinitely clever? I respond, Is he a

courageous man? Does he have a dependable character? You can find cleverness and intelligence on every street corner; courage and dependability
have become rarities.
Imagination, creativity, vision and a Holy Fire is needed
Fritz Kraemer demands

exceptional imaginativeness and
inner vision beyond mere
intellectual insight because
lacking inspiration, the power
machine comes to a halt because
it lost its soul.
Kraemer demanded that we Think up new and more creative ideas than
the 50,000 people before you. Or as the great thinker Albert Einstein said,
Imagination is more important than knowledge and, You cannot solve the
problems on the same level where you have created them. Fritz Kraemer
demands exceptional imaginativeness and inner vision beyond mere intellectual insight because lacking inspiration, the power machine comes to a
halt because it lost its soul. Bureaucracies like those of the Pentagon or State
Department crush the urgently needed creativity in their mills, and too often
spin around their own axes like a piece of a decorative mobile. All those in
positions of responsibility should again and again ask for and encourage
creativity, imagination, and vision, because without these good foreign policy
is not possible.
I believe the civil servant must not be opportunistic or seek publicity. Do
things for the cause and no other reason, he demanded. Time to reflect, to
meditate, is especially important for the elite. That is a deficit today. For this
reason, the dimension of depth is missing in politics. Most politicians only
know that over which they were briefed. That is why I call them the Briefies,
said Kraemer.
He criticized, There is little visible spontaneity in the political field, too
much ghost-writing, and politicians leave part of their soul on every rung of
the ladder leading them to the top with the Holy Fire, the inner passion, the
vision gone. The clever technicians now guiding the affairs of our world have
forgotten that a certain inner fire is an absolute necessity for those who are to
shape reality instead of merely adapting to it.
178
I believe the civil servant must not be opportunistic or seek publicity. Do things for the cause. Time to reflect, to meditate, is especially
important for the elite. That is a deficit today. For this reason, the dimension of depth is missing in politics.
Moral superiority is important

You must fight for absolute values and follow a code of honor. These ideas
were of the greatest importance to him. Any excessive violence or mistreatment of human beings contradicted his belief in the necessary dominance of
honor. Fanatics have to be borne down, he claimed repeatedly, Forcefully,
not brutallyeven they!
179
Soul in foreign policy is essential

You wont find the word soul in foreign affairs analyses, except in mine.
Successful policies need an internal energy, a drive in the metaphysics of the
soul, Kraemer believed. In politics, the human soul must be addressed, as
politics concern peoples feelings and longings as well as rational argument.
Kraemer asked politicians to touch and move the soul of men and women.
He said people are looking for inspiration, for emotions, for an ideal; thus
every foreign and military policy has to offer it.
No ignorance, please
My great fears are that the

normal products of our education
system are people provincial to
the core. They do not know
history, have only the vaguest
sense of world geography,
master no foreign language
with no sense outside their
own smug little nests.
He criticized ignorance like that of European leaders Chamberlain and

Daladier at the Munich conference, which opened the door for Hitlers World
War II. This means to understand the will of the adversary and not to transfer
your own thinking to him. It is incredibly important for the U.S.A. and other
nations to put themselves in the position of the Afghans, the Pakistanis, or the
Iraqis, for example, rather than to impose foreign ideas upon them. What
matters is what other societies think, feel, and want. Ignorance makes one
blind and leads to failure.
No provincialism
Fritz Kraemer had been critical all his life of any central or provincial
approaches and thinking. My great fears, he wrote, are that the normal
products of our education system are people provincial to the core. They do
not know history, have only the vaguest sense of world geography, master no
foreign language, with no sense outside their own smug little nests. You must
advise commanders about the psychology of the observed nation. That means
not only what they are thinking but what they might think and do in the light of
their past history and mental makeup, he stated in a 1948 Pentagon briefing.
In particular, hot spots in foreign affairs need in-depth political planning
and treatment based on a broad analysis of the nations involved. Policies in
such critical areas must never be centered on the interests of power or on
180
simplified American thinking about these regions. Mismanagement, dominated by ignorant and narrow-minded provincialism, is a real danger in foreign affairs. This is true for the days prior to the use of military power and is
just as important for the period afterwards.
Dual-strategy of diplomacy backed by power

Without the implicit or explicit threat of strong military force, and the will to
use it, the belief in diplomacy is an illusion, he wrote. Thus, he promotes a
balanced dual-strategy of power and diplomacy as promoted by his role models Bismarck and Churchill. He criticized those who believe in the power of
negotiations without the power of arms. It is not a call for a power-centric
policy only. He quoted Fritz the Great who once wrote to his Ambassador in
London: Walk as self-confidently as if 15,000 soldiers walk behind you.
The West often creates the appearance of powerlessness and thus provocative weakness. It is not so important for a statesman whether someone actually
has power, rather who has the appearance of power, knowledge, and superiority among his own people and who can create this impression to those
outside, he preached.
Political Grand Strategy neededthe pragmatic Anglo-Saxon approach is

not enough
Carl von Clausewitz wrote in his famous work On War in 1832 that war is
a continuation of politics by other means, a new kind of language of politics
which can never be separated from politics. This fundamentally political
approach was shared by Dr Kraemer who was suspicious of a purely technical and non-political approach to world politics dominated by Anglo-Saxon
pragmatism alone. We have always been essentially more apolitical than
others in the Western world. We are beholden to Anglo-Saxon pragmatism,
flexibility as a virtue unto itself to solve a problem on its merits. This is for him
a soulless plant with the pure machine in the Pentagon and Washington DC
actually accomplishing nothing behind all those imposing closed doors. He
favored a deep grasp of historic-political reality, knowledge and a depth of
insight into history. He was critical of wrong predictions, faulty analyses
181
and ill informed views. He preached that a sense and a natural, inner musicality for history is needed as well as original and even unpopular ideas.
Combating criminal terrorists, the containment of aggressive radicals and
totalitarian states, and the pacification of war zones should be conceived of
and examined through the inclusion of these soft factors of peace-making
espoused by Kraemer. Only in this way can hollow victories be avoided and
the interests of the U.S. and its allies preserved. They supplement the necessary military means of force in meaningful symbiosis, in a monolithic peace
policy.
Included among the best practices for a successful implementation of Kraemers soft factors of peace-making are the following, because they combine
the necessary power politics with the psycho-political element, creativity, and
moral superiority into a meaningful overall strategy:
Combine the necessary power

politics with the psycho-political,
creativity and moral superiority
into a meaningful overall
strategy.
The NATO Harmel Report of 1967, which signaled both sufficient defensive capabilities as well as the willingness to reduce tensions with respect to
Eastern Europe and the USSR;
The NATO Double-Track Decision of 12 December 1979 through which
the allies of Western Europe answered the threat of the deployment of Soviet
SS-20 rockets through the deployment of Pershing II rockets and Cruise missiles and at the same time offered to forgo this expansion through the zero
option should the SS-20s be scrapped, which led to the INF disarmament
agreement of 8 December 1987;
the counter-insurgency strategy of General David Petraeus in Iraq, which
in 2007 was finally able to turn things around for the better;
the new Afghanistan counter-insurgency strategy (COIN) to get the inputs
right after eight lost years, written in 2009 by General Stanley McChrystal,
then commander of U.S. and International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in
Afghanistan, with the help of General David Petraeus, the commander of the
U.S. Central Command and implemented in 2010 and 2011. For the first time
this placed the needs of the local population and the build-up of strong Afghan
National Forces as the center of focus;
182
the outstanding planning and management of German reunification in the

years 1989 and 1990 in the 2 plus 4 negotiations in which two Kraemer
students Henry Kissinger and Vernon Walters played important roles, belong
to these examples,
as do the reconciliation of France and Poland with the centuries-long archenemy Germany after 1945.
These are six of the finest hours of successful foreign policy which, in the
spirit of Kraemer, involved moral superiority and psychological intuition
backed by power.
The reader should reflect for himself on the worst examples when the warnings of Fritz Kraemer for artistic politics have been ignored. For the most part
this has been due to arrogance, the overestimation of the possibilities of military power, and ignorance of historic, religious, moral, and ethical roots, and
local psychological elements. In addition, a failure to clearly and objectively
analyze the facts and a lack of thought-through and creative planning for the
period following combat operations comes into play. A combination of all of
these mistakes has resulted in lost victories with numerous dead American and
allied soldiers and even more civilian casualties locally.
Foreign policy is an art, like the

painting of a good work of art by
Warhol, Richter or Picasso in
contrast to an object quickly
scribbled, a superficial picture
without forethought.
Foreign policy is an art, just as a true work of art stands in contrast to an

object quickly scribbled, a superficial picture without forethought. The colors
available are given to us primarily from the local population and their history
and feelings, not just by the soldiers or officials from afar who think and feel
in their own limited world. Only when the picture has been painted in a wellbalanced manner, only when the hard and soft factors of peace-making have
been brought into an appropriate mix in relation to each other, will the work
be truly good and pacification in freedom result.
To use another image: in order to repair the world, we need a toolbox with
many different tools among which weapons and soldiers are very important
but not everything. We seek fundamentally well thought-out dual-strategies for
the trouble spots of our world, composed of hard and soft factors, power and
diplomacy.
183
De- and
Re-Generation
All highly civilized countries are going down a deplorable path unless theyre engulfed by a wave of inner
renewal and can reconstitute themselves from within.
I believe in Degeneration, but also in Regeneration.
Regeneration is always caused by an elite, a small
determined minority. Ideals can be carried to a
b
reakthrough by a determined minority.
184
Bourgeois
America
If America remains as bourgeois as it is at present it will
only reluctantly retain its position in the world.
This include-me-out attitude is visible even with
Republicans like Buchanan and applies whether a
Democrat or a Republican resides in the White House.
185
Power, My Friends, Is Not a

Privilege but an Obligation!
By Fritz Kraemer
It is for this reason, then, and not just because we might need an instrument
to defend ourselves and our interests, that the United States needs more than
a token Army.
Fanatical men from the left or rightor, perhaps, nations hating each otherwho are on the verge of throwing the match into the powder keg are most
unlikely to listen to reason and desist because we beseech them with mere
words. They can however, be made to listen, if you are able actually to bear
down on them, not brutally, but forcefully.
186
187
The helmet with the sign of the 84th Infantry

Division Kraemer used during WW II.
188
U.S. Generals
By Fritz Kraemer
Our U.S. generals today are all too frequently neither strategists nor men of
willpower; they are, and see themselves, as managers and the far greater
number of those today made their career, and were successful in climbing the
ladder, because they proved themselves as such: managers, administrators.
Jay Lovestone and Lane Kirkland of the AFL-CIO, civilians on the other
hand, are men with whom I can discuss geo-strategy for hours in depth. Very
few military men can even grasp the basic implications, not because they are
uncouth and primitive, but because they are over-educated and have lost
touch with the gruesomeness of the real world.
A journalist is for me an infinitely better partner in conversation than the
overwhelming majority of so-called military men who are increasingly but
civilians with a uniform thrown over their reluctant shoulders and anxiously
striving for academic respectability.
But there are military men for whom I have undying respect, and General
Al Haig is certainly one of them, with courage, stamina, patriotism, and self
reliance, but also the utmost sensitivity for psychological and political intangiblesa most unusual combination. All too frequently the courageous men with
the unshakeable resolve are over-simplifiers and too crude, while the highly
sensitive ones see and feel so much that they cant make the hard decisions
required. Haig is near unique in his broad spectrum of excellence.
189
How Fritz Kraemer as a Talent

Scout Discovered Alexander Haig
That I was able to make Alexander Haig the military assistant of Henry
Kissinger as National Security Advisor in the White House in 1968 was pure
coincidence, destiny, and a lucky break. Later, in 1981, Haig became Secretary of State under President Reagan.
In 1968, I happened to pass by the office of Colonel Hamblin, next to the
Chief of Staff. We had been in the 84th Infantry together. He said to me: By
the way, did you know that a man from our division, Henry Kissinger, has just
been named National Security Advisor? I said: Of course I know that, I
know him quite well. Hamblin: Kraemer, Ive been given the job of finding
a military advisor for Dr Kissinger. You know Im the liaison officer between
the White House and the Chief of Staff. Now Im supposed to put together
some names. I asked the G 1 personnel officer to send me the names of seven
officers with outstanding military records and a PhD.
I said to him: Ham, are you nuts? I have two PhDs, and I assure you they
mean nothing! They tell you nothing about the person. He could be a fool or
a coward. Could I have a look at the list?
The colonel gave me the list. I looked at the names. The first was brilliant,
but one of the few wicked ones in our military. The second one had studied at
Oxford, was a Rhodes Scholar and imitated a British accent. I knew five of the
seven personally.
Seven years ago, a first-class lieutenant colonel sat here at the Pentagon
who even had McNamaras respect and worked for him directly, I told him.
He even contradicted McNamara to his face. But the Secretary of Defense
190
Kraemer: Haig is a man of strong character with an innate

understanding of political and psychological imponderabilities.
praised this brave soldier nonetheless. Ham asked: Who is it? I replied:
Goddamn, Ive forgotten his name! I asked for some time to think and said:
He had the name of a high-ranking British officer in the First World War.
Ham was pleased: Gee, God damn it! You mean Al Haig! I should have
thought of him. Hes the one!
Both of us decided then and there to send Haig to Kissinger and to forget
the list. Colonel Hamblin recommended only one man to his Chief of Staff:
Alexander Haig. I sent Henry Kissinger a personal letter requesting him to take
this man. I had written to Kissinger: Above all he is a man of strong character
besides being intelligent and gifted, with an innate understanding of political
and psychological imponderabilities.
Thus, Alexander Haig was transformed from a career officer into a potential
statesman. Haig had struck me as a man of superior qualities.
Years before, I had walked through a room in which eight officers sat. It was part
of the General Staff to which I would be transferred in the case of war: the International Plans and Policy Division of G 3. For two weeks a year I was on uniformed
duty there as a reserve officer. At the time I was a civilian at the Pentagon.
One day I visited this department. A Lt. Col. Haig sat at the NATO desk.
Lets talk about NATO, I challenged him. After twenty minutes I knew he was
excellent. From then on we worked together: Haig processed all questions
pertaining to NATO between the Secretary of Defence and the Army. We
always had the same ideas.
191
He later worked for McNamara with the Italian-American Califano. Haig

then went to the Army War College, not the National War College, and I lost
sight of him.
This is a good example of how I exerted influence at the Pentagon. Had I
not passed through that office by pure chance, Haig would surely have
become a very good Chief of Staff, but not a statesman.
The influence one can exert is absolutely dependent upon the personality
one conveys and actually has.
I had an influence on people in the Pentagon. I always thanked people and
praised them for doing things for the cause.
I took care of promising young people. I never demanded nor requested
anything in return. But I did expect that they, in turn, would enlist colleagues
willing to do what they can as an elite for their country.
You cannot have stability

without equalitystability
presupposes balance.
192
We have not many who

see the global picture
in its entirety.
Fritz Kraemers globe in his living room
193
The Importance of the Nations

Elite in Pursuing and Advancing
the Value of a Free Society
By Alexander M. Haig Jr.
Fritz Kraemer embodied a complex mixture of classic elitism and self-effacing humanism, leading him to promote cherished principles rather than seek
public recognition or personal gain. Almost a quarter of a century ago at the
time of his retirement as Advisor to the Chief of Staff for the
U.S. Army, I wrote to Fritz: It would be hard to capture the depth of my
respect for the quality of your service to the American people, which has been
at once brilliant and sensitive to the instrumental forces of history but also
and above alldeeply embedded in philosophic and ethical principles. For
me Dr Kraemers lifetime of service confirms the importance of the nations
elites in pursuing and advancing the value of a free society.
My initial involvement with this remarkable personage began in the early
60s when I served as a young Major and Staff Officer in the International
Plans and Policies Division in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations in the Department of the Army. I had been assigned responsibilities for
Europe and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization including contingency
planning and policy formulation for West Berlin. Dr Kraemer, although a globalist in outlook, consistent with his own experience gave special attention to
European affairs, especially Soviet relations with the West. Despite his obligations to the highest Army authorities, Dr Kraemer often came to sit alongside
my desk at the end of the day to speak both fervently and authoritatively on
the challenges imposed by the Cold War, including the policies best suited for
coping with them. Fritz Kraemer found time for me, and later I always found
time for him and his wise counsel. It was a very busy time in my life including
my service as Military Assistant to the Secretary of the Army with special
194
counter insurgency responsibility for U.S. policy towards Cuba; as Deputy

Special Assistant to the Secretary and Deputy Secretary of Defense; as the
Presidents Deputy National Security Advisor, and later as Vice Chief of Staff,
U.S. Army; and as White House Chief of Staff; and also during my almost five
years as NATOs Supreme Commander in Europe. I found Dr Kraemers
advice indispensable throughout. I can think of no individual before or since
whose patient tutelage made a more meaningful contribution to the shaping
of my own worldview.
As Henry Kissinger has so concisely written, Kraemer dedicated his life to
fighting against the triumph of the expedient over the principled. Unfortunately, this struggle continues today while increasingly favoring the expedient.
There are numerous contributors to the growing role expediency is playing in
modern statecraft. The first being the impact of the advancement in information sciences, (radio, television, internet, etc.). All enlarge the role of what has
been labeled Modern Populism, increasing the quantity of leaders who put
their fingers to the wind to determine what will further his or her popularity
and who construct policies accordingly. A second contributor among others is
decreasing emphasis on the study of history, especially the history of political
theory in both lower and higher education. Sadly, this educational trend is
most prevalent in the United States.
General Haig as NATO-SACEUR
Dr Fritz Kraemer did not expect thanks or high office as a reward for his
service. In fact, his stand on principle held him back. But in the end, he found
the full measure of satisfaction because his adherence to universal principles
made an invaluable contribution to the promotion of freedom everywhere.
As Secretary of State in the

Reagan Administration
195
196
What It Means to Be an
American Soldier
By Fritz Kraemer
Being a soldier and soldierly virtues differ from nation to nation.

What counts for the American soldier? Not all instructions are crucial. The
American soldier withstood enemy fire for two essential reasons:
A man may never be yellow.
A man never leaves his buddies in the lurch.
These two basic convictions rendered the American soldier duty bound, nothing else. The simple soldier didnt care about fighting against a dictatorship or
fighting for freedom. Take away these basic convictions and the American
soldier can be neither shaped nor led.
It therefore concerns the tension between a natural survival instinct and
these two convictions. The heroism of soldiers is the result of overcoming ones
survival instinct in favor of the two convictions mentioned above. And of maintaining a social position within their group.
The French Foreign Legion is an example of the possibility of forging an elite
force out of thieves and rogues.
The Janissaries, an elite Turkish troop during the time of the Ottoman empire,
are another. They were abducted Christian children; kidnapped at fourteen
and trained to become fanatical Muslims sent to battle their Christian fathers.
197
Nothing is Possible
without Power
By Fritz Kraemer
Objectively, no negotiation in the world went successfully for one side only
because of diplomatic skills. In the twelfth century, Venice was a peerless
master of diplomacy. But the lagoon-state was already in the twilight of its
power and glorious history. Once it no longer had enough ships and crew,
Venice was simply done for.
But power alone is not sufficient as an objective criterion.
It must be coupled with will, a very subjective factor. The bourgeois cannot
recognize this simple connection between power and will.
In democracies, the little tacticians dominate security and foreign affairs.
Strategists are rare.
Nothing is possible without armed force. There can be no diplomacy behind
which there is no threat of force. A framework for negotiations depends on the
other one knowing that he doesnt hold all trumps, but that his opposite is
holding one as well.
Power and will also need a Holy Fire that can inspire others. In other
words: they need a soul. This is something similar to the entrepreneurial
spirit often invoked in industrialized societies.
Even revolutions have their cycles. Missionary-revolutionary fire often burns
itself out after a while. Lacking inspiration, the power machine comes to a halt
because it lost its soul.
198
In America, to say that sacrifices must be made is already considered

defeatist. One doesnt do such things. All of America was isolationist until
Pearl Harbor, the Japanese attack on the American fleet in December, 1941.
Without this Japanese attack, not even President Roosevelt would have succeeded in taking America into the Second World War.
The principal line of reasoning at the time was: Germany is bound to lose
economically because it lacks raw materials. Therefore, Germany cannot lead
a successful war.
The popular argument that arms can be replaced by economic power is
nonsense. History proves this.
The popular argument

that arms can be replaced
by economic power is
nonsense. History proves this.
An example illustrates the power relations between determined havenots

and the unarmed rich. When old Mr. Rockefeller, well rested after a breakfast
of oysters, is taken by a liveried chauffeur for a ride though the countryside in
his Rolls Royce and a determined man in rags at the wayside forces the chauffeur to a halt with pistol pulled, Mr. Rockefellers billion-dollar fortune is no
longer important.
The bourgeois almost never recognizes this threat because it originates in
circles he has no knowledge of.
In the last century, small heroic groups always won because they combined
strength, will, and power. The bourgeois cannot imagine that anyone could be
so wild and determined. He cannot understand that the riders of the apocalypse always fight to the bitter end like Adolf Hitler and the Nazis during the
Third Reich.
When fanatics are cornered they believe in a miracle that could still save
them until the end.
We need power, will,

and a Holy Fire.
A picture of Frederick the Great hung in Adolf Hitlers private room in the Fhrerbunker. The dictator hoped for a miracle until his suicide, just like a hundred
years earlier the sudden death of Czarina Elisabeth had saved the Prussian king
Frederick the Great. The death of President Roosevelt in 1945 was seen as just
such an event by him as well as by his Minister of Propaganda, Josef Goebbels.
199
Fanatics like Adolf Hilter would rather let their country burn than to abandon their idea.
To fanatics, heroism means a fight they know they will lose. The bourgeois
do not understand this kind of thinking.
The balance of power is above all a balance of deterrence.
That peace has lasted for fifty-five years after the Second World War is a
result of our not having gone down the path of pacifism.
To fanatics, heroism means a fight

they know they will lose. The
bourgeois do not understand this
kind of thinking.
In the last phase, the stationing of the American mid-range nuclear weapons, Cruise Missiles and Pershing II in Europe in 1983 to balance out the
SS20 nuclear rockets the Russians had stationed against Western Europe was
decisive.
At the time, the pacifist side warned us: for Gods sake dont provoke the
Russians! Had we followed these calls, the mass demonstrations, and recommendations of many intellectuals, we would likely have fallen prey without
war to aggressive Russian communism, the old-mens club in the Kremlin and
East Berlin.
One must not forget that Adolf Hitler, for instance, in the first phase between
1933 and 1939 actually extended his empire outside the boundaries of the
German Reich with nothing but threats. Not a shot was fired in the occupations of Austria and the Czech state.
At that time, no general staff in the world would have predicted that the
very strong French could be beat by the Germans. Only after 1935 did the
German army become a modern one. The Treaty of Versailles limited the
Germans to only 100,000 soldiers. In less than four years this small army
was converted by Hitler into a giant war machine overrunning all of
Europe.
In 1939 even the majority of German general officers was convinced that
they had not yet sufficiently armed and were still too weak for war. The Chief
of General Staff Beck was sure Germany must lose.
200
The lessons of the Second World War are: war is initiated through provocative weakness, a lack of both credible deterrence and balance of power.
Every dictatorship loves a victory without war, won solely by threat and
coercion. The seeming weakness of appeasement considerably reduces deterrence by giving in and, on the contrary, provokes armed attack, a war.
I am fully convinced that military might is indispensable.
I am fully convinced that

military might is indispensable.
Frederick the Great once wrote to his envoy in London, who had requested
additional funds in order to present himself on the same level as the other
ambassadors: Walk as if 150,000 Prussian soldiers were backing you up!
I believe in the same, for it means deterrent diplomacy.
But I am absolutely not a

warmonger, for anyone who has
been a soldier in wartime, as I
have, cherishes peace and knows
what war means.
If you look at it objectively, plain violence and raw power are necessary to check
wild, untamed fanatics.
201
Washington Behind
Closed Doors
By Fritz Kraemer
The pure machine in the Pentagon and in Washington D.C. actually accomplishes nothing behind all those imposing closed doors.
The meetings, called to finally bring in line and unify the State Department,
CIA, and Defense Department, invariably end in some kind of compromise. At
the end, the gentlemen of the staff are asked to get together and find the formula that their superiors have already discussed.
The big resolutions and decisions in Washington D.C. are usually made in
expert committees. Thus, a single individual in the right position at the right
time can exert crucial influence in determining the course of world events,
which would have been different without him.
The committees that ostensibly exist in order to make decisions usually dont
decide anything. They sit around tables. They become wrapped up in issues
that are almost never the crucial ones. Then the gentlemen part company.
Experts like myself make policies.
The president is presented with a single-page memo describing the policies

of the State Department, National Security Council, Defense Department, and
the CIA. The president gets five possibilities to sign off, one of them so extreme
that he would never accept it. So the president routinely chooses one of the
milder, mainstream options. The president cant immerse himself in every single case. He has to believe the briefings.
202
203
Fighting the Cold War

from the Pentagon
After returning from Germany as an officer in 1947, Fritz Kraemer went to

Washington DC where he served as a Senior Civilian Advisor to the U.S.
Army Chief of Staff in the Pentagon from the early 1950s until 1978. Until his
retirement at the age of 70, Fritz Kraemer influenced the thinking and the
actions of the United States of America during the Cold War, a period of
confrontation with the USSR and global communism. From 1978 to 2003 he
continued to promote his ideas in numerous meetings as a private mentor
promoting a policy of peace through strength.
This period encompassed the entire duration of the Cold Wara global
conflict lasting more than 40 yearsbetween the Soviet-led communist block
and the Western world under U.S. leadership. The beginning of this confrontation is marked by the Soviet blockade of Berlin (1948/49) and the Korean
War (19501953), its conclusion by the fall of the Berlin Wall and the democratic revolutions in Eastern Europe in 1989/90, followed by the ultimate
collapse of the USSR in 1991.
When writing about Fritz Kraemer a fascinating question arises: While the
great lines of his thinking are fairly clear, what can be said about the specific
policies Kraemer recommended to policymakers during the long decades of
the Cold War? Which advice was accepted and which was rejectedand
with what result at the end of the day? Can we assess realistically the specific
contribution of Fritz Kraemer to the final triumph of the Western world in this
historic conflict?
Today most scholars agree that this outcome was all but predictable. In
Eastern Europe, the communists even dreamed of building a more just and
204
productive system which would be attractive to the working class in the West.
More than once, Western democracies had serious problems in keeping up
with the ideological and military challenge posed by Soviet expansionism. As
Kraemer put it: The ultimate victory of the democratic West over the communist East in the Cold War hung by a silk thread. We avoided the scaffold by a
hairs breadth.
The ultimate victory of the

democratic West over the
communist East in the Cold War
hung by a silk thread. We avoided
the scaffold by a hairs breadth.
When discussing this question, one has to keep in mind that Fritz Kraemer
did not write many papers during his time at the Pentagon. He preferred to
give his advice face-to-face, talking intensively with policymakers and military leaders, but also sharing insights with selected journalists and those
students whom he trusted. As Kraemer had broad access to secret and
top-secret information, reading hundreds of cables a day, large parts of
his written work are obviously still classified. But he believed the value of
that sort of secret information is often overestimated while the basic conditions, history, and psyche of nations involved and the main trends are more
important.
Nevertheless, it is possible to pinpoint what Kraemer suggested at several
specific stages of the Cold War. The call for courageous action, including the
deliberate use of military force, is a recurring theme throughout Kraemers
thinking and advice.
The first example might be his call for the U.S. conquest of Berlin in April
1945. In 1945 I wanted my 84th U.S. infantry divisionin which I served as
lieutenant under General Bollingto march directly through to Berlin. We
stood at the banks of the Elbe, near the town Salzwedel, only 70 miles west
of the capital. I said: General, let me talk to the Germans that dont want to
continue fighting us. Tens-of-thousands of Germans stood on the bank across
from our positions. Not one shot must be fired. They do not want to fight the
Anglo-Americans any more, just the Russians. The general knew that according to the Yalta agreement with the Russians, the Americans should stop at the
Elbe. He knew that we could be in Berlin with troops, supplies and ammunition within six hours. As I found out from files much later, he had informed the
corps commander of the possibility of marching through to Berlin. I wantedby all meansfor us and not the Russians to take Berlin, which would
have been of greatest psychological importance.
MajGen. Alexander R. Bolling, com

mander of the 84th U.S. Army Infantry
Division, discovered young soldier Fritz
Kraemer in 1943 and promoted him
with a Battlefield Commission for his
merits in the Battle of the Bulge in 1944.
205
The 84th U. S. Army Infantry Division arrived in England,

1October 1944, and trained. It landed on Omaha Beach, 14 November 1944, and
moved to the vicinity of Gulpen, Holland, 512 November. The Division entered combat,
18 November, with an attack on Geilenkirchen,
Germany, as part of the larger
offensive in the Roer Valley, north of Aachen. Taking Geilenkirchen, 19 November, the
Division pushed forward to take Beeck and Lindern in the face of heavy enemy resistance,
29 November. After a short rest, the Division returned to the fight, taking Wurm and
Mullendorf, 18 December, before moving to Belgium to help stem the German winter
offensive. Battling in snow, sleet, and rain, the Division threw off German attacks,
recaptured Verdenne, 2428 December, took Beffe and Devantave, 46 January 1945,
and seized Laroche, 11 January. By 16 January, the Bulge had been reduced. After a
5-day respite, the 84th resumed the offensive, taking Gouvy and Beho. On 7 February, the
Division assumed responsibility for the Roer River zone, between Linnich and Himmerich,
and trained for the river crossing. On 23 February 1945, the Division cut across the Roer,
took Boisheim and Dulken, 1 March, crossed the Niers Canal on the 2nd, took Krefeld,
3March, and reached the Rhine by 5 March. The Division trained along the west bank of
the river in March. After crossing the Rhine, 1 April, the Division drove from Lembeck
toward Bielefeld in conjunction with the 5th Armored Division, crossing the Weser River
to capture Hanover, 10 April. By 13 April, the Division had reached the Elbe, and
halted its advance, patrolling along the river. The Russians were contacted at Balow, 2 May
1945. The Division remained on occupation duty in Germany after VEday, returning to the
United States in January 1946 for demobilization.
206
From Combat Chronicle
Kraemer was very self-confident even as a junior officer. He later said: I

have always been a great admirer of MacArthur and General Patton. I occasionally joked: Only General MacArthur and Major Kraemer would dare to
say such a thing.
In 1948 as a mere lieutenant he gave his first presentation in the Pentagon
on The Overestimation of Intelligence and Brilliance (printed in this book),
arguing that intelligence must advise commanders on the psychology of the
observed nation. That means not only what they are thinking and doing now,
but on what they might think and do in the light of their past history and mental make-up. He started to stress the importance of intangible factors and
spiritual problems and described himself as a missionary more than a
scholar. It was exactly this know-how and deep understanding of the Germans that was needed when Berlin became the starting point and the American focus of the Cold War.
In June 1948 a new currency, the later famous D-Mark, was introduced in
West Germany and also in West Berlin. Moscow reacted by completely blocking the city, even cutting off electricity. Berlin became accessible only by air
for the United States, Great Britain, and France, the three Western powers
which held supreme authority over the western part of the city. The famous
Berlin Airlift (Luftbrcke), which started just days after the blockade, saved
more than two million people from the bitter choice between starvation and
slavery. However, 101 people died, mostly due to accidents, 17 planes were
lost and the 11-month operation cost more than 2 billon dollars in todays
terms. Psychologically and morally the airlift was a great success, yet the
U.S.A. had accepted Soviet control over land access to Berlina severe
concession.
Fritz Kraemer was among those in the military who opposed the softer
option of an airlift and called for a military reaction to show strength, but he
did not yet have sufficient influence. He liked General Lucius D. Clays idea of
July 10th 1948 to send a convoy of 200 trucks accompanied by armed police
and even a battalion of U.S. pioneers as well as British and French troops. The
logic of this proposal was simple: when starting the blockade, Moscow had
stated that technical problems would prevent trucks from reaching Berlin.
The idea was to take this obvious lie at face value and offer the Soviets tech-
In 1945 I wanted my 84th U.S.

infantry division to march
directly through to Berlin and
not to stop at the Elbe river.
Only General MacArthur and

Major Kraemer would dare to say
such things.
207
The famous Berlin Airlift (Luftbrcke, 1948/49)

saved more than two million people from the
bitter choice between starvation and slavery.
Psychologically and morally the airlift was a
great success, yet the U.S. had accepted Soviet
control over land access to Berlin.
nical help with repairing damaged bridges. On July 23rd 1948 Washington dropped that plan as being too provocative. Clay was convinced that the
Soviets would not risk war over Berlin, but the Secretaries in Washington were
scared and favored the less provocative airlift idea.
The big resolutions and decisions

in Washington DC are usually
made in expert committees. Thus
a single individual in the right
position at the right time can
exert crucial influence in
determining the course of world
events
208
The Germans haveafter two World Wars lost, with five different regimes
following each other in 50 years and their country still dividedby no means
regained their self-confidence. The fearof a trend towards isolationism in
Washingtonis actually shared by virtually all Germans, Kraemer warned in
his 1969 memorandum The Modern World, a Single Strategic Theater. In
the late 1940s and 1950s, it was still unclear in Washington whether West
Germany would declare neutrality in order to unite with the East or be integrated into the Westincluding NATO. Without Germany in the heart of the
continent, the U.S. would not be able to hold Western Europe and would thus
lose it to communism.
At the Pentagon, I began as a simple first lieutenant in the infantry. The sign
on my door with the academic degree Dr Kraemer was only there to grant
me some legitimacy. I sat in this fortress of exalted broodingthat is Churchills
phrase. Until 1978 I was geostrategic consultant to the army general staff, in
the rank of a GS 15, not a political GS 16 to 18. In the 1970s Secretary
James Schlesinger wanted to promote me to a political GS 16, to which I
replied: Mr. Secretary, I can only advise against it. Please give the position to
someone that needs it. Prestige doesnt depend on whether one is a GS 15
or 16. I also didnt want to be politically dependent.
Kraemer recognized the influence he had when he gave objective, self-confident speeches without regard for the opinions of his superiors at the Pentagon.
The big resolutions and decisions in Washington DC are usually made in
expert committees. Thus a single individual in the right position at the right
time can exert crucial influence in determining the course of world events,
which would have been different without him.
Personality plays a decisive role. The quality of decisions made is very
questionable if you dont have personalities. Personalities must be able to
oppose the iron will of revolutionary fanatics. The individual personality can
accomplish much in modern states provided it makes the right courageous
decisions at the right time.
Within large bureaucratic organizations like the Pentagon everything
depends on whose spirit animates the machine. And thats why so much is
amiss in the Western world. You cant succeed at anything anymore without a
PhD. But titles arent really crucial, character is.
In order to assert oneself in a large bureaucracy one needs above all exceptional knowledge, quick-wittedness and endurance. I, for one, never tired.
In Washington DC, important

questions are often set on a course
by rolling consensus.
Who can say as I can: I had no influence whatsoever, but I was very convincing. It was obvious that I wanted nothing for myself personallybut not
out of modesty, rather out of immodesty. Thats what no one understands. I
dont need that. If furthering your career is all you want, youre worthless,
because you must be capable of jeopardizing your career. Thats the dividing
line, Kraemer avowed.
He found the decision-making processes frustrating. The pure machine in
the Pentagon and in Washington DC actually accomplishes nothing behind all
those imposing closed doors. The meetings, called to finally bring in line and
unify the State Department, CIA, and Defense Department, invariably end in
some kind of compromise. At the end, the gentlemen of the staff are asked to
get together and find the formula that their superiors have already discussed.
In Washington DC, important questions are often set on a course by rolling
consensus.
209
This was the case in the 1950s in the question of rearming Germany after the
Second World War. Previously speeches could be heard stating that the dangerous Germans must never again be allowed to bear arms. Suddenly everyone
was for it. Why? One had discovered that the Russians were very difficult.
NATOs capacity was supposed to be increased and one needed the 12 new
German divisions. Everything else was declared unimportant and shoved into
the background. That suddenly decided the matter, Kraemer said.
The include-me-out (Kraemer) of the fifties in Germany against the rearming of Germany, the founding of the Bundeswehr, and NATO membership
illustrated provincial attitude of the Germans towards foreign policy at the
time: an insular attitude, he analyzed.
Sometimes were just governed

by brilliant fools. They never
understood the devastating effect
of provocative weakness on a
totalitarian dictatorship like
the USSR.
During the political crises of the 1950s, Kraemer repeatedly called for
immediate U.S. reactionsincluding demonstrations of military force. In
November 1956 he favored a military response when the Hungarian Freedom Fighters were fighting the Soviet tanks. He did the same in 1956/57
during the Suez crises and in 1958, when Moscow tried to force out all Western military forces from Berlin with Khrushchevs ultimatum.
Kraemer was critical of the new and inexperienced U.S. President John F.
Kennedy, explaining: Immediately after his election in 1960, President Kennedy sent the U.S. ambassador to general secretary Nikita Khrushchevattending a maneuver at the timeto ask him to meet the young American
president at a location of his choice. Subsequently, at the Vienna summit of
June 1961, the ice-cold power politician Khrushchev tested JFK, whom he
perceived as soft. He renewed the Berlin Ultimatum of November 1958: by
years end all Western garrisons must have left Berlin. That was very direct.
I was outraged to see the U.S. President submit to Khrushchev, who understood right away, Kraemer deplored. In October 1960, the same man had
taken off his shoe to pound on the lectern in a speech to the UN. Weakness
real or only perceived by himprovoked him. Good will on the part of the
West therefore accomplished exactly the opposite.
In August 1961 when the Berlin wall was built Fritz Kraemer urged that the
wall be torn down before the last brick was in place. Later he said: Did we
210
win the Berlin blockade? No, we did not. We lost East Berlinit had a fourpower government before.
Kraemer was delighted when President Kennedy forcefully responded to the
Soviet attempt to deploy missiles in Cuba in 1962. But he criticized Kennedys
willingness to withdraw U.S. Thor and Jupiter missiles from Turkey and England in return for a secret deal with Moscow to withdrawal its missiles from the
island.
When Czechoslovakia was invaded in August 1968, most experts and
large segments of public opinion found only one conclusion in the mournful
event: it would re-awaken the awareness of the Western world towards the
dangers of the East and thus revive the somewhat lethargic NATO of that time.
The prediction (which, as you may recall, I contradicted at the time) was
wrong. The lasting impression that finally resulted was that of NATOs and the
U.S.A.s virtually total non-reaction, except in words, and the capability of
brute force (applied in this case by the Soviets) to impose its will.
NATO commander General Lemnitzer wanted to post tanks symbolically
along the Czech/German border in response to the occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1968, in order to demonstrate NATOs resolve and the free worlds
outrage. I supported this symbolic gesture at the Pentagon. The most important
advisor of the Secretary of Defense at the time considered that too provocative towards the Warsaw Pact, which had just brutally marched into Czechoslovakia, trampling on reformers and the first tenuous sprouts of freedom.
Lemnitzer could only send less provocative transport tanks to the border.
There is only one superpower in

the non-communist world, the
US. When big brother even
appears to falter, the little
brethren will not move forward
courageously, but they will
anxiously take several steps
backwards.
I subsequently went to see Mr. Endhoven, the Prince of Wizards, one of the
clever young people. I urged him to position the tanks. He replied: Dr Kraemer, Im embarrassed having to explain whats happened to a man of your
brilliance. Its so simple. The Russians marched into Czechoslovakia. The
Czechs have 18 divisions. The Russians can no longer rely on their 18 Czech
divisions; therefore the Warsaw Pact has now lost 18 divisions.
Upon which I became so angry that I said: To come to such a perverted
conclusion one must in fact have a particular brilliance for it. He screamed
back: Dont give me that bullshit. I answered: I regret that a man of your
211
excellence uses such expressions as an argument. That was the end of the
conversation, he remembered.
Kraemers conclusion: Sometimes were just governed by brilliant fools.
They never understood the devastating effect of provocative weakness on a
totalitarian dictatorship like the USSR. Just as in the thirties brilliant fools
didnt understand that their policy of softness and relentingthe politics of
appeasementsubstantially contributed to the outbreak of the Second World
War. The power-dictator Adolf Hitler perceived softness as provocative. It
made him demand more and more, let him break the Versailles Treaty without
sanctions, and ultimately led him to march into Poland because he believed
that England was too weak to make good on its guarantees.
In 1984 Kraemer predicted the

fall of the USSR. By all outward
appearances, so powerful and
highly-armed Soviet empire will
decay and implode from
ossification and calcification.
In the late 1960s one issue dominated U.S. foreign and military policy like
no other Vietnam. Kraemer was a protagonist of military action in several
phases of the conflict. He did not inherently oppose negotiations and diplomatic solutions and he always called for strong attention to and intimate
knowledge about the psychology of all actors involvedother nations, allies
and opponents. However, he was deeply convinced that diplomatic steps
were of no use and could even be harmful in such cases where the negotiating
partner was a dictator and insufficient military means backed diplomatic
efforts.
Applied to the Vietnam theater, this stance made Kraemer a hardliner by
conviction. At a time when the U.S. public and the allies of the U.S. called for
an end to the Vietnam War, Kraemer still wished to continue and win it by
military means. He was afraid of the impact a retreat would have on neutral
states, allies, and adversaries.
There is only one superpower in the non-communist world, the U.S. When
big brother even appears to falter, the little brethren will not move forward
courageously (in Europe), but they will anxiously take several steps backwards, Dr Kraemer wrote in his memorandum The Modern World, a Single
Strategic Theater on September 29th 1969 to then National Security Advisor
Henry Kissinger who gave it to President Nixon for consideration. He promoted the retention of a strong military presence in his meeting with Nixon and
Kissinger in the Oval Office on October 24, 1972 (see cover illustration).
212
He warned that the U.S. should not produce the impression of a retreat into
an inner shell, nor be pushed by public opinion. Provincialism is one of the
great problems of our time, he said.
Concerning the Paris Peace Accords on Vietnam of January 1973, which
his pupil Henry Kissinger had negotiated as National Security Advisor to
President Nixon, Kraemers dire forecast came true: just as he had predicted,
the administration in South Vietnam was overtaken by the communist North
only two years after the treaty was signed. Laos and Cambodia also fell to
Vietnamthe domino theory seemed to be proven true. However, communist expansion was restricted to Indochina, Thailand remained stable and
pro-Western, and further consequences for the global balance between the
communist and democratic hemispheres did not follow. The dominos had
stopped.
Generally, the strategic picture in Asia was more complex than in Europe.
There was a clear bipolar setting, whereas in the Far East, the Chinese/Soviet
antagonism of the time led to fragmented and confusing international constellations. One obvious American option in Asia over the decades was to build
up closer links with the Peoples Republic of China to increase pressure on
Moscow. Kraemer was skeptical, since Beijings first claim in this case was to
abandon Taiwan, politically, strategically and primarily as the sole representative of the Chinese people at the United Nations. Beijings One China Policy
didnt allow diplomatic relations with both capitals, Beijing and Taipei.
Concerning the Paris Peace

Accords on Vietnam of January
1973, which his pupil Henry
Kissinger had negotiated as
National Security Advisor to
President Nixon, Kraemers dire
forecast came true: just as he had
predicted, the administration in
South Vietnam was overtaken by
the communist North only two
years after the treaty was signed.
On U.S./USSR relations he wrote in his 1969 memorandum: The Soviets

are developing some genuine fear of Red China. They might feel impelled by
self-interest to seek a genuine Kremlin/Washington dtente the entire Soviet
assessment, however, of the weight and value of the United States as a friend
or foe, will depend very largely on their considering us either strong-willed or
else weak in purpose and resolve.
He said: We accomplished much after the Second World War: we had
very patriotic officers that had come up through the old school, like General
Abrams out of West Point, whom I admired extremely. I am terrifyingly aware
of our having barely avoided imprisonment and the loss of freedom. We were
lucky.
213
New German Chancellor Helmut Kohl in 1983 pushed through the

NATO Double Track Decision and began to deploy Pershing II und
Cruise missiles in Germany against vehement internal and external
resistance. When we talked about it in Washington he told me:
Dr Kraemer, I have nerves of steel, Kraemer remembered. During
the unique phase of German unification (19891990) too, Kohl
kept his nerve and steered an unswervingly clear course.
Kraemer saw clearly the severe sclerosis of the Soviet empire,

its inner weakness, and growing economic disorder. However,
even as a university student he was already convinced that
economic strength was not crucial in strategic confrontations.
As his friend Peter Drucker recalled, Kraemer liked to give
examples of this: neither Napoleons continental blockade nor
the blockade of the Confederacy by the Union in the American
Civil War nor the blockade of Germany and its allies in World
War One led to a decisive victory. In each of these cases the
dice fell on the battleground. Thus, Kramer concluded, a statesman shouldnt care too much about economics but about the factors that are
truly decisive: military means, knowledge, and inner values.
Kraemer saw clearly the severe

sclerosis of the Soviet empire, its
inner weakness, and growing
economic disorder.
Another fixed point in Kraemers thinking was that only great powers decide
strategic conflicts. In such settings, smaller powers had no choiceliterally
no place to goand thus ultimately could be neglected, even if they were
economically strong. However, Kraemers conclusion was not a lack of interest
in circumstances in smaller countriesquite the opposite. But apparently Kraemer saw these countries primarily as playgrounds for the major powers and
not as actors on their own.
For Kraemer the Berlin crises of 1948/49 (the Soviet blockade and air lift),
1958 (Khrushchevs ultimatum) and 1961 (when the East German regime
divided the city by the wall) were important tests of resolve, which the free West
withstood. The same was later true of NATOs Double Track Decision (December 12, 1979), the deployment of Cruise and Pershing II missiles in Germany
214
During dtente the USSR deployed new SS-20

missiles provoking NATOs Double Track
Decision in 1979 to counter with the stationing
of Pershing II missiles and cruise missiles this
new threat towards Western Europe combined
with the zero-option to destroy those missiles on
both sides.
and England (1983), and resistance against

the Russian occupation of Afghanistan in
December 1979 until February 1989.
In 1983 the new German Chancellor,
Helmut Kohl, pushed through the NATO
Double Track Decision and began to deploy
Pershing II und Cruise missiles in Germany
against vehement internal and external
resistance. When we talked about it in
Washington he told me: Dr Kraemer, I have nerves of steel, Kraemer remembered. During the unique phase of German unification (19891990) too,
Kohl kept his nerve and steered an unswervingly clear course.
Statesmen like Talleyrand (French foreign minister 17971807) and Helmut
Kohl had nerves of steel, part of their success. Napoleon once shouted at Talleyrand: Youre nothing but a silk stocking filled with shit. The limping Frenchman left the Emperors room without a word and in the antechamber said:
How sad that so great a man is so badly behaved.
The principal problem over the long decades of the Cold War was not
merely to maintain a status quo between East and West according to the division of influence spheres in Yalta, but to doggedly resist the Soviet Unions
expansion of power until the Red Empire lost the internal strength to expand.
Often the West was close to losing this contest of wills and strength. Its tactics
were reluctant, fearful, and withdrawn.
215
President Ronald Reagan was completely different in this respect. On June

12, 1987, he had the courage to say at the Brandenburger Gate in Berlin,
right on the spot: Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall! At the Reykjavik summit
of October 1986 with Gorbachev he remained firm when the Soviet leader
demanded he should give up the SDI against attacking nuclear rockets.
The principal misconception in the thinking of most politicians was to believe
that in dealing with a dictatorship, friendliness and yielding would produce
the same on the opposite side.
In fact, in dictatorshipsas in sharksthis causes the opposite effect: Their
appetite increases and so does the danger of being devoured. The West was
often very weak and pliable and demonstrated provocative weakness in the
face of communist claims to expansion, Kraemer said.
However, the Western world, led by the United States of America, ultimately
did not give in against the decades of pressure from Moscow. The presidency
of Ronald Reagan (19811989) stands as a symbol for the determination and
willpower of freedom challenged by a system of dictatorship and suppression.
After a short period of skepticism, Kraemers respect and esteem for Reagan
grew.
But did he ultimately expect the historical triumph of freedom in 1989/90?
Did he even predict it, as so many other developments since 1945? In one of
our conversations in Icogne, Switzerland in 1984 he predicted the fall of the
USSR. This, by all outward appearances, so powerful and highly-armed
Soviet empire will decay and implode from ossification and calcification.
With Mikhail Gorbachevs assumption of power in 1985, a late attempt at a
rescue through Glasnost and Perestroika was undertaken. However, the decay
and paralysis were too far advanced. In 1991 the giant USSR collapsed
under its own weight, and the centrifugal force of the quest for freedom sent
the people in the Baltic nations and the countries of Central Asia into their
desired independence.
The transformations in Eastern Europe between 1989 and today stand as
proof that positive development for freedom and prosperity is possible, even
for suppressed societies, when a double strategy of power and reconciliation
216
maintains the status quo and strengthens the power of freedom at the same
time, as in the Helsinki Final Act of 1975.
Dr Kraemer criticized the unclear policy with respect to the new threat
posed by radical Jihadists: In 1983 a rolling consensus was achieved when
241 Marines were killed by a fanatic in Beirut. It was sheer carelessness. We
had ignored the ironclad military rule not to concentrate all soldiers in one
location. Thus, an Islamic terrorist was able to blow up the Marines quarters
using a single car bomb. The concrete barriers that were meant to prevent just
such a suicide attack just lay useless on the ground. It was organizationally
easier to supply the Marines in one place; thats whyin contradiction of the
basic military rule to distributethey were put in one building.
Ronald Reagan was president at the time. He swore up and down the
P
otomac that he would never give in to terrorists. He issued the political statement that America was in Lebanon to stay. Within the shortest time after the
bomb attack and the death of so many soldiers a rolling consensus was
established: We cannot bear the loss of 241 men and cant stay there a day
longer.
Even the determined and conservative political Under-Secretary at the
Pentagon, Fred Ikl, said: Look Fritz, tomorrow we have to withdraw from
Lebanon. If we have further casualties in the Lebanon the country will go
crazy. That would result in the difficulty of our no longer having the necessary majority in Congress to maintain and strengthen our defense budget. I
countered: If we withdraw because of this loss, everyone in the world will
say America is withdrawing because of a successful terrorist attack. Such
an attack can bring a world power to its knees. Thats how simple it is. That
is reality.
Americas present military resolve is less tough because there is no more
dictatorial Soviet power threatening it. We therefore need not fear something
decisive happening, as during the time of East/West confrontation, he
explained. The decades-long bipolar mutual menacing of East and West has
disappeared. No power is standing on the world stage that is prepared to
forcefully call a halt to aggressive violence. International anarchy prevails,
Kraemer concluded.
217
How We Won the Cold War:

A Contest of Will and Strength
By Fritz Kraemer
218
The ultimate victory of the democratic West over the communist East in
the Cold War hung by a silk thread. We avoided the scaffold by a hairs
breadth.
The Berlin crises were important tests of resolve which the free West withstood, as were the NATO Two Track Decision and the resistance against the
Russian occupation of Afghanistan in 1979.
The principal problem was not the mere maintaining of a status quo between
East and West according to the division of spheres in Yalta, but to doggedly
resist the Soviet Unions expansion of power until the red empire loses the
internal strength to expand.
Often the West was close to losing this contest of will and strength. Its tactics
were reluctant, fearful, and withdrawn.
219
220
A Diplomat Often
Lacks a Sense
of Reality
By Fritz Kraemer
A diplomat is someone who has no real understanding

because he was trained to think there are no conflicts of interest, just misunderstandings.
He has no right to believe that misunderstandings can be

negotiated away just by clever people gathering around a
green table.
The cream of our diplomatic crop have learned but one part
of their art, namely to be diplomatic; nobody seems ever to
have told them that in certain situations the highest form of
diplomacy consists of being outright undiplomatic.
221
May the Lord enlighten our leaders, who as true

products of this affluent society have no natural
instinct any longer for threats and danger.
The clever technicians now guiding the affairs
of our bourgeois world have forgotten that a
certain inner fire is an absolute necessity for
those who are to shape reality instead of
merely adapting to it.
I am more and more certain that the fundamental malady infecting all our
doings is a terrifying lack of depth, an ineradicable trend to deal with matters
of destiny at a hurried working breakfast or luncheon, a one hour appointment with some harried cabinet or sub-cabinet member, in short: under circumstances where no scenario discussed is ever played out like a planned chess
game, where no advice given or taken is ever thoroughly probed as to its real
potential consequences. People provide and accept recipes under the pressure of having to come up with an idea while talking, everybody improvises.
There most certainly is a time for improvisation and for action quick as
lightening, but what you might obtain from me could only be the product of
hours of conversation and joint thinking through.
222
223
U.S. Power
By Fritz Kraemer
Never in history has a great power simply played

away its power; we have the potential of being a
subject rather than an object of history. Nobody
forced us to now stand naked before our enemies;
we disarmed ourselves very literally and also psychologically. For decades we were only lacking in will
power, today we lack power.
We are a modern nation, stressing facts and figures rather than the politico-psychological. We have
always been essentially more apolitical than others
in the Western world. We are beholden to AngloSaxon Pragmatism. Flexibility as a virtue unto itself to
solve a problem on its merits. We do not look at
consequences in Time or Space.
We have to shape reality!

224
225
9/11
By Fritz Kraemer
The one thing most frightening to me about 9/11 has been the total, absoluteclearly unfeignedsurprise shown by the general public as well as by the
authorities in the U.S. and the rest of the civilized world.
Personally, I had preached for decades that the people, especially the
bourgeoise, in civilized nations simply did not understand the dangers
threatening from outside their own charmed, comfortable, soft environment.
I had also coined the concept of provocative weakness, asserting the
military and/or diplomatic weakness in the West must, of needs, encourage
(i.e., provoke) wild-eyed, would-be aggressors and fanatics to venture forward further and further, due to their growing conviction that they did not
have to fear any hard reaction from the U.S. and its allies, all obviously deficient in willpower, all seemingly paper tigers rather than fighting entities.
Thus, surprise at the deed itself was not my first or even second feeling.
What did surprise me was the remarkably thorough staff work and psychological insight of the terrorists (or their wire pullers in the background): with
no more than eighteen, possibly twenty, air pirates (armed only with knives)
they hijacked four ordinary U.S. passenger planes, and with this microscopic
minimum of means they produced an utterly and unbelievably disproportionate damage and gave the entire world a fearsome demonstration of the open,
highly technologized societies vulnerability to very small groups of fanatic
activists.
May we develop now the spirit, the will, the courage, and the lasting tenacity
to make it obvious to the destructionists that we are not paper tigers.
226
227
When a bourgeois society is so weak of will

that it accepts no risks and wants to interfere
with real force only when no sacrifices can be
expected, it becomes outwardly powerless.
228
When he fears for his existence,

the bourgeois has only one wish:
acquiescence to the power that
threatens him.
229
230
Modern Man Is Not Only a

Homo Economicus
By Fritz Kraemer
Modern conservatives also, very frequently, share with marxists (communists or socialists) the conviction that man is a homo economicus, i.e., a being
only beholden to and motivated by materialism. Modern man is inclined,
indeed, to feel that only MATERIAL, i.e., quantifiable factors are real and
rational, while the SPIRITUALby its very natureis something imponderable,
non-rational, and therefore unscientific/illusionary, in short a human invention.
Conservatives used to believe that man does have a soul, and an ineradicable yearning for the metaphysical and transcendental which DOES transcend the restricted world of facts and figures and the narrow limits of mere
intellectualism.
Man does have a soul.
231
In Memory of Jay Lovestone

A Convinced Trade Unionist of the AFL-CIO
By Fritz Kraemer
Jay Lovestone was a man of action never given to wordiness.
President Kirkland acted in his spirit asking that we, privileged to speak
here today, be brief.
Jay Lovestone during a visit to Berlin,

Germany. From left to right: Jay
Lovestone, General Lucius D. Clay,
Mayor of Berlin Willy Brandt,
President of the Federal Republic
of Germany Heinrich Lbke
Since Jay Lovestone habitually kept his utterances short and since it was his
style not to show off and never to display his erudition, many who met him
may never have guessed the vastness of his knowledge.
He was fabulously well-informed about developments in the world at large.
Whether one talked to him about Brazil, Berlin, or Burma, one would always
find him fully aware of basic facts as well as current trends.
To an amazing extent, and with enormous diligence, he did his own reading and research; he did not depend on being briefed by others.
He had a truly global overview and vision.
But beyond this extraordinary factual knowledge, he had that rare grasp of
political reality which comes from an inner musicality for the political and
which no amount of formal education can bestow on any of us.
In this natural giftedness, he may be compared to the splendid Eric Hoffer,
the lifelong stevedore, who understood so very much more than most so-called
learned men.
Lovestone was an utterly convinced trade unionist. In contrast to me, he
never forgave President Reagan for having dismissed the striking air control-
232
President John F. Kennedy holding

his famous speech in the city of
Berlin 1963. JFKs German speech
written in English phonetics.
In Berlin, Lovestone had handed President Kennedy a slip with the words Auch ich bin ein Berliner.
The word Auch was finally omitted as too difficult by Mr. Kennedy in his address. That the public
at the time knew nothing of his role was of no importance to Lovestone.
Over the turbulent years I have known him, Fritz has demonstrated vigorously
the validity of the axiom that one can make enormous contributions to human
decency, freedom, and progress, if one does not seek credit for them.
233
lers. And the suppression of genuine trade unions in the Soviet Union and its
satellites was, for him, ungainsayable proof of the tyrannical nature of communist regimes.
History, very probably, will remember Jay Lovestone, above all, because of
his inspirational role and highly effective practical work in the early rebuilding
of democratic trade unions in a Western Europe barely recovering from the
devastations of World War II.
Jay Lovestone was contemptuous of the usual kudos and perquisites for
which lesser men are striving. He did not seek the company of glamorous
people or participation in prestigious social events.
Even in long private conversations he never gave the impression that he
expected to be given credit for something he was doing or had done.
The idea, for example, of having Solzhenitsyn, newly arrived in the United
States, give his first major American speech under AFL-CIO sponsorship had
originated with Lovestone. But on the day when Soltzhenitsyn spoke, Lovestone sat with my wife somewhere in the huge ball roomradiant that the
event was a success and never alluding to his own part in bringing it about.
For many years, he regularly visited us at home. But only once did he tell us,
how in Berlin he had handed President Kennedy a slip with the words Auch
ich bin ein Berliner. The word Auch was finally omitted as too difficult by
Mr. Kennedy in his address. That the public at the time knew nothing of his
role was of no importance to Lovestone.
He never asked: What is in it for me? He was intent only on promoting the cause
of freedom and dignity for all men.
Only men and women of great faith and total self-assurance can be so
naturally selfless. Jay Lovestone fully knew his own worth; he simply did not
need glorification, awards, and rewards or even verbal recognition of his
merits. He also knew who was who in this world, and he knew wonderfully
well how to distinguish between real people and phonies.
234
Rank and title did not impress him in the least. He was a most independent
person.
Intolerant of evil, and rough where necessary, he also had a highly developed sense for the role of purely psychological factors in human affairs and
he took those factors very much into account in his political assessments and
actions
He led a very simple, almost austere life. Not being spoiled by easy living,
he never lost touch with reality. In rather rich and comfortable societies like
ours, there is much shoulder-shrugging cynicism and many among us are
egotistically concerned only with our own career and success. Jay Lovestone
kept his fiery soul, caring very much for the fate of society as a whole and for
the fate, above all, of those being suppressed and enslaved by totalitarian
tyranny.
Self-disciplined, loyal, totally reliable as a human being, Jay Lovestone also
possessed deep insights, where others, equally intelligent perhaps, remained
on the surface. He wielded little formal power but very great influence.
In an age in which, for many reasons, there is a mighty trend toward mediocrity and a lowering of standards, Jay Lovestone was a man of excellence.
We shall serve his memory best by tryingby at least tryingto emulate
him in dedication, independence of thought, and strength of character.
President Kirkland, I am deeply grateful for having been permitted to bear
witness for Jay Lovestone.
Remarks by Fritz G. A. Kraemer 11 April 1990

at AFL-CIO Headquarters Washington D.C.
235
We, the Bourgeois People

By Fritz Kraemer
Our lives are on the whole so extraordinarily comfortable and secure

that indeed it would require exceptional imaginativeness and inner
vision beyond mere intellectual insight to feel, not only think, that we
might have really been endangered.
We as bourgeois people cannot fathom the ruthlessness, the fanaticism,
the intensity of purpose, the missionary zeal, and above all the
willingness to make sacrifices of a revolutionary movement.
We are highly civilized, sober, well balanced, rationalnaturally
inclined to reasonable compromise.
We do not believe in power pure and simple. We believe in World
Public Opinion.
236
We appeal to reason, not emotion.

We are not accustomed to being challenged on our basic values.
Our propaganda apparatus is rather limited.
We live in hard timesbarbarians have won in history before.
Well go under in the name of Realism.
We adapt to reality rather than shape reality.
We, the Bourgeoisdo not understand the intensity of fanaticism
of revolutionaries, missionaries, visionaries.
We are rationalists, therefore disinclined to believe in the importance
of intangible factors.
We are deeply humanitarian and civilized; therefore, battle fights
are not natural to us.
237
Some people understand everything but

know nothing. Others
know everything but
understand nothing.
The Chinese are

brilliant thinkers
they think around
corners.
Never ask, What do

you feel? instead,
What do you think?
Modern men dont

have the vocabulary to
express themselves.
Example: greeting cards
with printed messages.
Follow your heart

has replaced Follow
your duty.
The wicked can be

courageous.
238
Primacy of foreign
policy. Primacy of
power in foreign policy
and the need for the
genius foreign minister.
The greatest
threat to the
world: moral
relativism.
Overly civilized people

who become overly
intellectual wont fight.
239
Why Kraemer and Kissinger split

When Henry Kissinger spoke in Arlington Cemeterys small white chapel on

October 8th, 2003, the coffin of Fritz Kraemer, draped with the Stars and
Stripes, stood in front of him. Kissinger told the 300 friends and family assembled there that he had not spoken to him for 30 years. Tragically, he was only
re-united with his mentor after his death.
In the thirty years from 1943 until their split in the mid-1970s they were like
father and son. After Kraemer had cut Kissinger off, effectively ending his mentorship, he simply left the room whenever Kissinger entered a reception in Washington DC. He never explained to his student why he was refusing to talk to him.
When pupils like myself or more influential old friends like Ed Rowny and Vernon Walters begged him to reconnect with Kissinger in a spirit of reconciliation
and forgivenessan approach compatible with Kraemers cherished Christian
beliefs, as even Jesus Christ had forgiven his torturershe refused to budge,
sticking resolutely to his decision never to talk to Kissinger again during his
lifetime. When I urged reconciliation on several occasions, citing Christian values, it almost cost me the old mans friendship, and our relationship hung in the
balance. After that we did not see each other for many months. No-one actually
understood why Fritz Kraemer refused to see or speak to his star pupil. The split
was tragic for both of them, even for the teacher, who always ended up talking
about his erstwhile favorite disciple in almost every conversation.
Henry Kissinger made the split the main theme of his eulogy which you can
read at the beginning of this book. His explanation was that Kraemers values were absolute, making no concessions to human frailty, historic evolution,
treating intermediate solutions as derogations from principle. On the other
hand Kissinger was the policymaker who must build the necessary from the
possible; approaching absolute values in stages, hedging against the possibility of human fallibility.
240
Henry Kissinger was always flexible. I thank God that I split from such people at
an early stage. Personally I have nothing against him. He always wanted recognition
and love. Kissinger could therefore never simply follow his conscience in politics.
When he was U.S. Secretary of State he praised his mentor: Kraemer is a

badly-used Rolls-Royce. He never wanted anything for himself. In a world of
pragmatists, you need some Kraemers. He is like the lighthouse we all need.
Kissinger appreciated the role played by Kraemer, who remained true to his
principles. But for him policy-making had to be the art of the possible, making
compromises to ensure that Nixon, his President, was re-elected and that the
press reported favorably about him and foreign policy. He had to assert his
authority as National Security Advisor in the battle over influence with the
President against the State Department, as well as fostering relations with
members of Congress. Otto von Bismarck once said about this business: It is
better not to know how sausages and laws are made. In his book Il Principe,
Machiavelli paid tribute to what he saw as the basic principle that politicians
had to set aside their morals in the interests of the statepreaching the opposite of Kraemer.
When the teacher was asked about the reasons for his hard stance, Kraemer often related the following story, which was evidently the last straw. When
Henry Kissinger was U.S. Secretary of State under President Gerald Ford from
1973 to 1977, he asked Fritz Kraemer to come to his office in the State
Department as a matter of urgency. He drove there right away, thinking it must
be about something important. He went up to the spacious office in the Secretarys personal elevator. There, Kissinger asked Kraemer if he should resign as
Secretary of State. According to Kraemer, all he was concerned about was
which decision was the right one for his place in history books. Appalled that
the core issue was not the affairs and needs of the country, but Henry Kissingers own image, Kraemer turned and walked out without saying a word, and
drove home. He did not speak to him after that day, punishing his pupil by
ignoring him. At first Kissinger did not notice that he had antagonized his
241
mentor. He called him, but now the calls were not returned. Kraemer was visibly repulsed by Kissingers egotism and vanity. For his mantra to his pupil had
always been: Someone bent on making a career is worthless. A statesman is
someone who doesnt just pursue lofty goals for his state but is willing to sacrifice himself for it. He must be willing to sacrifice his career for the cause. The
most important aspect is to pursue almost impersonal goals, to serve a cause
beyond oneself.
Kraemer believed that Kissinger was turning increasingly into a careerist
and opportunist, away from his ideal image of a selfless and courageous
statesman. He was now bitterly disappointed because his star pupil was certainly brilliant, but would not or could not follow the path of a truly independent statesman of stature.
During one of the long evenings at his house on Fessenden Street in Washington DC, Fritz Kraemer told me:
Henry Kissinger was always flexible. This meant he often got it wrong.
An example: he once wrote about our closest ally in the Vietnam War, General Thieu, He is insane, saying that he didnt understand the massive concessions made by the North Vietnamese at the Paris talks that Kissinger was
leading at that time. That was exceptionally mean-spirited, in my opinion. For
at the end of the day we Americans abandoned and betrayed Thieu. The
North Vietnamese made no concessions whatsoever, and they later marched
into South Vietnam with the regular North Vietnamese army and their tanks.
Henry Kissinger wasnt capable

of arrogantly fighting for a cause.
Kissinger as a person was never
evil, just simply un-arrogant.
The politics of Kissinger was
always flexibleI was always
absolute.
242
I thank God that I split from such people at an early stage. Personally I have
nothing against Henry Kissinger. He always wanted recognition and love.
Kissinger could therefore never simply follow his conscience in politics. He
wasnt capable of arrogantly fighting for a cause. Kissinger as a person was
never evil, just simply un-arrogant. The politics of Kissinger was always flexibleI was always absolute. I thank God that politics didnt force me to
become open to everything, i.e. being flexible.
As far as I am concerned, arrogance does not have any negative meaning,
as it is about being completely convinced that personal conviction and values
are absolute.
Kraemer was instrumental in getting Alexander Haig a position with Henry

Kissinger; Haig proved himself an outstanding member of the National Security Advisors staff in the White House and valued both men highly. He later
said: Kraemer became profoundly disappointed on the issue of Vietnam and
arms control. He tried to get the two back together but theres no way
because Fritz is an ideologue and a principled individual whod never compromise on his beliefs.
Fritz Kraemer understood in deeply human terms why his pupil was different
from him, and more importantly why he was insecure. In 1945 as they stood
in front of Kraemers parental home (Hubertushaus) in Diethardt in the Rhine
district of Sankt Goarshausen, Kissinger said to him at one point, If I had had
this upbringing, I would have become as self-confident as you. Kraemer
explained, I owe my own self-confidence in large part to my mother, who told
me Be proud, my son! She demanded physical courage and risk-taking of
her sons. He was the quintessential heir to the self-assured upper middle
classes of the German Empire, while Kissinger was at the opposite pole, the
frightened son of a teaching family from Frth, Bavaria, refugees who felt
alien and abandoned in their new home, New York. Kraemer had no need of
acceptance, and was supremely self-confident from an early age; Kissinger on
the other hand was an anxious and insecure adolescent who longed to be
accepted and loved by everyone. So the roots of the subsequent rift lay in the
different paths in life of teacher and pupil.
Kraemers assessment of President Nixon was as follows: Richard Nixon,
for instance, was to my mind the most intelligent president I encountered,
the one most interested in foreign policy. But Nixon lacked self-confidence.
He was uncomfortable around people with a more privileged background.
Luke A. Nichter, Professor of History at Texas A & M University, explained
in his 2009 essay Ideology of Fritz Kraemer at the Heart of Wartime Policy
from Vietnam to Present that Vietnam split the conservatives in the U.S. into
two groups: those who sought reconciliation with Americas adversariesincluding not only North Vietnam, but also the Soviet Union and Chinaand
those who thought weak-kneed political leaders were giving away too much
to Americas opponents, including restricting military solutions in Vietnam and
more generally pursuing policies of dtente. After Vietnam, Henry Kissinger
243
emerged as the prime example of the former group, while Fritz Kraemer
remained the main exponent of the latter.
In the first long essay published about Fritz Kraemer in The Washington
Post, March 2, 1975 Nick Thimmesch noted under the headline The Iron
Mentor of the Pentagon: Kraemer was actually pleased with Kissingers
performance in the opening years of the Nixon administration his hard line
on the use of U.S. troops in the Cambodian invasion in 1970 or the mining
and bombing of Haiphong in the spring of 1972.
The split, according to Luke Nichter, occurred later during the fall of 1972,
just when the Nixon administration was closest to reaching a peace agreement with North and South Vietnam. Most importantly, the split was captured
on the Nixon taping system. Before publication of The Forty Years War, no
attention had been paid to a meeting that took place on October 24, 1972,
yet it has all the makings of pure intrigue.
National Security Advisor Henry

Kissinger to President Nixon:
I have this friend in the
Pentagon, Ive shown you some
memos of hisKraemer, he said.
Nixons spontaneous response was
I like him and should meet him.
Tell him I do read his stuff.
A year earlier on September 18, 1971, National Security Advisor Henry

Kissinger mentioned his mentor to President Nixon in a rather surprising aside:
I have this friend, this right-wing friend in the Pentagon, Ive shown you some
memos of hisKraemer, he said. The epithet right-wing was no bad thing
for Nixon, but would it not have been more appropriate to describe him as a
strategist? Nixons spontaneous response was I like him and should meet
him. Tell him I do read his stuff.
Dr Kraemer had written a memorandum The Modern World, a Single Strategic Theater on September 29, 1969 to then National Security Advisor
Henry Kissinger who in turn gave it to President Nixon for consideration, omitting the authors name. Kissinger wrote to Richard Nixon: Attached is a memorandum written by an acquaintance of mine which provides a rather comprehensive assessment of the United States position in the world. Although I do not
agree with its every last word, it does define the problem we facethe generally deteriorating strategic position of the United States in the past decade.
The President actually read Kraemers analysis carefully: he made several
handwritten notes and wanted it to be sent to Secretaries Rogers and Laird for
their comments. One sentence Nixon was especially fond of: The people are
244
not very just, they forgive the victor, but always make scapegoats of their own
leaders who are not victorious. Nixon underscored this sentence. The Dolchstosslegende (the propaganda tale of the stab in the back of fighting troops)
unfortunately can be invented in any country and at any time, Kraemer has
written.
Kraemer wrote, It is one of truisms of our time that because of the sensational development of communications and transportation, the globe has shrunk
with distances between formerly far-away countries having been reduced to
mere hours of flight time. The hallmark is interdependence rather than independence among States. The whole globe has become a single theater.
His analysis of Vietnam: I venture the assertion that any objective analyst
simply cannot help reaching the conclusion that all the indicators pointwith
the world focusing its attention on Vietnamin one direction only: an ultimate
pull-out, a radical reduction of military commitment, a withdrawal of US military power not simply in hotly contested Vietnam but on a worldwide scale.
Fritz Kraemer was placed on President Nixons schedule on October 24,
1972 at 11:15. Kissingers deputy and other pupil in the White House, General Alexander M. Haig, Jr., who remained loyal to Kraemer after the Kraemer-Kissinger split, was not permitted to attend. At the start of the meeting,
White House photographer Ollie Atkins captured numerous images. They
depict Nixon and Kissinger in a jocular mood, clearly enjoying themselves,
while Kraemer looked grave, perhaps annoyed that the start of his meeting
had been reduced to humor and grandstanding, Nichter remarked.
One sentence Nixon was

especially fond of: The people
are not very just, they forgive
the victor, but always make
scapegoats of their own leaders
who are not victorious.
Nixon underscored this sentence.
The Dolchstosslegende (the
propaganda tale of the stab
in the back of fighting troops)
unfortunately can be invented
in any country and at any time,
Kraemer has written in the
memorandum.
Nick Thimmesch reports that Kissinger had urged Kraemer to speak in a low
voice to the President but he was sitting straight in his chair, lecturing the
President.
Nixon began the meeting by flattering Kraemer. There are so few people
with intellectual capabilities who arent hopelessly unrealistic. We call them
doves, for lack of a better name for it. Thats too good of a name for it. Theyre
actually worse. To have an intelligent appraisal by someone who really understands great forces at work in the world with the Soviets, China, etc., to
have that kind of analysis I appreciate it. Its been very helpful.
245
Kraemer soon began to lay into Nixons and Kissingers strategy in Vietnam, including that crucial concessions had been madesuch as not insisting
on a North Vietnamese withdrawal from South Vietnamin order to obtain a
flawed peace in time for the 1972 presidential election. Kissinger and Nixon
defended themselves, wrote Nichter.
Excerpt from October 24, 1972 (mp3, 2:27, 2.3m)
Kissinger: Our difficulty, Kraemer, has been not that we have made concessions before the election. Our difficulty has been to think up demands
which could protract it beyond the election because every demand we
make
Nixon: They settle.
Kissinger: They meet within twenty-four hours. So we are literally running
out of proposals we can make to them.
Nixon: Yeah.
Kraemer: Make a proposal that they should withdraw from South Vietnam.
Kissinger: Weve made that now. Weve made the proposal, for example,
that their prisoners have to stay in South Vietnamese jails.
Nixon: Forty thousand.
Kissinger: Forty thousand political prisoners would stay in South Vietnamese jails, which we thought was unacceptable.
Kraemer: Thats interesting.
Kissinger: And they have now accepted that their cadres stay in South
Vietnamese jails. Now, you know that this is not an easy thing for them to sign
a document in which they release our prisoners, [they] have to release South
Vietnamese military prisoners, but all [North Vietnamese] civilian prisoners
stay in jail.
246
Kraemer: Do you perhaps think that the ceasefire is such an advantage to

them for the psychological reason that they are more disciplined ?
Nixon: I think they are fairly confident, but I think there is the other factor,
which I think we must have in mind. Remember, we never want to obviously
underestimate that they have taken a hell of a beating. I mean the bombing
has hurt, the mining has hurt, the attrition that has occurred in South Vietnam.
I mean, when you stop to think of, not just what we have done in the North,
but the 52s, those six carriers weve had out there, and everything. We have
clobbered the bejesus out of them. I think, therefore, that they have reached a
point, and it is only temporary, I agree, where in their thought there, they may
have read Mao. You know, he was always willing to retreat.
Kraemer with National Security Advisor

and his long-time protg Kissinger at the
desk in the Oval Office with U.S.
President Richard Nixon: Since we
cannot deal with Vietnam, with whom
can we deal? The whole foreign policy
of the United States is on line here,
Nixon noted October 24, 1972.
Kissinger: We may have been, in fact, too successful because we told

them, for example, that all communications will be cut off on November 7th.
Because the president would have to retreat to reorganize the government.
247
Excerpt from October 24, 1972 (mp3, 1:42, 1.6m)

Nixon: Weve fought a pretty good fight up to this point, and were not
caving. Because we see that its a very difficult war. Success or failure
now, not just for the momentbecause anything will look good for two or
three monthsbut something that has a chance to survive, shall we say, for
two or three years. That is very much a condition that we cannot compromise on.
Kraemer: May I formulate, say, one strategic sentence
Nixon: Sure.
Kraemer:that maybe summarizes ?
Nixon admitted that Kraemer

touched on far more than simply
American policy towards
Vietnam. The whole foreign
policy of the United States is on
the line here.
Nixon: Sure.
Kraemer: If, it should prove, within a number of fronts, that we, the United
States, were not able to deal with the entity North Vietnam, 31 million inhabitants, that would be, apart from everything moral, the question will arise
among friend, foe, and entrantswith whom can the United States ever deal
successfully? Because this entity of 31 million, supported by the Soviets, by
China, but not by their manpower
Nixon: Yeah.
Kraemer:is relatively so small that everybody from Rio de Janeiro to
Copenhagen, and from Hanoi to Moscow, can draw the conclusion: obviously, the enormous American power couldnt deal with this. Therefore, as a
lawyer, I would say since we cannot deal with Vietnam, with whom can we
deal?
Nixon admitted, writes Nichter, that Kraemer touched on far more than
simply American policy towards Vietnam. The whole foreign policy of the
United States is on the line here, Nixon noted. The half-hour meeting was too
brief for what Kraemer had in mind. He made his disagreement known to the
President, which ultimately resulted in a split with Henry Kissinger.
248
Fritz Kraemer must have been pretty frustrated, for his repeated criticism
was that far too little time was left for reflecting on and discussing important
political issues, as in this case. His question Since we cannot deal with Vietnam, with whom can we deal? went right to the heart of his theory of provocative weakness. The Americans had in fact already reduced their troops to
a minimum, thus leaving weak forces on the ground and passing control of the
war over to South Vietnamese forces. Without American air support however
they were like sitting ducks facing a hungry fox.
Henry Kissingers secret peace talks in Paris had begun back in 1969, with
the result that wrangling behind the scenes about a U.S. withdrawal had
already been going on for three years with the North Vietnamese.
As mentor and disciple went out through the corridors of the White House,
Kissinger hissed at the older man, You have ruined my policy, as Kraemer
later recounted. He was wrong. In October 1972 Kissinger managed to
reach an initial agreement with Le Duc Tho, the head of the North Vietnamese
delegation in Paris. The U.S. allowed North Vietnamese troops to stay in the
south to end the war before the November elections (Kissinger). But negotiations stalled once again in December that year. The ambitious Kissinger
shared the fears of his predecessor Walt Rostow that he would be kicked out
of the White House if his years of talks broke down after all. In mid-December the Nixon administration was about to unleash the awful bombing of
Hanoi, a move Kissinger urged, the Washington Post article reported. Now
you and Le Duc Tho can bargain realistically, Kraemer told him. In these
months of maximum stress Kraemer became disturbed with Kissingers
ambivalence, his telling one person what he wanted to hear and another just
the opposite. With what he sensed was Kissinger on a giant ego trip with
Kraemer disillusioned with the man he nourished intellectually. On January
27, 1973, the Paris Peace Accords were signed.
Kissinger won the unbearable war of nerves, secured his prestigious position and in 1973for drawing the line under Americas involvement in Vietnam, done with brilliant diplomacy though it was fundamentally on very shaky
groundhe and his opponent and enemy in war, Le Duc Tho, even won the
Nobel Peace Prize. This, together with the feat of rapprochement with China
and Nixons historic visit to Mao, and the SALT negotiations on nuclear arms
Fritz Kraemer must have been

pretty frustrated, for his repeated
criticism was that far too little
time was left for reflecting on
and discussing important political
issues, as in this case. His
question Since we cannot deal
with Vietnam, with whom can
we deal?
Kraemer became disturbed with

Kissingers ambivalence, his
telling one person what he wanted
to hear and another just the
opposite. With what he sensed
was Kissinger on a giant ego trip
with Kraemer disillusioned with
the man he nourished
intellectually.
249
control (his specialty since Harvard), meant Kissinger had positioned himself
perfectly as the shaper of American foreign policybut en route to the glorious heights he had irretrievably lost his mentor. The agreement with the Communists on Vietnam and the concomitant Nobel Peace Prize formed a doubleedged sword, the Olympus of foreign policy and the pact with the devil that
would predictably sacrifice thousands of faithful allies to the USA in South
Vietnam. The key issue here was morality versus kudos. He should have
refused it according to his mentorlike Le Duc Tho, who declined the prize
on the grounds that his country was still not at peace. The clear, hard Communist who stuck to his principles knew that the agreement was not worth the
paper it was written on, a face-saving sham without any solid basis in reality,
so he showed utmost consistency in turning it down. Kissinger however could
not resist the temptation of his policy being elevated to a high status, revealing
the human weakness lacking in his opponent. The pinnacle of all the accolades, then, became the low point of his moral integrity as a statesman.
Kissinger and his opponent and enemy in

the Vietnam war Le Duc Tho were both
awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in
1973. The North Vietnamese general,
diplomat and politician declined on the
grounds that Vietnam was still not at
peace. Kissinger accepted and could not
resist the temptation of his policy being
evaluated to a high status. The pinnacle
of all accolades became the low point of
his moral integrity as a statesman in the
eyes of his long-time mentor Fritz Kraemer.
After the American withdrawal March 1973, Le Duc Tho joined the brilliant
General Giap in leading the attack on South Vietnam, breaking the pledge he
made at the Paris agreements. President Ford did not intervene, not even with
air strikes. In 1975 Americas long-term ally was overwhelmed, occupied by the
North, and united with the Communist North in 1976. Fritz Kraemer was so
mournful that he wore a black ribbon on one arm that day in 1975 . When he
met a two-star general of the air force with a cheerful heart and smile on his face
in one corridor of the Pentagon he shouted at him: You should not be so jolly
the day our allies perish in Saigon!. The general stood at attention wondering
who that old man was, with his stick and moncle, who dared to rebuke him.
The South, allied with the Americans, became a prison of communism and
it took thirty years for it to recover from one of the bloodiest wars since the end
of World War II and Hanois reign of terror. America had lost 58,000 troops,
the war, and the halo of invincibility from two world wars, as well as much of
its honor and credibility as an ally.
The domino effect of Communist conquests, feared by many including Kraemer, was limited to Cambodia and Laos, unable to stretch even as far as
Thailand. The impact of provocative weakness was restricted to the region, for
the further reason that the North Vietnamese victors strength was sapped and
250
Hanois aims had been achieved. The armies, depleted after decades of war,
and the politicians of the North were fully occupied with digesting their South
Vietnamese prey and exerting influence on Cambodia and Laos.
When I asked Fritz Kraemer why America lost in Vietnam, he mentioned
two elements from the military perspective which substantially contributed to
the American defeat in Vietnam: It would have been militarily indispensable
to permanently block the 100 miles through Laos between South Vietnam and
the Thai border, thus cutting off the Ho Chi Minh trail, an elaborate supply
network that smuggled soldiers and weapons from North Vietnam via Laos
into the south. Furthermore, the constant rotation of draftees that only spent a
few weeks in their units proved fatal. This prevented the development of the
esprit de corps so crucial to moral courage. A soldier only fights because he
belongs to a unit of comrades. The soldier must have a home. The squad is the
smallest unit in which he is at home, then the platoon, the company and the
battalion. The regiment is already too large, approximately 3000 men. A U.S.
division in wartime comprises 15,000 men. After Vietnam we sent young men
into pure marching battalions in which no one knew anyone else. When they
got to the front they were in a completely new regiment. They knew nobody.
Five-man squads were based on the principle: after a year the soldiers are
sent back. In his thoughts the leader of a squad was always on his way home:
Im going home and youll stay here! Four weeks later the second man went
home. Esprit-de-corps could never develop. In battle the soldier was alone. In
spite of individual heroism, a really powerful fighting force rarely evolved
because no team spirit was built up with everyone leaving after a year.
Kraemer is an abstract idealist, Kissinger told Thimmesch. He leaves little
room for options. I listen to him, knowing that if I can only accomplish 20 per
cent of what should be done, I am fortunate.
The split between the hands-on pupil and his mentor was both sad and
tragic. Kraemer knew that compromises are inevitable in politics. But he
wanted to set an example, as a sign to subsequent politicians that there is a
red line between necessary and understandable compromises and unacceptable careerist opportunism that should not be crossed by statesmen. For Kraemer the yardstick of statesmanlike behavior must always be the interests of the
state and its allies, and never the status of one individual.
Kraemer wanted to set an

example, that there is a red line
between necessary and
understandable compromises
and unacceptable careerist
opportunism that should not be
crossed by statesmen.
For Kraemer the yardstick of

statesmanlike behavior must
always be the interests of the
state and its allies, and never
the status of one individual.
251
Fritz Kraemer as an Aristocrat

in the Pentagon
By Herman Kahn
Fritz has contributed not only more than one mans share, but as much as
any mans share, and his ideas and ideals are ones that we, his friends, generally share and try to carry forward in our work.
Fritz always thinks of himself as an aristocrat. If words still mean what they
were once intended to mean, this characterization is unquestionably and
deservedly true.
More than any other man I know, or know of, Fritz has a sense of the fitness
of things, of propriety and grace, and of noblesse oblige and service. To say
that he has devoted a lifetime to duty is to belabor the obvious. But to add that
he thinks with both precision and clarity, and writes with both felicity and
elegance, and, most important of all, he knows what he stands for and unhesitatingly says what he stands for, is to characterize Fritz Kraemer and provide
us all with a challenge worth emulating.
I am honored to count Fritz Kraemer among my friends and colleagues, as
well as a source of inspiration and guidance. If there is anyone in the Pentagon who has stood for the good and the true in terms that we simply no longer
use as much as we should, it is Fritz Kraemer. I dont know if history will vindicate the thoughts and actions we have shared together, but it should, and I
hope it will.
Futurist and Founder of the Hudson Institute

252
A Man of Unshakeable
Selflessness
By Vernon A. Walters
Dr Kraemers service to the nation and the cause of human freedom is

unique in many respects. He has helped to form the thinking of many of
our principal military leaders over a very long period of time. His wise
c
ounsel has been sought by many of the civilian leaders who have been
heading the Defense Department. His ability to look above the horizon and
recognize before most others the signs of coming events has made that
advice invaluable.
Perhaps the most unique feature of Dr Kraemers service has been his complete and unshakeable selflessness. He embodies what the Persian poet meant
when he said, The heart of the most powerful tyrant trembles before the man
who wants nothing.
For more than thirty years, Dr Kraemer has sought only to serve the Army
and the Nation. Our debt to him is very great.
Lieutenant General and Ambassador

Vernon A. Walters (19172002) was
Deputy Director CIA from 19721976;
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
from 19851989 and U.S. Ambassador
to the Federal Republic of Germany from
19891991
253
Letters from Friends of Fritz

About His Contributions
and Character
On the occasion of his retirement in 1978
254
Our tribute goes to Fritz Kraemer who has served the United States with the
best aristocratic virtues of courage, vision, total dedication, helping to evoke,
for the preservation of liberty, the immense energies of our nation.
Fred C. Ikle
Dr Kraemer is the conscience of the nation, clairvoyant extraordinaire, a

modern prophet shedding light on world events, unifying us to think, and
inspiring us to emulate his fearless fight for the defense of our country.
His eloquence is beyond description in clarifying and linking events in far
corners of the earth.
Leslie Uptown MD
Your intellectual depth, analytical skills, and strong common sense have
been a beacon of light for so many people seeking to make their way over the
difficult terrain of foreign policy and national security problems.
Lane Kirkland,
President AFL-CIO
255
How does one pay tribute to a force field?

A guiding light?
A magic mountain?
Impossible, if that force/light/mountain had not been compressed into a
very energetic, absolutely human, cigar smoking, good bourbon drinking,
monocle wearing, sword-wielding source of strength and wisdom who
enlarges our world.
Through these years you have provided moral strength and intellectual stimulus.
Your influence is moral and psychological, reinforcing individual beliefs
and strengths. You do not manipulate for any one individuals benefit the system in which we all serve. Instead, you provide what I value most of all:
inspirational force. The knowledge that one manelitist, scholar, and visionary patriotwould work year after year without the trappings of promotion or
personal aggrandizement, to influence the course of events for the betterment
of his nation and for the greater good, provides that guiding light so badly
needed to move along the path of worthy service.
Donald S. Marshall,
Colonel U.S. Army (Retired)
256
I salute you as a source of strength to me and to many like me who share

the distinction of having you as a wise mentor!
You may not state what follows in the same way, but a few of the many lessons you have taught me are:
1.
One courageous person can make a difference to the security of our
nation.
2. one can understand the meaning of world events without having
No
deep transcendental or religious roots.
3.
Islands of strength must sustain each other.
4.
A prophetic voice is essential in times of peril.
5.
Think as a generalist, even if you are a specialist.
6.
Capture events. Do not be captured by them.
7.
If you have insight pass it on!
8.
Above all else: Duty, Honor, Country!
Albion W. Knight Jr.,

Brigadier General, U.S. Army (Retired)
257
When I reflect on Fritz Kraemer, and all that he has meant to me over the
years, it is, I think, his mirth and his depth of friendship that I treasure most.
Not that I am not in his debt for so many other marvelous things: for his
brilliance, his eloquence, his irrepressible energy, his impatience with pretense, his command of the sweepand the detailof history, his adamantine
sense of principle, his sheer vigor of mind. All of these qualities, and more,
emboss his personality with such an unmistakable stamp of individuality that
he is utterly unforgettable.
There is not the slightest possibility of confusing Fritz with anyone else on
earth.
He is the man who could listen to an obscure young private in the Army a
shy, and not yet twenty-one-year-old Henry Kissinger and say: Henry, you
understand everything. But you know nothing. And then began to arrange
for that education.
He is the manthe only manwho fought through Europe in the American
Army, in World War II, wearing a monocle: Private Kraemer, with two doctorates, and more brains in his a..., than I have in my head, as his sergeant,
the renowned wrestler Strangler Lewis so memorably expressed it.
He is the man who captured an entire German townaloneon a bicycle.
And received a battlefield commission for doing so.
He is the man who requested his division commanders permission to be
allowed to cross the Rhine and take the surrender of the city of Berlin, alone,
in the name of the American Army; a request the general denied, not because
he was afraid Fritz could not do it, but afraid, rather, that he could do it, and
that Eisenhower would never understand!
He is the man who could say to the famous conservative, William F. Buckley, after listening to a long lecture on conservatism: Mr. Buckley, you have
often been attacked from the Left, I, Kraemer, will now attack you from the
Right!
258
He is the man who, in the mid-1960s, could stand up in a university auditorium filled with angry Vietnam War protesters, and reduce them all to stupefied silence with the wordsdelivered with thundering Kraemeresque indignationYou are all too miserably bourgeois to understand anything! And as
they stared at him in open-mouthed astonishment, he waved a magazine aloft,
and said, Now, if you really want to understand what this is all about, you
should read the Peking Review! Who is he? whispered one bewildered
student in the back of the auditorium to another. I dont know, his befuddled
companion replied, A Trotskyite, I think.
Who is he indeed?
I have heard many succinct answers to that question from Fritz himself over
the years.
I am not a modern man is one of his favorites. I am an unbendable man
is another. I must warn you that I am capable of being quite an unpleasant
man is a reply he saves principally for prying correspondents. But perhaps his
most characteristic reply of all is simply I am a man who knows who he is.
And so he does. The Greeks would approve. Know thyself was their
advice a very long time ago.
I for one would not attempt to sum up Fritz Kraemer. He cannot be captured
in words. He is almost too large for life itself. His laughter is the laughter of
one who understands that tragedy and goodness are somehow inextricably
mixed in the souls of free men.
Beyond laughterand better even than laughteris love. And the love Fritz
bears his friends is enduring, and loyal, and immensely beneficent.
I know. He is my friend. And I am immeasurably the richer for that.
John L. Madden
259
In the mid-fifties a perceptive sociological study, The Lonely Crowd was

published. The study of U.S. society established three categories of Americans: other directed people, tradition directed persons, and inner directed
human beings. Increasingly, Americans are becoming other directedmaking
their individual decisions on what they think the people they work with or for
appear to want. Tradition directed people act in accordance with historical
belief patterns. Inner directed people, relatively few in numbers, acquire and
stand by their own philosophy of life.
Fritz Kraemer is an inner directed person. One word conveys the character
of this remarkable manintegrity or oneness or wholeness.
Despite all the confusion of contemporary life, some cohesion and stability
is absolutely vital. The force that binds society and institutions together issues
from the spirit of a comparatively few people. Fritz is one such person. Almost
twenty years ago Fritz became a member of the Armys Coordination group.
There he became Father Confessor and an inspiration to many of the leaders of the U.S. Army.
The granite-like moral standards embedded in Fritzs character helped
change a number of other directed generals into inner directed commanders who did much to keep the Army true to its ideals.
William R. Kintner, Former Chief,

Strategic Section Coordination Group,
Office of the Chief of Staff, United States Army
260
In the twenty years of our friendship, I have always found you a rock of
integrity, clarity, and courage rising high above the morass of confusion and
shifting currents that surround us all.
Whenever self-doubts arose, I could always go to you for confirmation and
renewal of courage, secure in the thought that two such great minds could
hardly be wrong.
You have established a fantastic record of giving strength, inspiration, and
indelible memories to a host of friends.
I hope and assume that you will now expand your areas of invaluable influence even further from a different base. Certainly I will want to know that the
source of strength, wisdom, and courage, which you represent, is always
there.
The best of everything for you and your wonderful wife in retirement. My
only wish for you is that you enjoy it as much as I do mine. And I now look
forward to enjoying it even more with you, not feeling as guilty as I usually do
when I occupy some of your time.
John H. Morse
Fritz Kraemer is a living monument to those values that once sustained the
humanistic promise of Western civilization but seem to have joined the litter of
a moral anarchy which is euphemized with such terms as pragmatism and
rationalism.
Walter Hahn
261
Considering the fact that I have known you for over a quarter of a century,
the most remarkable thing about our constant friendship is that you never
change
Your record of constant and faithful devotion to our country and to mankind
is most remarkable in this modern age. I consider myself blessed to be among
those who have been privileged to work closely with you, to have gained from
your wise council, and to have been considered among the circle of your
friends. You have had an impact upon America which has been far vaster
than most people realize.
Lieutenant General William A. Knowlton,

Superintendent United States Military Academy,
West Point, New York, 3rd July 1973
Your voice commands attention, your intensity demands thought, your

thoughts create understanding, and the understanding is encompassed in a
spiritual selflessness of fearless service to God and country which inspires others to become part of the dedicated few who, as you, truly shape history
protecting the roots of civilization from the assaults of anarchy and mindless
chaos.
Dolf M. Droge,
National Security Council, 3rd July 1973
262
I want to extend my sincere appreciation for your invaluable council to me

and your outstanding service to our Army and the Nation. Yours has been a
distinguished record of public service spanning over 30 years.
You have brought to the seat of Government the rare combination of peerless academic credentials, the statesmans pragmatism and the soldiers patriotic fervor.
Your enlightened knowledge and acute perceptiveness of global political
events and trends have been of profound value to the highest councils of Government. As Special Advisor you have introduced new depths of relevance
and authenticity to the Armys operations You have never compromised
your appreciation and high regard for the pre-eminence of basic human values in shaping the course of events. Your willingness to find time to help others, including many budding young officers, has won you an impressive following of admirers It is a conspicuous honor to be among the protgs of
Fritz Kraemer.
Kenneth E. BeLieu,
U.S. Under Secretary of the Army, 29th June 1973
263
I am still totally informed and passionately involved.

I have joined no think tank, no lobby, no industrial
enterprise. I am beholden to no one, I have no axe to
grind, no interests to represent, no projects to sell;
from me you will get an objective diagnosis of reality.
264
I read ten hours or more every day including weekends, give advice where it may
be concretely useful, and lecture wherever I find a forum. Not a comfortable way of
life, but a fighting form of existence, made highly intense by my desperate awareness
of the danger to our very survival.
I had to fight the bureaucracy for my choice of not being paid the usual per diem or
full expenses when I went on official speaking engagements at Army and other
installations. It also shows that I explained to the bureaucrats that as an educator or
a missionary I did not want to be paid.
It was obvious that I wanted nothing for myself personally,

but not out of modesty, rather out of immodesty. Thats
what no one understands. I dont need that.
265
Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von St

Two Prussian-American Heroes
By Joseph E. Schmitz and Henning-Hubertus Baron von Steuben
Major General Friedrich Wilhelm Baron

von Steuben, who served as General
George Washingtons Inspector General
during the American Revolutionary War,
drilling troops at Valley Forge. In 1777
Benjamin Franklin recruited Baron von
Steuben, a former captain and aide-decamp in the Prussian General Staff of
King Friedrich the Great, to assist in the
cause of the American Revolutionary
War. He was an experienced Prussian
Army staff officer who would have a
profound effect on the United States
Armyjust like Fritz Kraemer would
have in the 20th century. Both were
professional military officers deeply
rooted in Prussian values hundreds of
years old: integrity, honor, discipline, and
service to the country.
266
euben and Fritz Kraemer:

Who Shaped the U.S. Army
267
Two officers deeply rooted in

Prussian values hundreds of years
old: integrity, honor, discipline,
and service to the country.
No state without virtue! With this proposition the Prussian King Frederick
the Great described over 200 years ago the function of the political and military elite as a role model. The citizens believe in the integrity of governmental
leadership as an indispensable element of the state. This principle applied not
only to Prussian absolutism, it was even more true for the creation of the liberal
United States of America as a state of We, the people. A functioning democracy is based on the personal responsibility of their citizens and the integrity
of their elites and leaders. It draws its strength from the constructive cooperation of the rulers and the ruled, which is equally important in government,
military and society. Leadership therefore should not primarily be seen as a
privilege but as an expression of spiritual education, responsibilities and personal merits. This gives any democracy its role models: uprightness and morality, the living of values, a Christian way of life and commitment to the community. These timeless ideals were embodied in two emigrants from Prussia to
the U.S. in an exemplary manner in two quite different centuries of American
history: Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von Steuben (17301794) and Dr Fritz
Kraemer (19082003).
Kraemer was an officer and U.S. Army Chief of Staff Senior Advisor of
principles, honor, and courage, and of profound spiritual faith, committed to
integrity with an extraordinary insight into core values. As such, he lived and
fought for the spirit of free people with dignity in America and the Free World
to the very end. Fritz Kraemer followed in the footsteps of another PrussianAmerican Army hero: Major General Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von Steuben,
who served as General George Washingtons Inspector General during the
American Revolutionary War.
According to historian John McAuley Palmer the military services of two
men, and of two men alone, can be regarded as indispensable to the achievement of American Independence. These two men were Washington and Steuben. Washington was the indispensable commander. Steuben was his
indispensable staff officer. The U.S. Armys official history of its Inspectors
General explains: Steuben shocked American officers by personally teaching
men the manual of arms and drill, but his success helped to convince them.
With Washingtons support, Steuben set out to involve officers in training,
making the subordinate inspectorsa body of officers drilled by Steubenhis
agents.
268
In 1777 Benjamin Franklin recruited Baron von

Steuben, a former captain and aide-de-camp in the
Prussian General Staff of King Friedrich the Great, to
assist in the cause of the American Revolutionary
War. At the time, Steuben was serving as the Hofmarschall (Lord Chamberlain) to the Prince of
Hohenzollern-Hechingen, a small Prussian principality in what is now south-western Germany. Steuben
was an experienced Prussian Army staff officer who
would have a profound effect on the United States
Armyjust like Fritz Kraemer would have in the 20th
century. Both were professional military officers
deeply rooted in Prussian values hundreds of years
old: integrity, honor, discipline, and service to the
country. Kraemer and Steuben combined their inner
versions of Prussian values with a fresh American
spirit and a zeal for individual liberty, a splendid
combination of the Good Old and the Young, of
deep moral roots and fresh ideals of liberty, of conservation and a fight for human rights.
Like Fritz Kraemer, Inspector General von Steuben
effectively infused an American adaptation of Prussian values into the U.S. Army. In Steubens own
words, approved by Congress on March 29 1779,
as the invariable rules for the order and discipline of
the troops, Steuben admonished that, the commanding officer of a regiment must preserve the strictest discipline and order
in his corps, obliging every officer to a strict performance of his duty, without
relaxing in the smallest point; punishing impartially the faults that are committed, without distinction of rank or service.
Like Fritz Kraemer, Inspector General

von Steuben effectively infused an
American adaptation of Prussian values
into the U.S. Army.
Aside from training and discipline in the battlefield, Steuben stood for public accountability, a principle later codified in the U.S. Constitution itself. Article I of the Constitution, from its inception in the late 18th Century, has always
mandated that, a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.
269
Henning-Hubertus Baron von Steuben

(left) and Joseph E. Schmitz (second from
right) with book author Dr Hubertus
Hoffmann (on the right) in the office of
U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld in 2002.
Kraemer and Steuben combined

their inner versions of Prussian
values with a fresh American
spirit and a zeal for individual
liberty.
Steuben understood that such discipline must be enforced on and off the
battlefield. Parallel to his emphasis on training and drilling the troops, Inspector General von Steuben maintained that his inspectors must depart from
purely military inspection and must also examine financial accounts. Upon
Steubens arrival at Valley Forge, one Congressional publication indicated
that, there were 5,000 muskets more on paper than were required, yet many
soldiers were without them. Steubens first task was, therefore, to inaugurate a
system of control over the needs and supply of arms, and, in course of time,
he succeeded in carrying this control to such perfection that, on his last inspection before he left the Army, there were but three muskets missing, and even
those were accounted for.
The congressionally-commissioned Steuben Monument across Pennsylvania Avenue from the White House in Lafayette Park proclaims an artful,
albeit understated, synopsis of Inspector General von Steubens role in the
270
birth of our nation: He gave military training and discipline to the citizen
soldiers who achieved the independence of the United States. When President William Howard Taft dedicated this monument in 1910 he proclaimed:
The effect of Steubens instruction in the American Army teaches us a lesson
that is well for us all to keep in mind, and that is that no people, however
warlike in spirit and ambition, in natural courage and self-confidence, can
be made at once, by uniforms and guns, a military force. Until they learn
drill and discipline, they are a mob, and the theory that they can be made
an army overnight has cost this Nation billions of dollars and thousands of
lives.
More recently, the U.S. Congress codified this constitutional accountability
principle in the Inspector General Act of 1978, the statutory foundation for the
Inspector General System of which Steuben is still revered as its founding
father. This law created independent and objective units in most major
agencies of the United States Government to provide leadership and coordination and recommend policies for activities designed to promote economy, efficiency, and effectiveness [and] to prevent and detect fraud and
abuse in the programs and operations of the establishment into which each
Inspector General is appointed.
When the Pentagon subsequently commissioned its Soldier-Signers of the
Constitution Corridor in 1986, the inscription that accompanied the central
oil painting of General George Washington at Valley Forge surrounded by his
mounted staff and tattered citizen-soldiers, read as follows: During the coming months they would suffer from shortages of food and clothing, and from
the cold, but under the tutelage of Washington and Major General Frederick
Steuben would gain the professional training necessary to become the equal
of the British and Hessians in open battle.
Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von

Steuben and Fritz Kraemer:
two Prussian-American heroes
to remember who defined the
character of the United States
Army General Staff; benchmarks
of duty, honor, and integrity for
us all.
In the spring of 2002 Fritz Kraemer attended a Pentagon ceremony of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to welcome aboard a number of newly
Senate-confirmed presidential appointees, including Secretary Rumsfelds new
Inspector General. Some months later after a Pentagon ceremony at which the
Commander-in-Chief honored those who had died on 9/11, that same Inspector General had the honor to escort Dr. Henry Kissinger through the Pentagon
to his waiting car. While they walked, the Inspector General mentioned to Dr.
271
Kissinger that he had recently asked his mentor Fritz Kraemer what he thought
was the most dangerous enemy of the United States Constitution. Kraemer had
unhesitatingly answered, Moral Relativism; upon hearing this, Dr. Kissinger
unhesitatingly replied, I agree.
What was it about Fritz Kraemer that inspired leaders like Henry Kissinger
and Donald Rumsfeld? What was it about Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von Steuben that enamored both Benjamin Franklin and George Washington, and
then inspired the tattered citizen-soldier of the Continental Army ultimately to
win the Revolutionary War?
Fritz Kraemer and Baron von Steuben both had a way with truth, which is
a synonym for integrity. Both promoted integrity through an enthusiastic American adaptation of Prussian values, including discipline and accountability
within the United States Army.
A splendid combination of the

Good Old and the Young, of deep
moral roots and fresh ideals of
liberty, of conservation and a
fight for human rights.
In the historical sense Steuben stands for Prussian values like discipline,
responsibility, and fulfillment of duty. Those Prussian values can, still today, be
important elements of the U.S. Army as a part of an open democratic society.
The most important value is integrity.
The Steuben family motto, Sub Tutela Altissimi Semper (in German Unter
dem Schutz des Allmchtigen bestndig and in English Always Under the
Tutelage of the Almighty) embodies a core principle of Western Civilization, a
rock-solid foundation on which to build international efforts, not only to survive
the ongoing threats of violent global jihadists such as Al-Qaeda.
Fritz Kraemer lived the same principles in fighting the enemy of the United
States Constitution and of Western Civilization that he identified as moral
relativism. Or as our Founding Fathers concluded in the Declaration of Independence with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we
mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
Like Steuben, Kraemer succeeded in his efforts through the inspiration of
young officers like Alexander Haig, by discipline, honor, and courage.
In his 1982, Ash Heap of History speech, U.S. President Reagan described
three foundational principles that set us apart from the totalitarian threat we
272
faced in the latter half of the 20th Century: individual liberty, representative
government, and the rule of law under God. Thirteen years later, after the fall
of the Soviet Union, the Polish-born Roman Pontiff admonished, Surely it is
important for America that the moral truths which make freedom possible
should be passed on to each new generation. Every generation of Americans
needs to know that freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having
the right to do what we ought. This same passion for individual liberty drove
Fritz Kraemer and Baron von Steuben.
Inspector General von Steubens enduring legacy has earned himself a
place alongside the Founding Fathers of the United States of America. His
vision for America, fuelled more recently by Fritz Kraemer, remains as bright
a beacon of hope today as it was for our citizen-soldiers of the Continental
Army at Valley Forge over two centuries ago.
Those Prussian values can be, still

today, important elements of the
U.S. Army as a part of an open
democratic society. The most
important value is integrity.
In facing threats to the liberty and the free people of our 21st century, we
should all hope to be as disciplined, principled, faithful, courageous, and
committed to truth as Friedrich Wilhelm Baron von Steuben and Fritz Kraemer:
two Prussian-American heroes to remember who defined the character of the
United States Army General Staff; benchmarks of duty, honor, and integrity for
us all.
Joseph E. Schmitz was Inspector General of the

U.S. Department of Defense from 2002 to 2005.
Henning-Hubertus Baron von Steuben is the
President of the Steuben Family Association.
273
I live
within
history.
When Fritz Kraemer, a loyal

supporter of the German
Kaiser, wrote him in his exile
in Dorn (Netherlands) to
congratulate him on his
birthday, Wilhelm II sent him
this autographed picture.
Kraemer had it for over sixty
years in his living room and
looked at it each day.
The last German Emperor:

Kaiser Wilhelm II.
274
A Prussian Throughout His Life

By Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von Preussen
A man who had gone to school with Dr Fritz Kraemer in Berlin first told me and my
wife about him on the occasion of a visit to Washington D.C. That connection between
us led to a first meeting during our next visit to the U.S. Many others would follow. Each
was not only impressive, but gainful to me to a high degree.
His unusual biography, which led him from Germany via Italy to the United States,
endowed him with very extraordinary political farsightedness during an age of great
political upheaval thatstarting in Europechanged the world.
Precisely because he was raised as a Prussian conservative and remained one
throughout his life, he was capable of comments on prevailing trends that were as clear
as they were unequivocal.
From the start, I was inordinately impressed by the clarity and conviction of his opinions. At the time we met, he was a highly valued political and military advisor to the
Pentagon, in spiteor possibly even becauseof his European roots. The letters Fritz
Kraemer sent me over the course of years contain his crystal-clear assessments of any
given political situation. When I look at this correspondence today I realize just how
accurate his foresight was at almost all times.
The basis for this was surely his comprehensive knowledge of history, which allowed
him to analyze the present with the greatest degree of objectivity. I loved historical discussions with him sincealthough we certainly differed in certain detailsthey resulted
in gratifying agreement on the larger issues.
I will never again hear Fritz Kraemer lecture on the political state of the world. But
gratitude will remain for having witnessed a strong, convincing, and unusually charismatic personality, firmly rooted in Western civilization and Lutheran Protestantism. I will
not forget Fritz Kraemer.
Fritz the Great: Prussian King
275
Elite, Chivalry,
Aristocracy, Honor
By Fritz Kraemer
In our modern, egalitarian democracies, you always need a small, determined

minority, an elite, to put ideals into practice.
Democracies dont want high-flyers, but regular people, who are just the
same as anyone else.
Aristocrat in Greek denotes

the best and aristocracy
means reign of the best.
Since only a very small elite remains, the group of models to emulate has
been greatly reduced. We require personalities that are not merely nonintellectual, but that can physically withstand tough times. Whoever wants to
shape reality must be much more than just intellectually excellent.
In the politics of modern Western democracies, everyone is terrified of
determination. That makes it easy for the schemers, not for the best and most
talented.
In communal life, action and contemplation must balance each other. Both
are equally necessary for public service.
There is a deep connection between observant thoughtfulness and meaningful action. The rush and bustle of activity leads not to higher culture but to its
destruction. This is one reason among many why society must have a section
(elite) which possesses the leisure and tranquility to thoughtfully observe and
meditate.
The cardinal virtues that constituted the essence of chivalry have been forgotten. Demanding of knights the willingness to assume responsibility was of
the utmost importance. This willingness is an immanent criteria of all authentic
elites. Their motive isnt the fruits and privileges of an elevated social status.
276
The important aspect was the greater burden and heavier responsibility they
accepted compared to the average citizen.
All this can be more simply put by the tried and true proverb: noblesse
oblige.
Noblesse means aristocracy.
Most people today envision an aristocrat to be at best a prerevolutionary
French marquis in a white wig. That aristocrat in classical Greek denotes the
best and aristocracy therefore means reign of the best is today lost on living
consciousness.
The knightly qualities of honor and being honor-bound are no longer tangible for a normal twentieth-century person.
The famous military academy West Point, of the rather un-ancient United
States of America, today and since its founding at the beginning of the nineteenth century has as its apt motto: Duty, Honor, Country.
Temperament, enthusiasm, reliability, and imagination

are important factors for the personality, for success, and for the
cause. The value of the IQ, on the other hand, is overestimated.
277
278
Otto von Bismarck, the Chancellor of the first German Emperor in

the nineteenth century, was a natural statesman. He had an eight-year apprenticeship before becoming Reichskanzler.
His way of thinking is very well revealed in a sentence written to his wife in
the year 1866:
This much, though, is justly learned in this trade

(of Prussian Prime Minister): one can be wise with
the wise and yet stand before the future like a
child before a dark room.
He cried at any time. A letter written to his wife from a Gasthaus in Stettin,
on the way from his estate to Berlin, states: At the thought of the children lying
at home with measles I had to turn myself to the wall in my own bed and
weep.
A statesman needs a feeling for the fatefulness of human

existence, like Bismarck. That includes religion and belief,
a feeling for the limits that apply to all human endeavors in
order not to despair of setbacks.
279
A figure like Bismarck is unique. Ive read his memoirs
thirty times. Someone similar will never again be found. He was a

singular occurrence. Noble by birth and raised in the grey cloister.
Bismarck had a physical courage that outshone everyones.
Bismarck was an immensely skillful and difficult negotiator. But if
you had his word, you could rely on it completely. A mixture of
incredible courage, toughness, absolute certainty of being right
and the others being ignorant, mixed with the amazing insight of
never taking advantage of victory to humiliate an opponent.
280
Politics demand an artistic element. Bismarck was

an artist. Verbally he was terribly superior. This is
obvious in his letters to his king.
281
282
Excellence
By Fritz Kraemer
Excellence alone does not make the leader, but it is difficultif not impossible from a civilized point of viewto conceive of truly great leaders who are
not also men of excellence. And this in our modern, egalitarian democracies
involves a near-insoluble dilemma.
Excellence in Latin means to stand out, i.e., to be head and shoulders
above the others. Do our modern societies still permit such elitism? Will the
people reallyexcept in such crises as brought Churchill, de Gaulle, de
Gaspiri, Adenauer to powervote for those who are somehow superior?
And also: will the excellent, the superior ones, who consider it their mission/
duty to serve at the top, feel obliged to adapt to the mediocre, the mass, the
electorate in order to reach those very places where they can serve the cause
and actually bring their excellence to bear? Or will theyhowever noble the
original intentionsleave part of their innermost soul, part of their excellence
at every rung of the long ladder that leads to the summit?
Shall they arrive there shallow and compromised, master tacticians, flexible, perhaps still brilliant, but no longer superior to any other successful
climber? Not only in the political arena, but even in the business world, top
positions are increasingly bestowed not on the most outstandinghence more
or less unusualindividuals but on the safe adaptable team worker with
medium insights and short-range vision. In other words: is Western Democracy
on the road to becoming a Mediocracy?
283
Kraemerism
Elite
I am deeply convinced that three of one thousand are
special. I do not mean the rich, the plutocrats,
rather the best: the aristocrats.
You can only speak with the elite, not the masses.
History teaches that truly decisive
revolutions like the Reformation or the
development of high Greek culture are
only possible in city-states with altogether only one
million people, always set in motion and implemented
by tiny minorities, perhaps only one percent of the masses.
What advice for the youth?
Remain yourself! You have to be convinced of being on the
right track before you know. Idealism rather than materialism
are important for a fulfilled life.
284
What is important is not ones own reputation, but whether

one damages ones own cause in order to decide which
path one should take.
None of us was spoon-fed with wisdom.
We need a true individualism and the ability and
the will to sometimes swim against the stream.
Much self-discipline is required to achieve
something great.
Bourgeoisie
Permissiveness is horrible and the road to
totalitarianism.
All attempts to achieve a perfect world end in tyranny.
The bourgeoisie is desperate for leadership.
The complete cowardliness of the bourgeoisie, who no
longer wants to fightalso in the U.S.A.is a weak point
of democracy.
285
For years I have preached: intellectuals are naturally

relativists.
The people will soon look for a man of absolute values,
one who is not boring.
The intolerance and ignorance with respect to Christianity
has become outrageous.
Politeness
The rules of politeness and good behavior were only created
so that they may serve as lubricant for the smooth interaction
of people among each other.
Labor
Some hold me for a reactionary. Few know that I have
especially good relations with the labor movement, like Jay
Lovestone, the foreign minister of the U.S. union AFL-CIO
under George Meany. In his youth Lovestone was a
286
communist and then became

a staunch anti-communist.
He had only little formal
power, but had an extensive
and deep influence.
The appearance of power
is also important
The West often creates the
impression of powerlessness
and thus provokes weakness. For a statesman it is
not important if one actually
has power, rather whether
one can create the impression of power, knowledge,
and superiority among ones
own people and to those
outside.
287
The U.S.A. must win every war quickly

When the American nation decides to take up arms, it must
win the war quickly. Otherwise, public opinion changes
very rapidly against the government due to pictures.
Prussian virtues
Among the Prussian virtues belong a sense of
responsibility and service to the community, to society
and the state, and not to ones self. Without a sense
of responsibility, human co-existence is impossible
because there would be no confidence with respect
to mutual dependability. If everyone believes that
everyone is undependable, the basis of peaceful
co-existence is lost. Prussia under Friedrich the Great
was the most modern state of its time.
288
The obligation-person
Occasionally we encounter a special type of person: An
incessant conscientiousness and systematic way of working
are his unavoidable diseases. Ultimately, these are due to
a lack of self-discipline. This obligation-person is driven
by continual time pressure. Thus, he can never reflect on
something intensely and thereby loses the overview.
The art of un-coordination has been highly developed
in this government.
If we do not stem the rot within, how can we stem the
rot without?
Every time that we have negotiated, we have emerged
from the conference room in a weakened position.
289
Democracy Is Splendid, Egalitarian

Democracy Is Deadly
By Fritz Kraemer
As a historian, I know too well that decadence is the normal price of a high
civilization and of high living standards. The pervasive questioning of all values, especially the widely preached contempt for such basic traditionalists
concepts as honor, courage, reliability, dedication to ones nationrather
than only to egocentric self-promotionis a hallmark of modern societies in
North America and Europe. Everywhere those elites seem to be melting away
who had known that men and women of excellence have to bear the burden
of governing and of sacrificing (noblese oblige) personal comfort and interests
to the fulfillment of duties. The rampant egalitarian obsessions destroy the bitterly needed respect for a hierarchical order where people accept being subject to higher authorities: students to teachers, officials to their superiors,
employees to the managers of a business enterprise. I have coined the phrase:
Democracy is splendid, egalitarian democracy is deadly.
In modern egalitarian democracies, educational standards are being continuously lowered. Modern diplomats, very frequently, barely know languages
or international law, and so-called educated people have not even a rudimentary knowledge of geography or history; although knowledge of the past is
the only way of being able to predict the future. I, for example, can only predict with near certainty that a new dictatorship must rise in Russia, because it
happens to be a law of history that when chaos, disorder, uncertainty, and
unpredictability become pervasive, the nations so afflicted will yell for law
and order, safety and security, surrendering their freedom enthusiastically to
tyrants. Another characteristic signet of decadence is the self-doubt and relativism seeping down from the intellectuals to the masses. A relativism which
290
does not recognize, ridicules even, any absolute value like reliability or honesty, means that, finally, no one even tries to be reliable because, after all,
everything is only relative. If no one can actually rely on anyoneknowing
that there are no firm ethical principles, that honor is a meaningless conceptthe basis of human peaceful coexistence, mutual trust and confidence
has been destroyed.
Decadence is the normal price

of high civilization.
291
My temperament is that of
a moderate volcano.
I owe my own self-confidence in large

part to my mother, who told me:
Be proud, my son!
She demanded physical courage and
risk-taking of her son.
Self-discipline was sufficient to

prevent a breaking out into purely
adventurous existence.
Fritz Kraemer as emigrant
in New York in 1939.
292
A speechwriter for Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara

wrote on the occasion of my 65th birthday:
Dr Kraemer is an untamed stallion.
A General once said to me:

Talking to you is like drinking heady wine.
293
Arrogance and Absolute Values

By Fritz Kraemer
Haughtiness and high pride are deeply connected. Someone who doesnt
believe in himself and has low self-esteem will hardly muster the strength and
desire to serve his neighbor, since self-pity and envy wear him down.
A person with self-confidence and self-awareness can be much looser,
friendlier, kinder, and more willing to help than someone with no self-esteem,
someone that always feels insufficiently recognized and badly treated.
He who has no respect for himself always feels short-changed.
Arrogance towards others is often a necessity. Arrogance towards God,
though, is blasphemy. As regards God, only humility is called for.
Nevertheless, in discussions and debates, I have never encountered agreement with the necessity to be arrogant towards others.
Most of the people Ive discussed it with reject the word as provocative and
try to replace it with a milder term.
No matter what spin you might put on it, objectively considered it is the
height of arrogance to be convincedas I amthat ones own ethical values
are absolute while the opposite values of others are at best relative.
The ethical problem hidden here derives from the fact that only the arrogant
conviction of the absoluteness of ones values bestows the strength to constantly swim against the evil current of time andin fighting a criminal totalitarian system, for instanceto even accept martyrdom.
In general usage, the word arrogance means bad and overbearing manners. Possessing the arrogance to consider ones values absolute demands
emphatic graciousness and good manners.
294
Not arrogance and wantonness, but a lack

of courage and feelings of inferiority are
the most dangerous source of the havoc that
men wreak upon themselves and others.
Objectively considered, it is the height of

arrogance to be convinced as I am that ones
own ethical values are absolute while the
opposite values of others are at best relative.
Only the medium brilliant can afford

to be impressed with their own or
other peoples brilliance.
The truly brilliant know that brilliance

is nothing.
295
Cle
Cleverling
296
ever
I invented the word cleverling.
They are know-it-alls that dont

recognize the heart of a matter, nor
its basic traits and relevant course.
297
Loneliness is the price of excellence.
Very exceptional people are exceptionally lonely. Furthermore, their

special quality is simply denied in todays egalitarian democracy.
How should these people stay their own unpopular, elitist

course without our encouragement and active support?
298
299
300
Inner musicality
is needed for a
good politician.
301
Neither in Harvard nor in Oxford can one learn to become

a decorated statesman, just as one cant learn to become
an artist like Renoir, Matisse, or Monet at an art academy.
302
Many study in art academies and yet there are

only a few excelling artists like Van Gogh or Picasso.
The really unique and exceptional is God-given,
is inherited and not learnable.
The way of getting to the top as a tactician is

something else. That is aptly described, for instance,
in Niccol Machiavellis book The Prince.
Given the inner disposition, the technique can be learned.
303
Can the Office of

Statesman Be Learned?
By Fritz Kraemer
A statesman is someone who doesnt just pursue lofty

goals for his state but is willing to sacrifice himself for it.
He must be willing to sacrifice his career for the cause.
A statesman needs
a touch of adventurousness.
Otherwise, he wont take any risks. Then he

will only act on the fickle majoritys desires.
304
A statesman needs a personal purpose in

life, a religion or a substitute for religion.
A statesman needs exceptional energy and inner independence.

He must be able to say: Personal success is not my ultimate goal. I will
make no concession which furthers my career but betrays the cause.
To be primarily career-oriented means to be bound hand and foot.
305
Ronald Reagan was living proof of innate

instincts superiority over mere intellectual brilliance.
306
307
What Qualities Must

a Statesman Have?
By Fritz Kraemer
First, an inner musicality for history is the primary raw material.

Second, personal courage is important. Without it a statesman
cannot assert his goals.
The third necessity is nerves like steel cables.
308
Without courage, one becomes nothing but an instrument of opinion polls in

democracies; you muddle through.
Even dictators show courage: Adolf Hitler as dispatcher in World War I,
decorated with the Iron Cross, or Fidel Castro. Courage for a bad cause is just
as effective as courage for a good one.
Stopping courageous scoundrels always requires contrary courage of the
forces of good.
Courage is an important element of self-assertion. Sheer economic or military
power without the courage to employ them is ineffective. In political disputes,
wisdom and intelligence without courage are nothing effective.
309
What We Can Learn from History
For no man is a prophet.

Only by means of the mental tool of
analogy can we learn from history
what will happen tomorrow.
310
311
Dr Fritz Kraemers Guidelines for You

From the many conversations I had with my mentor and guru, I have put together in my
own words the following rules:
I.
Think, think, think actively and thus be a strong person in your own rightbe
yourself rather than a miniscule nothing.
Dont simply float passively with the masses, like a cork in the stream of
current opinion, a pure opportunist.
Make yourself an independent personality, a rock in the storm, with passion
and enthusiasm.
Read literature so that you are able to develop truly new and creative ideas,
and always consider the psychology of people.
Study history in order to be able to understand tomorrow.
Develop yourself into a person of good character, iron will, courage and
much energy.
312
Stand up for your convictions. Speak out about what you think
and feel.
Believe in and fight for absolute values and a
Holy Fire.
Follow a code of honor and a moral
vision.
Dont exhaust yourself with pure
materialism; rather seek a balance and
an ideal occupation which give internal
satisfaction.
II.
Shape a better realitydo not only
adapt to the bad realities.
Fight for the good. Stand firm against
the evil that threatens human freedom
and dignity. Defend the principles of
the UN Charter against the threats of
totalitarian and authoritarian
ideologies.
313
Assume responsibility for others and the community. Support those who fight
for freedom and human rights throughout the world.
Dont ever ask, Whats in it for me? Instead ask, What is good for my
country?
Dont place yourself at the center of your short life, rather the good cause.
Be courageous, not fearful or a bourgeois weakling.
A shot of adventurousness is a good thing.
III.
Dont place your career above all else. At least try sometimes to do something
good, to do something that doesnt bring an immediate reward and stay true
to your ideals.
Dont say what your superiors or your surroundings want to hear, but what
you really think and what will benefit your country.
Develop your own independent career path independent of promotions.
314
IV.
Dont surround yourself with prominence like a stamp collection. Rather seek
out young people who are still unknown, support them intensively and over
many years, and be their mentor.
V.
Feel what is good for people. Speak to their soul and their feelings. Always
develop a sense for the feelings, desires, and fears of other societies.
VI.
Be polite and open in relations, but unbending in your convictions.
Dont hold yourself to be a super-clever, brilliant mind; dont be a conceited
cleverling.
Dont fill your mind with abstruse ideas; rather, as a humble and finite person,
believe in God.
315
Show Physical Courage,

Take Risks!
By Fritz Kraemer
Physical courage is supremely important:

not to know what fear is.
Women are often more courageous than men.
For men are often too preoccupied with their career.
In modern states, people have little esteem for heroism.
Hardly anyone is willing to suffer death for the sake of
a nation, of a political ideal.
Courage, as you know, means to continue
the battle, even if all the odds are against you.
316
Only very few are born courageous.

Courage is generally the degree to
which inborn cowardice is overcome.
Fritz Kraemers favorite photo from

WW II in 1945: doing the Kosac
Dance like a Russian with Russian
soldiers.
317
You must believe in and fight

for absolute values!
It is important to follow a
code of honor.
Dont ever ask whats in it
for me? Instead ask what is
good for my country?
318
319
Read Shakespeare!
This is the only way to think up new and more creative

ideas than the 50,000 people before you.
320
321
322
Simplicity is the final

result of incredible
complication.
This is comparable to the famous

formula of Albert Einsteins, E = mc2.
He arrived at this formula after
years of complicated thinking.
323
Fritz Kraemer Today

What is the relevance of Fritz Kraemers

analyses for the politics and citizens of today?
Cultivate and inspire elites in democracies:
Look for men and women of excellence!
The Missionary of the Potomacs cardinal demand is the cultivation of an
elite that doesnt simply enjoy privileges but is willing to assume social responsibility.
Our egalitarian democracies, which by their nature are adverse to elites,
must establish a practicable concordance between the equal rights of their
citizens and the necessity of fostering excellence.
Spiritual elites are the necessary motor of positive developments in politics,
economics, and culture.
Elites by character, not by titles.

Kraemer holds a negative assessment of universities, describing them as
soulless education plants. This critical evaluation also extends to formal titles
that reveal nothing about the actual person: Character counts, not position
and title.
His heroes are individuals who stand for ideas and ideals.
324
Rather than soulless learning-by-rote, the individual nurturing of a responsible elite should be our central concern; not just the recording of amounts and
numbers but the exertion of passion, of true conviction, of a sense of duty and
responsibility.
Talent scouting
Being a gifted and successful talent scout, he knew that even the greatest of
talents requires a discoverer to initiate, cultivate, encourage, and make
demands on them in continuous personal conversations to spiritually stimulate
them and to assume responsibility.
But whoin these hurried timestakes the time to promote and encourage
young people?
Each and every reader should be on the lookout for young people among
their friends and acquaintances, and be ready to support them as a mentor
over a course of years, not materially but with food for thought.
The demand for a new political elite.

Fritz Kraemer considers the lack of elites in politics to be the Achilles heel of
egalitarian democracies.
What can be done about this? The politically responsible do in fact lack the
desire as well as the courage to actively support unusually talented young
people against the majorities in the parties and parliaments. Exceptions confirm the rule.
Therefore, especially those parts of society that operate outside of government and the political parties ought to put their young talents at the disposal
of political leaders, foster them, and work to install them over the long term
within the political system.
New elites must be supported by initiatives and funds from industry, particularly within the realms of foreign and security politics so dear to Kraemer.
325
Relativism as the greatest danger.

Relativism and know-it-all intellectuals were seen by Kraemer as caustic and
destructive forces, the greatest weakness of free democratic nations. Even one
who doesnt share this assessment in all its sharpness cannot help but notice
that modern man is too materialistic and that a yearning for the more transcendental values of the soul is tangible in almost every individual.
In other words: there is no getting around internal values.
Imagination is important. Shape reality!
The geo-strategist detests provincialism. Kraemer is a real globalist.
He is not found among those who think and plan unilaterally, nationalistically, or purely militaristically.
Kramer always emphasized the crucial psychological aspects of successful
politics like foresight and imagination, a global view without provincial blinkers, a knowledge of history, and the courage to act, without which successful
and brilliant politicsthat restructure instead of just reactare impossible.
We should shape a better reality, not only adapt to bad reality.
Non-bourgeois Realpolitik.
Fritz Kraemers core issue is an externally strong, watchful state that effectively protects its citizens against constant threats from wild fanatics, and the
primacy of power in foreign policy.
He propagates a sufficient capacity for peace, not just a willingness.
He backs this up by his deep, historically proven conviction that diplomacy
without the means of power to back it up is necessarily doomed and that
provocative weakness entails devastation and death.
A democracydefensible and willing to be defendedof engaged citizens
with spiritual values and the courage to assume responsibility for them is Fritz
Kraemers ideal.
326
327
www.worldsecuritynetwork.com
328
The World Security Network

Foundation
Elite Network for a Safer World promoting World 3.0
The World Security Network Foundation (WSN) is an independent, international non-profit

organization. It is the largest global elite network for foreign and security policy, with the purpose
of Networking a Safer World, promoting a fresh global foreign policy, which we label World
3.0.
WSN was founded and funded by Dr Hubertus Hoffmann, a German investor and geo-strategist, inspired by his long-term mentor Dr Fritz Kraemer, who demanded that he give something
back to humanity by supporting and enabling the talents of the young in a new global foreign
affairs elite (see www.worldsecuritynetwork.com, www.codesoftolerance.com, Facebook and
YouTube).
The World Security Network focuses on three goals:
etworking the young foreign and defense affairs elite.
N
roviding fresh analysis, ideas and visions for the worlds most pressing problems.
P
romoting designs for a safer world in politics, the media and academia.
P
We promote timely action to implement two-pronged peace strategies, with power on one hand
and diplomacy and reconciliation on the other.
The World Security Network approach to resolving conflict takes account of the three vital elements: vision, structures, action, on a basis of strategic planning, sufficient funding and rapid
implementation.
WSN has a network of 100 editors, currently of 34 nationalities, reporting from all over the
world. The International Advisory Board consists of 71 well-known experts from 21 countries. It
includes former ministers, state secretaries, members of parliament, ambassadors, journalists,
politicians and academics as well as 20 former admirals and generals.
329
The WSN is:

ot American, African, Asian or European, but global.
N
ot Left or Right leaning, republican or democrat, or of any party, but independent, internaN
tional and pluralist.
ot a peace movement or an organisation of warmongers, but realistic and credible in balancN
ing Realpolitik and Idealpolitik, power and diplomacy, military action and reconciliation: the
twin strategy approach of peacemaking that is World 3.0.
ot a talking shop, but solution-orientated, seeking concrete action for all conflicts.
N
ot bureaucratic, but creative and entrepreneurial.
N
ot fanatical, but composed of engaged global citizens with the shared vision of networking
N
a safer and better world for our children.
WSN is a new kind of global foreign affairs action network for the age of globalization, using
the internet and local task force meetings.
WSN aims are:
Networking a Safer World, with the vision to implement the goals of the UN Charter:
mutual respect, tolerance, human rights and economic growth.

o rouse people from apathy, raising awareness of trouble spots before war breaks out, to
T
propose solutions and draw media attention to security issues at an early stage.
o network the strategic community, focusing on the new young global elite in foreign and
T
defense affairs.
o convey new creative ideas and policy recommendations to decision makers using the interT
net.
One of WSNs main projects is The Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect designed to promote tolerance, respect and cooperation between different religions and creeds including Islam,
cultures, ethnic groups, and races (see www.codesoftolerance.com). WSN Tolerance Academies
teach young people online and in local meetings tolerance and respect towards other religions
and ethnic minorities and best practises from all over the world.
WSNs weekly electronic newsletter reaches and links more than 300,000 users all over the
world. WSN TV also provides video statements on YouTube from over 250 experts used by more
than 500,000 visitors.
You are invited to join our network on Facebook or via www.worldsecuritynetwork.com, and
promote a better foreign policy World 3.0 with us.
330
Dear Hubertus Hoffmann!

I am very pleased that your major project internet service
can obviously boast a successful launch. Vivat, crescat, floreat,
may it live, grow and prosper!
Always yours
Fritz G. A. Kraemer
331
332
World 3.0
The foreign affairs philosophy of Pentagon strategist, mentor, and missionary Dr Fritz Kraemer was determined by strong beliefs described in detail in
this book. According to Kraemer, foreign affairs should rest on the following
principles and convictions:
howing strength and avoiding provocative weakness against anti-demoS
cratic forces;
mphasizing the importance of power in foreign affairs as a backup for
E
diplomacy;
rimacy of foreign affairs over domestic affairs as they deal with the survival
P
of the nation;
he need for a foreign minister to be a statesman of genius with an inner
T
quality of musicality;
haping the world with the mission of promoting absolute values and the
S
cause of humanity;
cknowledging the psychology of nations and the need for a soul in foreign
A
policy;
harp criticism of self-serving capitalist bourgeois people unwilling to conS
front extremists and fight for their values, as well as generating mediocrity
through their dislike of anybody who stands out from the crowd;
ighting moral relativism on the basis of respect for religions and belief in
F
God;
333
he imperative to mentor a broad, responsible elite of young men and

T
women of excellence and character as the basis of good governance;
upporting and encouraging young talents not to seek privilege and mateS
rial goods, but to serve their country with passion and satisfaction;
elief in the power of re-generation, with this innovative and dynamic elite
B
acting as a catalyst to change the course of history.
Foreign policy full of hope UN Charter as a benchmark with no

tolerance versus radicals
The current starting point for democratic nations foreign policy is sobering,
but nonetheless full of hope, despite all setbacks.
The year 2011 saw an unpredicted new wave of freedom and democratic
values based on the desire of individuals for dignity and self determination.
Following the dramatic years of liberation in Eastern Europe and the USSR
from 1989 to 1991, freedom this time resembled a date palm emerging from
the sand in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, and Yemen in the Arab Spring. Colonel Gaddafi, the longest-ruling and shrillest dictator of our time, was toppled
within a few months. The initiators and activists of this Arab call for freedom
were not extremists, but frustrated young people and traders from the bazaars,
supported by the wider Muslim population. Their weapons were not bombs
but Twitter and Facebook. Tunisia and Egypt shook off their authoritarian rulers and family clans. Even the military dictatorship in Myanmar (Burma) turned
away from its dominant neighbour China, setting free hundreds of political
prisoners. The house-arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi was lifted, and in 2012 she
entered parliament and traveled to Oslo to accept at last her Nobel Peace
Prize from 1991.
In 2012 a wave of disillusionment followed with a strong showing by Islamic
parties in the first free elections. Chaos prevailed in Libya, but in July the liberal
National Forces Alliance triumphed in the elections. On September 11th U.S.
Ambassador Chris Stevens and three of his team were killed by protestors in
Benghazi. The Muslim Brotherhood won the first free parliamentary elections
334
The Tahrir Square in Cairo: The alternative to progress and democracy as defined
in the UN Charter from 1945which recalls the tragic experiences of Fritz Kraemer
and the German nation during the Weimar Republicis radicals hijacking
democracy and erecting another extreme Islamic dictatorship as we have seen in
Iran. Zero tolerance versus intolerant radicals and a strong and fearless presence
of liberal citizens is needed to contain the radicals.
335
and the presidency with 52percent for its candidate Mohamed Morsi in Egypt,
but approximately 48percent voted for the independent Ahmed Shafik producing a delicate alance of power with the powerful military. At the end of 2011
b
the moderate Islamist party Ennahda Movement won the elections in Tunisia
with 38 percent. President Assad killed 20,000 of his people in Syria.
Fritz Kraemer always firmly believed in re-generation through an elite comprising just a few active personalities. This time they included the Tunisian
street vendor Mohamed Bouazizi who set himself on fire on 17th December
2010 in protest against the confiscation of his wares and humiliation by officials. He became the catalyst for the revolution in Tunisia and the Arab Spring,
inspiring the revolutionaries of Benghazi and Egypts bloggers, as well as the
multitudes in Cairos Tahrir Square.
It was only the beginning of a long-term struggle for freedom and stability
for the next ten to twenty years. How nave it is to think that people in the Arab
World can jump from several decades-long dictatorships to democracy. This
process took many decades in Europe, Asia and America.
As history shows, there is a permanent danger that the young plants of liberty may be torn out again by radical Islamists or military leaders hijacking
the call for freedom, social justice and jobs to install other dictatorships.
Democracy and the millions of new jobs needed for young people in North
Africa and the Middle East (MENA) cannot be created within a few months.
Democracy must be allowed to growas documented by its development in
Eastern Europe and Russia. Professor Ludger Khnhardt, Director of the Center
for European Integration Studies (ZEI) at Bonn University and a member of the
International Advisory Board of the World Security Network (WSN), calls on
the transatlantic partners to engage with the Arab world in a long-term comprehensive agenda of transformation.
It will be of crucial importance for the new free elite to inspire and lead the
majority of freedom-loving, but politically deprived masses. The conservative
majority of 90 percent does not want a new dictatorship of Islamists, but to
follow the moral code of Islam as an anchor in revolutionary times, as well as
honoring the long-term opposition, social programs, and rejection of corruption by the Muslim Brotherhood.
336
The influence of moderate Islamic parties is good, as we share many of the

same values, but domination by ultra-radicals is deadly. Whoever dreamed of
establishing heaven on earth ended with hell in reality. Did the Prophet establish an Islamic dictatorship with sharia law after he conquered Mecca in 630?
No, not at all, he left existing institutions intact. He did not even punish the
enemies who had wanted to kill him, issued a general amnesty and preached
reconciliation and peace. After riding around the Kaaba he begged the people to lay aside the arrogance and self-sufficiency of jahiliyyah which had
created only conflict and injustice, saying all people are children of Abraham. Did he mistreat his wives or his four daughters as the Taliban, and as
other radicals preach? Never, he loved and respected them, especially his first
wife Khadijah bint al-Khuwaylid. She was an emancipated business woman
who hired the 25 years old Muhammad and was his boss, proposed that he
marry her, financed the new tiny Muslim community as main sponsor and supported him for many years on his path to God. In his farewell sermon at Mount
Arafat he reminded his followers to treat women kindly. Did he hate Christians and Jews? No, he protected them in treaties and saw them as an ancient
part of the way to God. The Holy Koran demands in 29:46: Do not contend
with the people of the Book except in the fairest wayand our God and your
God is one.Whoever wants to follow the Prophet and the Holy Koran has to
be tolerant and respectful as the UN Charter which is our global common
base and law stated in 1945.
The alternative to tolerance, respect, progress and democracy which
recalls the tragic experiences of Fritz Kraemer and the German nation during
the Weimar Republicis radicals hijacking democracy and erecting extreme
Islamic or military dictatorships as we have seen in Iran.
Zero tolerance for intolerance and the strong and fearless presence of liberal citizens are needed to contain the radicals. If young activists and the
majority become silent and scared they will lose to the radicals, like in the
Weimar Republic in 1933 or in Iran in 1979.
Brutal dictator Assad in Syria killed more

than 20,000 of his people in 2011/
2012. The West must connect its support
for the Syrian National Council and the
rebels with the establishment of a new
crystal-clear democratic constitution.
All leaders of the different groups must
personally sign and agree under oath to
implement the UN Charter. Any group
which abstains must be excluded from
any political, financial or military support
by the West and the Arab States
involved. We can only support rebels
who fight for democracy and not a
differently labeled dictatorship.
We must keep our eyes open and provide massive support to all forces of
liberty, but our influence is not strong at all. We cannot again remain passive
like the UK or France did when Hitler strangled German democracy between
1933 and 1939.
337
Western countries must call for a clear and binding recognition by all new
forces in the Arab world of the principles of the UN Charter. It demands to
reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the
human person, in the equal rights of men and women, to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, to practice tolerance and
live together in peace with one another as good neighbors. This is the red
line and the focus for the promotion of global values. Without a binding commitment by rebels, new leaders and governments they should receive no support at all. We must start an open dialogue on common values at all levels and
find common ground.
The revolutions in North Africa and the Gulf serve as a crucial litmus test to
prove that true tolerant Islam, as preached by the Prophet is reconcilable with
democracy and common global values, like in Turkey.
This determines if the leaders in moderate Islamist parties and the militaryas was accomplished by the new parties after the revolutions throughout Europe at the end of the 20th Centuryare able to create a modern and
humane free order, rather than producing yet more authoritarian regimes like
those so aptly described in George Orwells Animal Farm or in books about
the Third Reich and the rise of totalitarianism by my Bonn professor Karl
Dietrich Bracher.
I firmly believe that our world will be safer if we get rid of the remaining
dictatorships and implement worldwide the principles of peaceful coexistence,
stipulated in the UN Charter as the global consensus of values. Dictatorships
employ violence in both their domestic and foreign conduct because they are
violent by nature, existing only by permanently violating the rights of others.
However the predominantly negative experiences of intervention in Iraq
and Afghanistan show that the U.S. and its allies have not been able to implement strong Western-style democracies by either hard military or soft political
means from the outside. Can we deliver freedom and if so, how?
Our foreign policy must draw lessons from the mistakes made in Iraq and
Afghanistan and take into consideration the actual experiences of Eastern
European and North African revolutions as well.
338
Hitherto our diplomacy seems mostly to consist in merely observing developments, rather than actively shaping appropriate change.
There is no such demonstrable massive support for the delicate palm of
democracy as there is for Islamic movements (and even radicals) among many
Arab states and charities. Foundations in the West teaching democratic principles and the rule of lawrequired for stimulating democratic development
are even punished by the military in Egypt. The West cannot tolerate a strangulation of this transfer of democratic know-how and governmental disrespect
for the UN Charter. We must link all support for the revolutions in MENA and
for the new powers to the precondition of implementation of the UN Charter
which has been signed by the states. These rules must be integrated into new
constitutions as well.
After forceful and inspired military support of the rebels in Libya, almost the
next day we have left the progressive forces of democracy in the Arab world
without the massive support required in the struggle for power positioning the
West as mainly passive bystanders during this unique and historic period of
change.
We have no guidelines, no plans, no funding, and no guts to say what we
stand for as Fritz Kraemer did.
We have opened Pandoras Box without a plan for what to do afterwards.
In our foreign policy, political buzz words have replaced concrete planning
and deeds.
Why we need a new World 3.0 policy

What are the elements of a new, promising foreign and security policy
which I would like to call World 3.0 following Microsofts development
stepsto make it capable of deterring enemies, strengthening the forces of
freedom and making the world safer and more peaceful?
A policy which corresponds with the national interests of 21st century freedom-loving, democratic nations while also meeting the needs of billions of
339
people in impoverished and underdeveloped countries for food, jobs, and

human dignity.
A smart and effective policy capable of mastering global challenges and
changes.
Moreover, a policy we can afford, as highly indebted nations with limited
financial means.
A foreign policy that meets the desires and dreams of the new Facebook
generation, the new young and active elite from Cape Town to Seattle to
Beijing.
An active foreign policy which does not remain stuck in administrating
the status quo and defense of national interests through deterrence as did
World 1.0.
One which does not perpetuate the weakness of our current mainstream World
2.0; a foreign policy which fails to offer coherent and creative action plans for
crisis management, with few deeds and much talk, which does not deliver feasible results and staggers from one media-friendly conference to the next.
A better foreign policy shaping the globe for our children

Networking a Safer World 3.0.
World 3.0 is the upgrade of World 1.0 and World 2.0. The historical maxims and wisdom of power and national interests as described by Cardinal
Richelieu or German Chancellor Bismarck and the needs of Realpolitik la
Hans J. Morgenthau and Henry A. Kissinger are still the solid base of World
3.0, but these are no longer sufficient for a successful foreign policy in the 21st
century.
World 1.0 and Word 2.0 are no longer enough to serve our national interests in the new atomized, non-polar world where there are many more new
players, instant mass communication tools, demands from billions of people
for immediate improvement, and limited resources.
340
What kind of priorities, dual-strategies, and action do

we need in our globalized world to promote peace, stability, and human rights in our time?
How can our foreign policy in this fragmented world,
with many of its seven billion individual inhabitants struggling for food, shelter, and human dignity, achieve positive change?
What can it achieve in the fight against terrorism,
nuclear weapons in the hands of mullahs, famine in East
Africa, pirates and greedy politicians pillaging their
impoverished countries and installing themselves comfortably in authoritarian structures?
Have we reached the limits of what is possible, but are unwilling to admit it?
Are we not just puffing ourselves up like a vain cockerel unable to lay eggs?
Dozens of books could be and have been written about different good
ideas, concepts, and problem-solving approaches. Admirable suggestions are
to be found in expert periodicals, books, and speeches.
Referring to the stimulating suggestions of Fritz Kraemer, I would like to outline
just a few ideas prompting the reader to further discussion and publication. It is
up to everyone to join this important discussion process with creative ideas.
Sometimes a young student in Cairo has a better idea than Henry Kissinger in
New York. Kindly address your own ideas to president@worldsecuritynetwork.com
or to the Facebook site of the World Security Network Foundation.
World 3.0 is the upgrade of World 1.0

and World 2.0. The historical maxims
and wisdom of the importance of power
and national interests as described by
Cardinal Richelieu or German Chancellor
Bismarck and the needs of Realpolitik
la Hans J. Morgenthau (left) and Henry
A. Kissinger (right) are still the solid base
of World 3.0, but these are no longer
sufficient for a successful foreign policy
in the 21st century.
One Tool-Box, many craftsmen

Let me start with a simple metaphor.
Think of yourself as a plumber with a tool-box full of different tools. As a
good craftsman you will look first at what you have to repair and then
341
choose the tools which serve you bestjob donequickly, easily, and effectively.
This is not the case in foreign policy as yet. We must address this weakness
and change it.
Many craftsmen are on hand to address hot spots in foreign policy. Politicians in parliaments and parties with different views, the media, public opinion, the foreign office, the defense ministry, the UN, and myriad actors from
other countries. This amounts to masses of people with strong egos, national
perceptions and sometimes arrogance and ignorance. It sounds like chaos
and a big messand it will almost certainly start like that. Fritz Kraemer used
to say Great interests are at stake, but small interests govern.
In the end action comes too late, mostly uncoordinated, and it costs the tax
payer a lot of money. This is the negative experience of Iraq and Afghanistan.
No foreign minister, ministry, or respected institute predicted the Arab
Spring, nor the fall of the Berlin Fall and re-unification of Germany, or the collapse of the USSR. How embarrassing if you compare this with the egotistical
and pompous speeches of many diplomats and politicians who were involved.
The track-record of World 2.0 is frustratingly poor after the Cold War and the
golden period of the European Spring.
Libya as a first test of World 3.0

One of the best and most successful U.S. ambassadors (and member of the
International Advisory Board of the World Security Network Foundation) is
J.D. Bindenagel, who negotiated the two most creative international treaties of
recent decades. He was appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1999 as U.S.
Ambassador and Special Envoy for Holocaust issues and reached agreements
on World War II-era forced labor with Germany. From 20022003, Bindenagel was special U.S. negotiator for Conflict Diamonds, leading a U.S. government negotiation which resulted in a worldwide ban on the sale of illicit,
conflict diamonds. As he notes Dr Fritz Kraemer was a strategic thinker
whose strong beliefs helped shape American foreign policy and offer lasting
342
value as current policy makers face the challenges todays dictators pose for
our values. Colonel Gaddafis threat of genocide immediately called to mind
his principles of showing strength and avoiding provocative weakness
against anti-democratic forces, while emphasizing the importance of power in
foreign affairs as a backup for diplomacy. As Friedrich the Great admonished
his critics: Diplomacy without arms is like an orchestra without instruments;
certainly, the searing experience of the Second World War, the lessons of the
Holocaust and the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo have had a profound effect on
foreign policy principles. Dr Kraemer would have been pleased by the forceful
action the United Nations, NATO, and Arab leaders took to end the Libyan
dictatorship in 2011. Reliability and commitment to Western values came
after a long political struggle and Dr Kraemers advice remains sound
today.
Exceptionally Libya proved in 2011 that political hot spots can also be
dealt with effectively. There were no Western boots on the ground, the local
rebels in Benghazi occupied the drivers seat, and the push came not from the
United States but from France and the United Kingdom. The tiny but wealthy
Gulf states of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates supported the air campaign with 18 jets from the Muslim world side by side with European allies
like Norway and Italy. This first joint NATO-Arab military campaign conducted more than 20,000 air strikes in support of the rebels. Confirming
Kraemers doctrine that nothing works without power. Surprisingly the UN
Security Council passed a resolution with Russia and China abstaining. The
Arab public and the Qatar-owned TV station Al Jazeera supported NATO.
The intervention aimed to protect human rights and prevent slaughter by the
mad colonel. Minimum input resulted in maximum output. Suffering a minimum of casualties among rebels and civilians, no losses of NATO jets or
soldiers, and without burning huge amounts of money, a new post-dictatorship government was established in Libya. The mission was accomplished
with a globally networked and innovative World 3.0 approachwith many
more efforts needed to stabilize freedom and justice in a new democracy
over the next few years. The military campaign was just the beginning of a
longer transformation process. Europe, the United States and Singapore with
its transparent (public wealth funds) fund can offer best practice in the process of building up a stable country with a free people and transparent
income from oil and gas revenues.
U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens

was killed on September 11, 2012 by
radical Islamists in an attack on the U.S.
consulate in Benghazi along with three
staff members during protests against the
hate-video Innocence of Muslims. U.S.
President Barack Obama praised him:
Throughout the Libyan revolution, he
s
elflessly served our country and the
L
ibyan people. He has supported Libyas
transition to democracy. A strategy of
containment with no tolerance against
intolerance is needed. We also have to
promote the Golden Nuggets of tolerance
we all share in our global village. In a
world of 7bn individuals you will always
have some who misbehave and hurt the
religious convictions of others. Under the
fixed rules of The Holy Quran it is forbidden to attack people who did not insult
you. Muslim leaders must make clear
these Islamic rules. We have to cut the
dangerous tit-for-tat strategy of the radicals who provoke a spiral of confrontation, while making it clear that a majority
of 99.99 percent of the people tolerate
and respect all other religions and want a
global village of peace and love.
343
Our bureaucracies are our main adversaryendless diagnosis

replaces therapy
We should never merely blame the bad guys, jihadists, or dictators for what
they do. We must instead be self-critical, examining what needs to be improved
to make us smarter as well as stronger than our enemies. We need a continually adapting foreign policy without ignorance or arrogance.
Our own bureaucracies, including weak politicians in cabinets and parliaments, constitute our main adversary. Experience shows that at the end of
frustrating, grinding decision-making processes we usually burn too much
money for little output and are too slow, uncoordinated, and inefficient. This
red tape monster is harder to fight than any enemy. It is our main Achilles Heel
in foreign affairs, causing us to win often on the battle field but lose in the end,
producing one lost victory after another. Our enemies do not constitute the
main threat, but rather our systems inability to deal with them effectively and
creatively.
Worlds of difference lie between the dynamics of the actual movers and
shapers of todays world, such as the young Egyptian bloggers, the young
Palestinians Israeli Syrian and Libyan activists willing to risk their lives for
freedom on the one hand, and the planning staffs of the State Department, the
Foreign Office, or the Auswrtiges Amt on the other.
On the whole the foreign policy establishment is unable to keep up with
such rapid developments, barely understands the complex new world, and
exerts little influence on the course of events. Foreign policy officials have
become onlookers.
The powerful are attempting to shape the world with pep talks, international
conferences, and state visits, but mostly end up splashing in their own bathtubs.
Political rhetoric carries the day, while actual plans and deeds are rare.
Just a few months before they fell, the now ousted rulers in Tunisia, Libya,
and Egypt were openly courted. No foreign minister predicted what would
follow so soon.
344
Almost all of the much vaunted international conferences produce nice TV

images for the electorate but no concrete options, proposals, and plans at all.
They consist of exhaustive speeches with many buzz words, but an action
vacuum.
Today, a nearly endless diagnosis replaces therapy.
The usual discussions and international meetings dealing with foreign policy
mostly end with the demand We ought to do something, but without considering consequences, plans, and precise implementation.
Hardly a single politician or leading civil servant asks the hard questions
about the where, when, and how. But this is where effective work starts. Success or failure will be determined in this realm of plans and options.
Listening to politicians gives the impression that they confuse their speeches
with implementation, according to the platitude: But that is what I said.
Proactive policy is the missing asset in the foreign affairs of the mainly bourgeois politicians and diplomats who enjoy exalted positions and titles but
avoid fighting for values and a better future for our children.
We need proactive White Revolutionaries for World 3.0otherwise we are
destined to fail.
The subjunctive has taken over.
Foreign policy is no longer shaped and conducted; instead it is geared
towards the media dictating what should, could, and must be done.
A growing number of problems are merely being described, even by research
institutes, but none are being processed and mastered. The books published by
well known foreign affairs institutes describe the different positions and problems but almost never dare to make any clear proposals with options.
This creates a huge traffic jam and pileup of too many problems on the
foreign policy motorway.
345
Author Dr Hubertus Hoffmann with

tribesmen in the FATA on Pakistans border
with Afghanistan We are leaving the
initiative to a few radical activistswho
represent a tiny minority of around one
percent of the global populationand
through our passivity we are creating
an action vacuum full of provocative
weaknesses. We are not acting, but
instead becoming the object of action.
We are not shaping, but instead reacting
to new developments.
We are leaving the initiative to a few radical activistswho represent a tiny

minority of around one percent of the global populationand through our
passivity we are creating an action vacuum full of provocative weaknesses.
We are not acting, but instead becoming the target of action.
We are not shaping, but instead reacting to new developments.
We are not actively stimulating and effectively supporting the silent majorities
of 99 percent plus in specific countries, but remain passive bystanders.
We are not helping with deeds, only advertising our interest with empty
words.
Thus we lose influence and reputation.
In view of todays paradigmatic shift in foreign policy, what is needed is a
new preventive stabilization policy, transcending traditional deterrence.
346
We must systematically neutralize the many time bombs large and small,
before it is too late and they get out of control. Pure crisis management no
longer suffices.
We must address the roots of tensions such as ethnic conflicts, hunger, poverty, population growth, water shortage, or underdeveloped agriculture.
We must collect, evaluate, strengthen, and implement best practice on a
global scale. Currently this learning process seems overly bureaucratic, slow,
unprofessional, and lacking in dynamism.
We must analyze well beyond the existing limits of military thought, and
begin to deliberate in new international networks and coalitions as exemplified in Libya.
In an age of towering debts and limited budgets, we are obliged to calculate precisely what we can afford and which funding mix will enable maximum output with minimum input.
We must convince the affluent oil countries in MENA, as well as new
powers like China and Brazil, to become more active as partners in the development process, particularly in Africa, shouldering their part of the global
burden.
Brilliant foreign secretaries and talented foreign policy personnel

where are they?
Kraemers demand for a brilliant foreign secretary as a mover and shaker
in foreign affairs with a touch of musicality and creative talent is permanently
and systematically ignored in most countries. This damages the quality of foreign policy enormously, because it remains anaemic.
Most Foreign Offices do not care who serves as their foreign secretary.
This prestigious position is part of a political bargain and a candidate is not
selected on the basis of specialized knowledge, experience, or qualifications. Tactical political power and a minimum consensus favor smooth per347
sonalities who lack charisma and vision dominating the field in too many
countries.
Do we not require personalities with more experience and vision, as the
world becomes more complex and their tasks more difficult?
The present results of this personnel policy are mediocre and disappointing,
stuck in old-style crisis management.
Foreign policy cannot be learned in a few weeks, just as flying a jumbo jet
cannot be learned quickly by someone used to driving a car. Extensive experience, solid specialized knowledge, and real talent are indispensable. Consequently, foreign policy frequently lacks the necessary personal foundation.
This makes it incapable of shaping new realities, but able only to react to
problems.
Must we allow this to continue or are there still heads of government heeding the quality of foreign secretaries in their respective cabinets and members
of parliament assuming responsibility for suggesting the best?
Worse, in most countries foreign policy is reduced to an insignificant area
for a very few specialists, avoided by politicians striving to reach the top. It
promises no credit with the public, because the area ranks low in opinion
polls. For example in a survey in the German Bundestag of 2005, 109 new
Bundestag members were asked about their preferred areas of politics. Only
one chose foreign policy. Do we not require more and better foreign policy
experts in parliaments? Who recruits and supports them?
This foreign policy blindness is alarming; foreign policy expertise is
d
windling while a growing number of challenges are emerging in our atomized world order. Simultaneously foreign policy is undergoing a brain-drain,
preventing the creative, entrepreneurial conduct customary in private business.
A possible solution could lie in politically independent and influential personalities fostering the careers of selected young, passionate, and qualified
politicians in the field of foreign policy over many years. This would pave their
348
way into parliaments from outside the existing, stultifying system of partisan
politics.
A Holy FlamePassion and devotion needed

Apple Founder Steve Jobs opened new horizons to foreign and security
personnel and civil servants. In his famous Stanford 2005 Commencement
Address he offered the following insights: The only thing that kept me going
was that I loved what I did. Youve got to find what you love. And that is
as true for your work as it is for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large
part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you
believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you
do. If you havent found it yet, keep looking. Dont settle. As with all matters
of the heart, youll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship,
it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you
find it.
World 3.0 means foreign policy with love and passionThe Holy Flame
aiming at changing the world for the better. Fritz Kraemer wrote in his memo
On Elitism, A life of contemplation, active missionary work for a cause, is
infinitely more desirable than an existence earnestly geared to the making of
money. We need politicians and young people with passion and devotion for
foreign policy which can shape the world.
Learn from Steve Jobs: The only way to

do great work is to love what you do.
World 3.0 means foreign policy with
love and compassionHoly Flame
aiming at changing the world for the
better. We need politicians and young
people with passion and devotion for
foreign policy shaping the world.
We need to promote a just world order with greater respect for the dignity
of the individual.
The credibility and moral integrity of political actors offering Western values
and standards to other peoples and countries truly matter.
The very soul of our democratic foreign policy must not be put at risk. We
must preserve it wisely and carefully, as something of the highest worth.
I agree with the plea of Professor Hans Kng of the University of Tbingen
in his book World Ethos for World Policy and World Economy that ethos
must be better integrated into foreign affairs as an important policy factor.
349
The influential book Politics among Nations (1948) by Hans J. Morgenthau,

a German Jewish emigrant from Coburg, promoted a realistic power policy.
I agree. But power only in the old-style World 1.0 is not enough. A soul is
also necessary, combined with solid power for diplomacy and peace; a
merger of power and ethos. Where power without ideals and immoral deeds
damage the flame of freedom and democracy they pervert Western foreign
policy, producing weakness and simultaneously reducing both influence and
real power as well. There are soft factors in power too, as Harvard Professor
Joseph Nye has established, and they play an ever more important role in the
new world.
For these reasons anything that damages the reputation of any state should
be carefully analyzed, avoided, and better ended. In the case of the United
States, overreactions like Guantanamo Bay or water-boarding of suspects
cross the red line and produce negative consequences, recruiting terrorists
and their supporters and damaging credibility and reputation for global moral
leadership. They reduce the U.S. hard-soft power base and must therefore
cease.
Those states which are still power-centric like China and Russia have to
consider if their cozy alignments with brutal dictatorships like North Korea,
Iran, or Syria, and the suppression of minorities and human rights activists at
home reduce their hard and soft power in global politics.
We need politicians actively and passionately promoting the soul of Western foreign policy every day. Fritz Kraemer said: My fear regarding the inner
corrosion of the very successful politician is that he will leave part of his soul
on every rung of the ladder leading him to the top. The harsh school of upward
struggle may, in fact, have made him a master tactician, but the Holy Fire, the
inner passion, the vision has gone, had to go.
I admire individuals inspired by such a glowing Holy Flame for oppressed
human beings, as exhibited by Fritz Kraemer or the French intellectual and
journalist Bernard-Henri Levy. Born in a Jewish family in Algiers, the co-founder
of the school of Nouveaux Philosophes has fought for threatened human
beings on a global scale. After a visit to Benghazi, he organized the first meeting of the French President Nicholas Sarkozy in the Elyse Palace with Mus350
tafa Abdul Jalil, the leader of the then fragile National Transition Council. It
marked a turning point in their struggle, with France subsequently siding with
the rebels.
Good-Bye Doomsday, Welcome Optimism

Foreign policy ought to be conducted with crisp and self-confident optimism. Pessimism and doomsday scenarios merely have a paralyzing effect.
The fall of the Berlin Wall, the dissolution of the USSR, the integration of
Eastern European countries in the EU and NATO, the dismantling of the SS-20
IRBM, or the youth rebellion in North Africa deliver examples of positive surprises in world politics. The glass is half full and a better world is possible. We
must be active shapers instead of administering the crisesoptimism vs selffulfilling prophecy.
More young responsible elites needed to promote progress

and values
According to Kraemer, the foundation of every sensible policy consists in
regeneration, always educating new generations for true responsibility. The
systematic quest for, and ongoing support of manifold young elites in politics,
economics and culture throughout the world, is crucial for a new foreign policy, World 3.0.
Existing programs are very laudable, but much too small and underfunded.
We are working with tweezers and need a vacuum cleaner.
We ought to multiply existing education and talent enabling programmes
and creative mentor programmes particularly for countries undergoing radical
changes in Africa and Asia.
We must identify many more new talents, support them, and encourage
them to join the network of responsibility, providing necessary know how and
life-long contacts as well as nurturing mutual trust.
351
Philipp Missfelder, the young and talented

CDU/CSU spokesman for foreign affairs
in the German Bundestag and chairman
of the Junge Union, underlines the
importance of a fresh and active
friendship policy with the yet unknown
young people in the Arab Spring,
building new connections to support their
fight for freedom.
We have several best practice examples, including The Harvard International Summer Seminar, directed by Henry Kissinger from 1951 to 1971, in
which 800 Europeans and Asians were made familiar with American thinking within a few months. Another example is provided by Sandbox, a global
community of 600 young leaders from 48 different countries, founded in
2008, comprising extraordinary achievers below the age of 30 who have
already had an impressive impact creating value for the community. Under
the direction of Professor Peter Neumann of Kings College London, 20 Atkin
Fellows from Israel and the Arab world gather annually at the International
Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence for four months
to develop new ideas for better understanding in the Middle East. Cosmopolitan inspirer and networker Lord George Weidenfeld welcomed the first
cohort of young scholars in 2007 for the Weidenfeld Scholarship and Leadership Programme from Eastern Europe, Russia, North Africa, and the Middle
East organized by his excellent London-based Institute for Strategic Dialogue.
Philipp Missfelder, the young and talented CDU/CSU spokesman for foreign
affairs in the German Bundestag and chairman of the Junge Union, underlines the importance of a fresh and active friendship policy with the yet
unknown young people of the Arab Spring, building new connections to support their fight for freedom. The Atlantic Bridge brings together young individuals from the U.S. and Germany every year. Its chairman Friedrich Merz
has contributed an article to this book. In 1991, I was one of the Young Leaders and fascinated by the programme. The active trans-Atlantic networker
Professor Werner Weidenfeld supports young talents with his Munich-based
C.A.P. institute for many years. The largest Women as Global Leaders Conference, with 1,800 female young leaders from more than 60 countries, does
not take place in emancipated Sweden, but every two years in Dubai under
the direction of the Zayed University of the United Arab Emirates. The brilliant
Higher Education Minister Sheikh Nahayan Mabarak al Nahayan invited me
in 2008 to deliver the conference dinner speech on The Human Codes of
Tolerance with the American actress Jane Fonda as an emancipated listener
in the first row. I recall with a smile the start of my speech: Testosterone has
arrived at the Women as Global Leaders Conference, dear Jane
Their example should be followed and enhanced by nations such as the
U.S., Canada, the European nations, Japan, and South Korea agreeing upon
a Global Leadership Program and splitting the costs. This fund should be
352
brought into a foundation providing different non-governmental organizations with the opportunity to support a variety of special programmes in politics, agriculture, culture, media, religion, justice, education, or industry for
say 100,000 young people per year, creating one million in ten years. The
United Arab Emirates and Qatar with its superb Qatar Foundation could be
included. Both Gulf states have provided outstanding examples with first-class
universities and renowned institutions. The programme should support the
new elites particularly in MENA, Africa, Central Asia, Afghanistan, and
Pakistan. With average expenses of USD 50,000 per scholarship the required
funding would amount to USD 5bn per year, split between the U.S., E.U.,
and Japan with one billion dollar each, and Canada, South Korea, Qatar,
and U.A.E. with USD 500mn each. I can think of no better investment because
it creates the responsible elite in areas of crisis, addressing the future of youth
and their nations.
We should not simply award scholarships and convey knowledge, but
develop mentor programmes following Fritz Kraemers example. For this task
we require thousands of experienced personalities capable of conveying
guidelines for life to the most talented young individuals and devoting much
time to them.
Crisis regions urgently need know-how in all areas. Their political and economic decision-making processes are frequently inflexible, antiquated, and
too slow. Their judicial systems may be inoperative. Crisis regions lack the
competitiveness needed for the future.
Suitable mentors can be found in the enormous world-wide pool of the
retired in every walk of life. We should recruit mentors for the elites from
d
ifferent countries, and through skilful personnel policy, create a permanent
foreign policy network with a million new synapses, providing assistance
for self-help and regeneration through the responsible elites as proposed by
Kraemer.
Jeffrey Gedmin, President of the Legatum

Institute in London: Today its imperative
that we focus on the cultivation and
promotion of a new, fresh and diverse
global elite. We need to transfer
know-how, strategic imagination and
a clear moral compass to a new
generation. This is Fritz Kraemers
legacyand our responsibility.
A systematic effort to bring together young people and experienced mentors is necessary in Western countries as well. Why dont foreign and defense
secretaries regularly invite the young and talented to meet former ambassadors, state secretaries, and generals, who, acting as mentors, support those
353
young individuals, as did Fritz Kraemer? Is there not a large untapped resource
with huge potential?
Mentors should not be confused with managers, looking after their employees. The young talents will be able to articulate their concerns and ideas and
incorporate the wisdom of Senior Advisors without the constraints of employment.
A section for mentoring should be created within the personnel departments
of foreign and defense ministries, systematically focusing on this process,
recruiting mentors and bringing them together with young talents. It should
become an integral part of personnel planning in foreign and defense policy.
Guidelines ought to systematize the quest for talent, providing permanent
support.
Creativity, character, and special involvement as well as self-confidence
and innovative thinking must be taken into greater account in official assessment and promotion guidelines than previously. We do not need more expert
and conformist administrators, but independent thinkers and shapers, those
often discarded by bureaucracies as non-conformist, according to the studies
of Fritz Kraemer. Innovative thinkers are crucial for truly nurturing creativity in
scelerotic bureaucracies, providing the prerequisites for the effective conduct
of a new foreign policy.
Traditional networks and conventions should include the young elites and
professionals as well. If the inspiring Facebook Generation is incorporated
into the frequently outmoded meetings of foreign policy elites it is bound to
enrich them.
These young individuals are looking for fields of action away from the
now-dominant world of super materialism. They want to fight for the good
and they have a global vision. Their friends come from many countries. They
are active. They advocate many of the values of Fritz Kraemer. There are
bound to be future Henry Kissingers or Alexander Haigs among the teeming youth of Africa, China, Europe, or the United States. It is up to us to
become acquainted with them, filter them out, and support them, like Fritz
Kraemer.
354
Integrate the new international NGO networks

A generation ago, the world was still divided into regions which seemed
distant from each other. As early as September 29 1969, Fritz Kraemer
described the march of globalization in his memorandum The Modern World,
A Single Strategic Theater, which he presented to the former U.S. National
Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, who in turn submitted it to President Richard
Nixon. It is one of the truisms of our time that because of the sensational
development of communications and transportation, the globe has shrunk with
distances between formerly far-away countries having been reduced to mere
hours in flight time. The hallmark is interdependence rather than independence among states. The whole globe has become a single theater, the
prophet forecast 43years ago.
Today we have finally arrived in a global village. The Dalai Lama put it in
a nutshell during a meeting of the World Security Network: There is no me
and theythe whole world is me.
International organizations and action groups, such as the World Economic Forum, Amnesty International, the Open Society Institute of George
Soros, Human Rights Watch, the International Crisis Group, the Young Presidents Organization, the Catholic lay person organization SantEgidio from
Rome and its successful peacemaking efforts in Mozambique in 1992, or the
World Security Network Foundation inspired by Fritz Kraemerall these
organizations using the worldwide web, provide a permanent network for
hundreds of thousands of active individuals from all nations with widely differing perspectives.
These people frequently have a closer relationship with distant acquaintances on the other side of the world than with their neighbours at home. Such
affinity groups share similar thoughts and have identical interests and notions
of the future regardless of whether they live in New Delhi, Washington, Berlin,
or Cairo.
The international outlook and the commitment to freedom demonstrated by
these influential movers and shakers is already changing the world for the
better, and having an impact on the foreign policy of national governments.
355
This is what the innovative thinker Parag Khanna suggests in his excellent
book How to Run the World (New York, 2011): a fresh, mega-diplomacy
with inclusiveness by involving governments, NGOs, and companies, decentralization and mutual accountability.
This new diplomacy goes far beyond the traditional foreign affairs techniques of diplomats and states, instead offering maximum flexibility with new
public-private partnerships in a fragmented worldas practiced by BernardHenri Levy. Vice Admiral Charles Style, former Commandant of the Royal
College of Defence Studies in London and member of the Advisory Board of
the World Security Network, comments that the interaction amongst future
high national leaders from over 40 countries at the College each year points
the way: there is an overriding and urgent requirement to build mechanisms
by which understanding can be built cross-culture, cross-sector, and cross-nation. This is needed both to avert the repetition of past catastrophic mistakes
and also to get onto the front of the white water wave of international change,
by thinking afresh about inclusive internationalist strategies. Most of us at present do little more than gasp for air in the turbulent water astern of its unstoppable progress. I am thus personally convinced of the need for something like
the international exchange, learning, and networking of the type which this
chapter suggests.
These new approaches for a World 3.0 reinvigorate foreign policy meetings and stimulate creativity as well as new networks among innovative young
people.
However, they are not designed to be the exotic PR garments of classic
power politics used for decoration by politicians.
The new networks should not limit themselves to promoting the appropriate
soft factors, but must exert direct influence on politicians and their plans as
well as stimulating young politicians in different regions and parties. To
achieve this the new networks must design concrete action plans and initiate
parliamentary resolutions.
Calling for political action through the medium of public criticism, warnings,
or demands usually fizzles out or gets stuck in red tape. These soft-policy net356
works should fashion their ideas in a dual strategy of power and diplomacy,
because nothing can be implemented without power. This was demonstrated
in Libya.
The new networked foreign policy is no longer inter-governmental but
inclusive.
Its several centers of gravity are located not only in the governments of
countries but in the global networks of the worlds real movers and shakers as
well.
Turning from eccentric materialism to values

The networks reflect a re-orientation of human individuals. The trend in elites
is shifting away from excessive materialism, maximum profit and high-class
consumption to a more fulfilled life, just as described by Fritz Kraemer in his
chapter On Elitism.
Foreign policy can benefit from consideration of values, active support for
the environment and for people.
Increasingly individuals around the world bring their own vision and ideas
to bear in foreign policy.
Split Global LeadershipDistribute Responsibilities from the U.S.

towards Allies
Most importantly, each nation should analyze its own national interests and
have its own clear aims, demonstrating eagerness and ambition to design its
own distinctive foreign policy and not follow hegemons slavishly; regular reevaluations and adaptation to realities on the ground are needed demands
DrAugust Hanning, the former German BND President and member of the
International Advisory Board of the World Security Network Foundation.
357
The approach of the Western world is still Washington-centric, which does

not fit the reality of a globalized world and overburdens the U.S. Our alliance
still reminds me of a family enterprise in which Uncle Sam has more than 20
grown up sons and daughters but still makes all decisions and treats them as
his children. They wait to see what daddy says, from the lazy back seats of
NATO. The same is true in the E.U. where smaller nations should lead in some
areas, not leaving it all to Germany and France.
It is time to give allies real global responsibilities and take over leadership
in the alliance supported by Washington. Principal allies should take the lead
in hot spots of foreign affairs, get more involved and take over special tasks
in a new diplomatic burden sharing.
Here are some examples: Estonia is the master pupil of the E.U. and has
established a booming nation from the ruins of the smallest republic of the
USSR within only 20 years. It could take the EU lead for the reform process in
Greece, Tunisia and Egypt. Denmark could take care of the reconciliation
process in the Western Sahara conflict between Morocco and Algeria. Norway can take the EU lead in the Israel/Palestine talks. France might coordinate the peace process in the Caucasus and Syria, together with Turkey. The
United Kingdom could lead the anti-piracy mission. Germany has the best
image of all NATO countries in Pakistan and among its powerful military having provided many of crucial weapons to Pakistan in their two wars with India
under the Hallstein Doctrin in 1965 and 1971. Berlin could therefore take the
lead in all Afghan peace negotiations involving Pakistan, with traditional
Pashtun obligations of good will from the ISI and the generals. Japan could
coordinate the Kashmir reconciliation process with India and Pakistan.
Washington must provide leadership and back those negotiations with its
power-projection, but should rely on its allies whenever they have advantageous positions to offer.
Ideally the lead negotiator should represent the EU and NATO with the US
and other allies represented in a Joint NATO-E.U. Team.
For now this approach is moribund, as all allies look for decisions from the
U.S. and do almost nothing without a plan from Washington (with the honour358
able exception of Libya in 2011), adopting the easy low profile of passive
administrators.
Creativity, creativity, creativity

The West knows how to market Apples iPhone, Big Mac, Porsche, Facebook, or Gucci perfectly. Hundreds of thousands of talented people work on
marketing strategies, developing new ideas every day on a global level. In
foreign policy, we are light years behind. This realm is dominated by unimaginative administrative policy focusing on crisis management, mere analyses,
and administration of problem areas. Form and style are highly regarded, not
substance and result. Renowned institutes and large conventions analyse
problems, but do not offer creative solutions. This approach needs a fundamental re-orientation, shifting the focus to creative action and comprehensive
planning.
Just one example from August Hanning: We know the backers of piracy
and the money-flow, and even their houses in Dubai, but do not put them
on very black-list like terrorists; instead our ships patrol the Indian Ocean
at very high cost. It is a clear interest of trading countries like Germany,
China, Japan, or the U.S. to guarantee free global trade on the oceans, but
is there an effective joint action
plan to deal with pirates and their
land bases, like in the Malacca
Strait?
We urgently need more creativity as a fundamental element of
World 3.0, guided by the wisdom
of creative geniuses like Albert Einstein, who often repeated: Imagination is more important than
knowledge and We cant solve
problems by using the same level
of thinking we used when we created them.
We urgently require more creativity

as an important element of World
3.0. It ought to be guided by the
wisdom of creative geniuses such
as Albert Einstein, who often
repeated: Imagination is more
important than knowledge and
We cant solve problems by using
the same level of thinking we used
when we created them.
359
Options and planning

Most important in crafting a foundation for a new approach in foreign
affairs are the following steps: analyzing all available options, carefully integrating them into strategy, and considering the entire range of opinions at
home as well as abroad, avoiding blinkered manipulation in one narrow
direction.
We need option papers with price tags and time schedules from all departments of defense, foreign affairs and international development (including
NGOs, research institutes and other players) leading to a common action
plan for implementation, starting with the Afghanistan mission.
We ought to collect systematically the experiences of crisis-hit countries in
civil development and military interventions during the last few decades, discuss them among allies and devise a framework plan for the most effective
support in future.
We should not invent the wheel again and again, but collect experiences
from the past, and truly learn from history.
Better planning of international missionsno ignorance or

arrogance please!
For every international mission, we require precise and comprehensive
planning for engagement of at least ten years. The missions in Iraq and
Afghanistan lacked that.
Success depends on hard and soft factors: military, diplomatic, governmental and federal concepts, economic development, agriculture, energy and
water supply, education, supporting new elites as well as society at large.
Planning must include regularly monitoring funding as well as implementation of objectives in a transparent comprehensible and manageable way.
360
We always demand both entry and exit scenarios with realistic time frames
and contingency plans detailing what we would like to do and what can and
must be achieved.
We must therefore be able to estimate mission expenses and what we are
willing to spend.
We must avoid any ignorance or arrogance which leads us to underestimate undeveloped countries and shift our perceptions from the Potomac or the
Thames to the Tigris or the Khyber Pass. Planning must begin with analyses of
what individuals in foreign countries require and what satisfies their specific
needs. We have to think and act locally. This corresponds with Fritz Kraemers
insistence on knowing the psychology of the nations involved. Too often we
find ourselves trapped in Western perceptions.
Get away from the mania and mantra of huge international peace conferences, state visits, and UN debates and return to earth by asking what the
local population thinks, needs, and wants.
Interventions only make sense if they include the necessary support to set up
acceptable, reliable, and just government supported by the countrys population; otherwise everything is built on quicksand.
Wasting tax revenue through corruption undermines the confidence of both
the local people and our own electorates. Hence all funds must be linked to
accountability and punitive clauses allowing international courts to examine
accusations of corruption. Hitherto the monitoring of funds has resembled a
toothless tiger, more or less encouraging abuse. When I complained to a
high-ranking advisor of the former Russian President Yeltsin that individuals
close to the Kremlin had misappropriated USD 400m of Western aid in the
late 1990s, he frankly replied: Who is responsible: the bear who eats the
honey pot, or the farmer who put it into the woods? He was right, blame us,
not them.
361
Cost efficiency
Every option needs a price tag. We need to know the cost of action (and
inaction) as precisely as possible. Currently in foreign policy vagueness prevails. Ultimately wars cost trillions of dollars and Euros, with the U.S. having
already spent an estimated USD 800bn in Iraq and USD 440bn in Afghanistan alone. An additional USD 400bn had been spent for other purposes in
the war on terror.
Every foreign affairs craftsman knows well: never use expensive military
tools if you can achieve the same goal with less expensive, softer ones. How
much more security did we get for so much money?
Timing and action control

Each item in the action plan needs realistic short- and long-term time labels.
Every six months the governments concerned must regulate the efficiency of
actions using a check list; just like any craftsman or entrepreneur monitoring
the progress of their business activities.
Reporting and open debate

In open and democratic societies, politicians must make public their intentions and objectives as well as when and how they intend to achieve them.
Nothing should be concealed. Each government should provide a detailed
annual report to their parliament concerning international hot spots such as
Afghanistan. In 2010, working with all political parties in the German
Bundes
tag, the World Security Network promoted the publication of an
annual Progress Report on Afghanistan for the first time after nine years in
combat. Democracies are strong if they permit open debate and weak if
everything is covered up, not carefully discussed in parliaments as well as in
public.
362
Smart dual strategies needed

For each hot spot we need sophisticated dual strategies combining power
and reconciliation, military and diplomatic means, economic development
and stabilization.
Unfortunately too often chaotic crisis management and fragmented parallel
planning by the military, diplomatic corps, and development aid agencies
fails to achieve maximum output with minimum input. This must change quickly,
because we must achieve more with less money.
With all the facts, different opinions, options available, costs and local
human needs, the drafting of a dual strategy paper begins by taking account
of all the soft and hard factors of peacemaking. The best and most efficient as
well as least expensive operational options are part of the detailed master
plan. The prevailing approach of holding one conference after another is ineffective. The areas covered in planning must include all the economic and
social aspects of interventions including energy supply, jobs, agricultural production, food supply, and educational opportunities.
Only a dual strategy with two equal pillars consisting of hard and soft elements, power and reconciliation, is capable of addressing these challenges.
More than ever we need such smart power policies for each global hot spot.
This worked excellently in the NATO Harmel Report of 1967 which combined
defense and deterrence capabilities with dtente. This was the foundation for
NATOs Twin Track Decision in December 1979 linking the deployment of
Pershing II and cruise missiles with a zero-option should the Soviet Union
destroy its SS-20 missiles.
Let us not be nave: we need hard and soft elements. This was made very
clear by Fritz Kraemer who taught us that raw power is needed to check wild
fanatics. Diplomacy requires the threat of power to back it up and nothing
works without this basic element of World 1.0.
Carl von Clausewitz sought to show in his famous book On War that war
is the continuation of politics by other (hard) means. Hence (soft) political factors prevail over weapons which are merely tools of politics. This political
363
analysis, favored by Clausewitz, is too often pushed aside in a purely technocratic, military-oriented planning process. Weapons and their use must be
part of an over-arching political master plan. Devising it and discussing all
available options require time, as Kraemer pointed out.
We must be aware that soft factors are not the same as weakness, and
hard factors should not always be confused with strength. Soft factors can
turn out to be strong if employed intelligently and hard factors can ultimately
result in weakness where they are not backed by a smart political plan.
A merger of soft and hard factors is needed in new dual strategies, to extend the basis of power by employing the smart new approaches of
World 3.0.
We need a new, larger toolboxa Manual for World 3.0encompassing
best practice from all conflicts as well as compendiums of lessons learned from
all elements of political and social life, diplomacy, think tanks, military, economy (jobs, water, energy, agriculture), education; we must also recruit and set
up a responsible elite. Then we can draw lessons from the mistakes of the past
and implement effective foreign policy to shape a safer world in the age of
globalization.
We must stick to our fundamental principles and maintain sufficient military
power as the basis of foreign affairs. Simultaneously we must strive to be
innovative, creative, flexible, and cost-efficient, master-minding and creating
a better world for our children.
Appropriate and sensible defense efforts vital

The Europeans continue to waste too much money on the development of
different national defense products such as tanks or aircraft. The Pentagon is
still pumping funds into antiquated military projects levered into budget
planning by influential lobbies. These outdated procurement procedures
require urgent scrutiny: the results are not convincing, too much money is
wasted, and some of the equipment plans originate in the Cold War. New
methods of attack, like cyber warfare, require innovative defense methods
as well.
364
Sufficient and credible defense capabilities must be maintained. Europe in

particular has neglected defense expenditure instead of working to pool
capacities with less money and reduce rampant bureaucracy. Why not produce one European submarine with a unified command, or two EU aircraft
carriers? Why is there no united air lift but national structures? Why can 2.1
million soldiers in Europe only send 60,000 troops abroad? European foreign
policy is impotent and impossible without sufficient investment in defense and
joined-up European structures.
Human rights and UN-concurrent constitutions

The protection and support of human rights as well as the implementation of
the UN Charter on a global level constitute the soul of foreign policy called for
by Fritz Kraemer. We consider human dignity inviolable and the essence of
politics. In authoritarian countries, the president and his family clan or the ruling political party are the measure of all things to which millions of people are
subordinated. The free few are starkly contrasted to the subjugated many.
The UN Charter of June 26, 1945 proposes a broad security approach
resting not just on the concept of deterrence or military power. Its objectives
are more timely than ever, because they reflect the understanding of life
of todays elite in almost every country as well as their desire for self-determination.
We the people of the United Nations determine to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought
untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights,
in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and
women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under
which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other
sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in large freedom, and for these ends: to
practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security,
and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods,
that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ
365
international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples.
Freedom-loving, democratic societies succeeded in the struggle against two
powerful totalitarian ideologies, National Socialism and Communism. These
societies paid a high price in vast numbers of victims and the active involvement of numerous individuals such as Fritz Kraemer from the beginning of
World War II in 1939 to the disintegration of the USSR in 1991. After hot and
cold conflicts spanning 42 years with more than 50 million victims and endless suffering for millions of human beings, our democracies finally prevailed.
This was an enormous endeavor covering two generations. The dictators
nearly prevailed. We were successful, however, because our ideology corresponded with our true needs and values, those of individual people who won
their freedom in a heroic struggle.
Currently we are involved in a new phase of a struggle with two large
authoritarian states, the Peoples Republic of China and Russia, as well as
remaining smaller dictatorships like Iran and North Korea. They are intent on
preserving state power and rejecting the full implementation of democratic
UN principles and respect for all human rights. Will the system of free democracies or the concept of state-managed development with politically deprived
citizens prevail?
Once more we need an active yet prudent policy focusing on the courageous implementation of UN principles and clear advocacy of these values in
friendly dialogue with China and Russia.
American and NATO interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan has helped
develop fragile democratic structures whose survival remains uncertain. The
embedding of democracy in the underdeveloped countries of North Africa
and the Middle East must be achieved through a prudent, phased policy. The
first step should be the framing of democratic constitutions adapted to local
conditions, and their maintenance by independent constitutional courts. The
UN Charter, and best practice as evidenced by the successful and phased
erection of the Federal Republic of Germany from 1945 to 1949 on the ruins
of the Nazi dictatorship, serve as examples. Constitutional conventions
endowed with the authority of all the countrys political and ethnic groupings
366
provide the basis for positive development. We must build and support thousands of partnerships with the different elements of freedom as was done with
the democratic movements in Eastern Europe.
Instabilities and uprisings occur all over the world from a lack of justice
and freedom and poor living conditions, as in the Arab Spring. Any ally of
the West must improve all three or it will be a source of conflict. Peacemaking without justice, freedom, and fair living conditions is a mission
impossible.
A focus on centralized presidential constitutions, which the U.S. mistakenly
forced upon Afghanistan and Iraq, must be avoided. Instead decentralized,
indigenous structures should be fostered locally. This enables the participation
of different tribes and regions in the development of their country.
I agree with the sentiments of my friend Professor Friedbert Pflger, a member of the World Security Network Foundation International Advisory Board,
in his Kings College speech in London in 2009: Human rights should be one
cornerstone of a democracys foreign policy. The spread of individual freedom, democracy, and justice enhances also the security of free nations.
Human rights can only be protected and safeguarded at home if they are also
a serious issue abroad. A democracy, which enjoys rights at home, but does
not care about rights abroad, will lose the support of its own people. Different
cultures, historical backgrounds, or religious traditions do not allow us to
apply the concept of a Westminster democracy everywhere at any time.
Therefore human rights policies should concentrate on gross violations of
rights such as torture. Its aim should be to fight the hell, not to create heaven.
Accordingly not preaching, a we-know-better attitude, arrogance, or self-righteousness should be avoided. Human rights policy may not come about as
moral imperialism.
If freedom movements in one country are being cruelly suppressed by a
dictator, revolution can be supported by supporting Free Parliaments in exile
in specific cases, such as Syria (and arguably Iran, Belarus or Cuba). These
institutions could draft UN compliant constitutions and represent the will of the
oppressed even while the UN Charter and human rights are not respected in
their home countries. The recognition of the National Transitional Council in
367
Benghazi, Libya, by many countries and the establishment of a Syrian National

Council in Istanbul in 2011 were steps in this right direction.
Promote the Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect

Tolerance and respect are the lifeblood of peaceful coexistence and crucial
elements of soft power peacemaking.
As the American philosopher Eric Hoffer once said, a war is only won after
you have turned the defeated enemy into your friend.
The German philosopher Emmanuel Kant wrote: The state of peace among
men and women is not the natural statea state of peace must be established.
A key recognition in achieving this is that a successful strategy for any crisis
which demands international intervention must aim to give all the actors
involved what World Security Network UK Trustee Major General ret. Sir
Sebastian Roberts has called a golden bridge to the future, of realistic hope
and self respect.
These wise sayings are truer today than ever before. The soft factors of
peacemaking are often sidelined in favor of harder military instruments. Moreover, focus on the promotion of stability by military means and homeland
security has led to an unbalanced approach.
The human soulwhich Fritz Kraemer considered fundamental in politics
the needs of the victims of oppression, and their suffering, at the heart of
peacemaking, have almost been forgotten. Instead cold power policy has
prevailed, unable to produce real stability or sustainable peace.
World 3.0 must integrate the wisdom of experts in reconciliation like my
friend Archbishop Alfons Nossol from Opole/Oppeln in Upper Silesia in
Poland, who over decades has made an immense contribution to reconciling
the Germans and the Polish peopleso called archenemies for hundreds of
years: Only a real, honest policy of reconciliation can bring about long-lasting
368
World 3.0 must integrate the wisdom of

experts in reconciliation like my friend
Archbishop Alfons Nossol from Opole/
Oppeln in Upper Silesia in Poland who over
decades has made an immense contribution
to reconciling the Germans and the Polish
peopleso called archenemies for hundreds
of years, teaching: Only a real, honest
policy of reconciliation can bring about long
lasting peace and create the foundation for a
thriving coexistence between former enemies.
Power politics is a necessary complement to
this peace policy, to the extent that it helps
protect human rights and human dignity and
checks the powers of evil.
peace and create the foundation for a thriving coexistence between former
enemies. Power politics is a necessary complement to this peace policy, to the
extent that it helps protect human rights and human dignity and checks the powers of evil. Power politics as such is, however, insufficient: its effect is too limited;
it leads in the wrong direction. It must subordinate itself to the primacy of the
thinking heart and loving mind. Power politics is only justified in the service
of peace. We must give a strong voice to the Christian message of peace in
order to provide it with significance in all countries, cultures, and religions. Only
then will we eliminate the deep-seated roots of terrorism, war, and displacement
and bring about a world with less hatred and less violence. A Christian peace
policy means: We must see our enemy as a person and as our neighbor possessing individual dignity. We must approach him with an open heart and
express convincingly our will to reconciliation and a new beginning. An active
policy of reconciliation shatters the encrusted shell of ideology from darker
years; through intensive work it melts away traditional prejudices and stimulates
the will on all sides to end the tragedy of animosities.
Nossol demands that we should not merely tolerate others; rather, we should
accept them with all their differences. This does not mean self-abandonment,
369
but respect for the special features, characteristics, and traditions of a world
with seven billion people, so richly diverse in cultures and ideals.
We now need a global promotion of tolerance as well as a new state of
peace and balance for our global village, encompassing all religions and
other positive forces on Earth. We need a global vision and a soul. We need
globally respected moral values and their continuous promotion. Then we will
be able to avoid the often proclaimed clash of civilizations, and demonstrate
that the real clash is that between the perversions and prejudices of civilisations: the clash of barbarisms.
We own this world intellectuallywe have influencewe have the powerwe have a vast pool of creativity and optimism.
I am calling for an elite capable of taking over the promotion of tolerance
and respect as the common soul of our global village now, without having to
wait for politics.
I am calling for the impeachment of the few extremists by empowering in all
countries a responsible elite to work for a better world of moral values, particularly for our children.
We already have Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect (for details see
www.codesoftolerance.com; which is a focus project of the World Security
Network Foundation) in all religions and cultures. We have only forgotten our
common roots. They can be found in Christianity, in Judaism, in Hinduism, and
in Buddhismrespect for all creatures as well as the promotion of human
dignity and love. We must all promote our common values very actively and
stand up as the no-longer silent majority in all 193 states against the propaganda of hate.
Contain and unmask the radicals

Most Muslim (as well as Western) countries are bound to be involved in
struggles against Islamist militant movements, including al-Qaeda, within and
beyond their own borders, over the next decades.
370
Whoever claims to kill in the name of Islam, yet does not have actual justification
from Islam, places himself outside the Islamic community (Ummah), isolates himself,
degrades Islam, and sins against the conscience of the prophet himself. He is guilty
according to the Sharia and must therefore be punished in accordance with Islamic
law. According to Islamic law, killing of civilians in Jihad is principally forbidden;
moreover, terrorist acts and the preaching of violence are violations of the Quran
and the Hadith. Terrorists should be excluded from the Community of the Believers
by a formal Sharia-ruling as non-believers.
371
The hard factors of security are essential and may play a dominant role, but
will not be enough to win. Insufficient attention is still being paid to the soft
factors of peace-making, comprising two elements:
First, a roll-back policy aimed at de-radicalizing, demobilizing, and re-integrating individuals and groups involved in insurgency and terrorism.
Second, a smart containment policy aimed at preventing fresh recruitment
of young Muslims to kill fellow-Muslims as well as Western individuals in the
name of Allah.
Several national governments, such as those in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen,
Saudi Arabia, or Somalia, also face the task of demobilizing and re-integrating former terrorists and insurgents.
More than a dozen countriesincluding Singapore, Saudi Arabia, and
Algeriahave already successfully established so called de-radicalization
and disengagement programs aimed at facilitating the social re-integration of
enemy combatants, ensuring they will not return to violent jihad.
An important part of the effort is to convince the former radicals of Islams
true character.
Terrorist criminals and hate preachers around the world justify their deeds
with commandments from Islam, both from the Quran and the example of the
prophet, the Hadith.
In their view, these acts are justified; they are in fact part of their duty as
Muslims and thus not evil but good. This distorted interpretation of Islam motivates and instigates their crimes and must be the focus of any containment and
roll-back policy. The containment of and struggle against Islamic extremism
and criminals should therefore focus on the true teaching of Islam.
There is convincing evidence that neither the Quran nor the Hadith justify
acts of terror, so Islam-based terrorism can be denied the oxygen required for
its survival, limiting its attractiveness for followers and unmasking the perpetrators as pure criminals.
372
One can even go a few steps further: whoever claims to kill in the name of
Islam, yet does not have actual justification from Islam, places himself outside
the Islamic community (Ummah), isolates himself, degrades Islam, and sins
against the conscience of the prophet himself. He is guilty according to the
Sharia and must therefore be punished in accordance with Islamic law. Consequently the following approach is proposed.
The Higher Ifta Council, established by the organization of Islamic Conferences with representative councillors from throughout the Muslim World issuing fatwas on all pertinent issues, should be institutionalised as the main clearing committee for Muslim as well as Western countries in cases of terrorism,
with the purpose of benchmarking their actions against true Islam. The King of
Saudi Arabia should establish a new Council of Islamic legal experts. Foreign
courts, public prosecutors, and government departments could turn to such a
council to obtain binding expert opinions for the judgement of crimes justified
by Islama Royal Sharia Council of the Custodian of the Holy Mosques of
Mecca and Medina.
When invoked, this Council would quickly decide Islamic legal questions
presented to it and deliver its expert opinion. Since terrorist crimes resemble
one another, the Council could treat numerous cases with the same formulation. The committee should include the Imams of the two holiest sites of Islam,
since their opinions carry particular weight. According to Islamic law, killing
of civilians in Jihad is specifically forbidden; moreover, terrorist acts and the
preaching of violence are violations of the Quran and the Hadith.
Terrorists should be excluded from the Community of the Believers by a formal Sharia ruling, as non-believers, and should no longer be allowed to visit
Mecca or any mosque for many years or even their life-time.
The expert opinions of this Council would deprive both preachers of violence
and terrorist criminals of their ideological oxygen. Furthermore their judgements
would be an important instrument against the recruitment of further terrorists.
These expert opinions can be used in ongoing criminal trials in Muslim and
Western countries to evaluate claims of justification and degrees of personal
guilt.
373
Capitalism
is good, but
excessive greed or
too much public debt
destroying the foundation of
our democratic societies is lethal.
The XXL-Greedies and XXL-public debt are
sawing away at the branch on which we all
are sitting in the West. Excesses created by the
exaggerated greed for profit, developed at Wall Street in
the 1990s and spread throughout the entire world, endanger
the credibility of our capitalist democratic orders. The negative impact
on state budgets additionally undermines our ability to finance our defense
capabilities as well as our foreign and development policies. Moreover, they
substantially endanger the stability of several countries and thus pose a new national
threat. The governments of the U.S. and Europe must bring their budgets in order and
reduce their excessively high deficits to an upper level of 60 percent of GDP. Then we can avoid
the permanent paralysis of capitalism and authoritarian systems prevailing over democracies.
374
This measure underscores the particular characteristics of terrorist guilt.

Such expert opinions would increase the effectiveness of court rulings in nonMuslim countries that have suffered Islamist extremist terrorism, like the U.S.,
the U.K., Spain and Germany, and strengthen the deterrent effect of the
penalty.
We have to contain and impeach all radicals, whether they are Muslim terrorists anywhere in the world or Koran-burning fanatics, whether in Florida or
Israel, or Neo-Nazis in Germany or Russia. The so-called silent majorities in
all countries must stand up, articulate their demands and fight for our vision of
a free and better world.
Red lines for XXL-Greedies and XXL-Public Debt

The American-dominated West was capable of winning the wars against
Adolf Hitlers inhuman Nazi totalitarianism in World War II and against Communism during the Cold War because it had enormous economic power at its
disposal.
Without economic might, the sword of military power remains dull.
Just imagine if the economies of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR had prospered like those in the West. In this case the Communists would be ruling
Russia and Europe. We prevailed in the Cold War because the centrally controlled communist economies failed, resulting in the implosion of Communist
societies.
The Communist Party of the Peoples Republic of China learnt these lessons
and has consolidated its power with economic reforms and an annual growth
of ten percent during the past 30 years.
The United States and its European allies urgently need a solid economic
base in order to afford sufficient armed forces, current modernization programs, development aid, and economic support for underdeveloped countries.
375
Moreover, they face the challenge of avoiding the destabilization of high

unemployment (which paralyzed the Weimar Republic in Germany during the
1920s and 30s) and preserving the attractiveness of liberal political orders in
competition with authoritarian concepts practiced in the Peoples Republic of
China and Russia. Until now we have taken the Wests economic supremacy
for granted. Chinas rise will fundamentally alter this power balance.
The XXL-Greedies are sawing away at the branch on which we all are sitting in the West. Excesses created by exaggerated greed for profit, developed
at Wall Street in the 1990s and spread throughout the entire world, endanger
the credibility of capitalist democracy and considerably weaken the attractiveness of the U.S. in its competition with authoritarian countries.
Europes and the United States XXL public debt which burdens our children
and grand-children undermines the ability to finance defense capabilities as
well as foreign and development policies. Moreover, massive public debt
endangers the stability of many countries thus posing a new international
threat. Capitalism is good, but excessive greed and too much public debt
destroying the foundation of our democratic societies is lethal.
Simple hard-working people have been driven into debt by the big credit
card oligarchs, families ruined by mortgages, and whole states by many billions of too cheap money with wrong ratings of the risks involved. Banks and
funds made profits which pushed global debt over a cliff. Having placed five
billion dollars in large corporations as an investor and adviser for hedge
funds, I know outstanding, responsible managers, but I am also familiar with
unscrupulous speculators who only attach importance to money, not caring
about the political and social impact of their activities. These excesses cannot
be accepted any longer since they destroy the foundation of our democracy.
This is capitalistic terrorism against the majority by a greedy few.
Its the banks, not the tanks: The large banksGoldman Sachs has been
said to rule the worldcarry great responsibility for the budgetary foundation of our common security. The American President, Congress, and the
E.U. must remind banks and large hedge funds of their patriotic responsibility and must remove the weeds of subversive speculation through stricter
regulation.
376
Simultaneously the governments of the U.S. and Europe must get their
inflated and under-financed budgets in order within the next few years, reforming themselves like Estonia or Germany, and reduce their excessively high
deficits to an upper level of 60 percent of GDP. Then the permanent paralysis
of capitalism can be avoided, preventing authoritarian systems prevailing
over democracies. It is ironic and contradictory that China is both the United
States most powerful adversary and its largest creditor and banker.
The annual meeting of the economic elites at the World Economic Forum in
Davos, founded by genius, global networker and creative thinker Klaus
Schwab, reveals a growing responsibility among this peer group for positive
global development including climate protection and support for underdeveloped countries.Capitalism, in its current form, no longer fits the world around
us. We have failed to learn the lessons from the financial crisis. A global
transformation is urgently needed and it must start with reinstating a global
sense of social responsibility, said Klaus Schwab at the World conomic
E
Forum 18th January 2012. The 60 year-old German model of a Social Market
Economy with domesticated capitalism, economic growth, stable and humane
working conditions, good healthcare, high protection of the environment, and
a maximum of freedom is very successful and a global benchmark; not perfect
but worth learning from and copying as best practice.
More needs to be done to promote the responsibilities of the economic elite
for ethical standards and human progress as well. Or as Friedrich The Great
demanded 220 years ago: successful leaders must be an example of living
values for their people, or fail. Prussian values like integrity, honor, discipline,
and service to the country need a revival in many nations, best combined with
a fresh American spirit and zeal for individual liberty, a splendid combination
of the best old and new.
Fair trade relations with the developing countries

International trade and investment are the most important drivers of economic growth in the developing world, explains Ambassador Frank Lavin,
former Under Secretary for International Trade at the U.S. Department of Commerce. It can also be an important socio-politico integrator, helping less-de377
veloped societies connect with ideas, talent, and markets around the world.
However, not all nations are equipped to benefit from this opportunity. The
developed nations must work with the developing nations to help the needy
countries develop investment codes and a regulatory environment to make
prosperity as easy as possible to attain.
Peace policy must keep an eye on the roots of conflicts. In numerous countries millions of people are struggling for survival. Food production is insufficient. Small farmers are abandoned by the national governments. While a
billion people in the industrialized world have too much to eat and are suffering from obesity, another billion people in impoverished countries are undernourished. The West must provide fair sales opportunities for commodities
from conflict regions and developing countries and boost agricultural production in partnership with national governments. Creative and innovative
approaches are necessary in order to defuse simmering conflict potential,
otherwise the germs of terrorism, piracy, and hatred can settle in open
wounds.
To make matters worse, the international prices of important commodities
such as wheat, corn, rice, and cooking oil have been driven upwards over
several years by a few greedy hedge funds. Although it is not the only and not
even the main factor, as weather conditions, higher demand and other factors
have an important impact too, this speculation adds to price increases substantially. In 2010, the price of food increased by a third. Investment in food
derivatives such as futures and options have increased greatly. The website of
the Chicago Board of Trade even encourages speculators to speculate based
on expectations of directional price or spread movement in rough rice. Large
banks are indirectly involved in these investments. Millions of investments from
pension funds and life insurance companies nurture this speculation with agricultural raw materials.
It should be an international principle that one should never speculate with
the food of millions of impoverished people. In the Horn of Africa alone, 12
million people suffered from famine in 2011, destabilizing the countries of
East Africa and causing chaos and terrorism in Somalia. This is a transgression of capitalisms red line. A stop sign is necessary. We must not tolerate
this decadence. The UN as well as individual nation states should develop
378
instruments to curtail this dangerous and unscrupulous capitalism. Speculators must be committed to a socially responsible market economy. Effective
instruments to contain destabilizing speculation should comprise a variety of
measures: the introduction of obligatory disclosure by the U.S. Commodity
Futures Trading Commission and other stock exchange monitoring commissions, a ban on so called empty sales as well as investments by pension
funds and life insurances, a high special tax on such food speculation and
banning trading in government bonds by all banks and funds directly or
indirectly involved in such transactions.
Each of us carries a responsibility for our Global Village

This first draft of just a few new foreign policy ideas for todays world must
be further enhanced and refined. We should all add to the discussion to
improve our foreign policy and get actively involved.
World 3.0 depends on sufficient defense capability, which must be preserved. Without it the shell would lack a core and the forces of progress would
be naked and defenseless. World 3.0 rests on the classic World 1.0 of power
and national interest but continues its development. It provides a link between
the indispensable hard factors and the important, manifold, and often overlooked soft factors of peace-making aiming at tailored, innovative dual strategies for peace and liberty. It is responsive to the will of the local population
and does not force our values and ideas on others. It activates new global
elites for responsible improvement of the world in all areas, on the moral
foundation of the UN Charter and human rights. Its instruments are global
networks, knowledge transfer through mentoring programs, creativity, passion, promotion of the Human Codes of Tolerance and Respect, containment
of radicals, improved planning and control as well as large personal commitment, as advocated and practiced by Fritz Kraemer. This new design for foreign policy is preventative, action-oriented, extensive, profound, and takes
responsibility for the peaceful development of billions of the worlds citizens.
At the same time it is a rejection of the moral relativism which characterises
extremists of all kinds and an appeal to the civic spirit of the mostly silent
majorities of who currently leave the stage of world policy to the very few loud
radicals.
379
In the Global Village everyonethe smart politician, the

wealthy hedge fund manager, the poor student, the brave soldier, the elegant diplomat, or the prudent housewifehas
responsibility in a global puzzle, whether they live in China,
or the United States, South Africa, Norway or Egypt.
For what?
For more respect and harmony. For a safer and better future
for our children and grandchildren as well as seven billion
other human beings, your neighbours in peace, liberty, and
human dignity.
Dont wait for the UN, for your President, or for a miracle.
Seize your opportunityget involved

now in Networking a Safer World 3.0
and follow the marvellous example of
Dr Fritz raemer!
K
380
381

Author: Dr Hubertus Hoffmann, with contributions from Henry A. Kissinger, Alexander M. Haig Jr., Edward L. Rowny, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Paul D. Wolfowitz, Madeleine Kraemer Bryant, Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von Preussen, Klaus Naumann, Henning-Hubertus Baron von Steuben, Friedrich Merz, Joseph E. Schmitz, Herman Kahn, Vernon A. Walters and others. Including ecordings and letters provided by Dr Fritz Kraemer.
r
This book is the second edition of the hardcover limited edition Fritz Kraemer on ExcellenceMissionary, Mentor and
Pentagon Strategist from Dr Hubertus Hoffmann, published by the World Security Network Foundation in 2004.
Design and Graphics: Hermann & Anna Design, Munich, Germany
Dr Hubertus Hoffmann, London. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner
without prior written permission except in the case of brief quotations as part of critical reviews and articles. This book must
not be re-sold as new or like new for less than USD 29.90 in the U.S.A. or for less than the equivalent price or the price
defined by the publisher in other countries without permission of the publisher. Contact: info@verlag-inspiration.de
Translations: Dr Charles Weston, Charles Heard
Corrections: Melissa Dring, Sir Sebastian Roberts, Tillmann Dietrich
Special acknowledgements to Madeleine Kraemer Bryant, Edward L. Rowny, Sir Sebastian Roberts and Konrad Badenheuer
Picture Credit: U.S. National Archive/Richard Nixon Presidential Library (Cover and p. 247), Ullstein Bild (pp. 43/281,
126, 132/133, 144 [Walter Frentz], 187, 218, 220/221, 223, 224, 225, 229 [2], 232, 233 [2], 236, 237, 279, 299,
304, 305, 306, 307, 308/309, 322, 327, 331), Pennsylvania State Capitol/Bridgeman Berlin (p. 266f.), Dr Fritz Kraemer, Madeleine Kraemer Bryant, WSN (p. 21), Deutsches Bundesarchiv (German Federal Archive; pp. 24, 25, 143),
Sahabzada Yaqub-Khan (p. 36), Johann Sadony (p. 53), Joachim Hennig/mahnmal-koblenz.de (pp. 65, 66), Jrdis
Zhring (p. 87), Ed Rowny (pp. 164169), The White House (p. 216/217), Henning-Hubertus Baron v. Steuben (p. 269),
Jonathan Rahad (p. 335), The Legatum Institute / London (p. 353), Alfons Nosseol (p. 369), Ryan Lawler (p.374), and
DrHubertus Hoffmann.
Cover: Katja Reimer, Zeichensetzen GmbH, Wetzlar, Germany
Type: Maximilian Moj, Munich, Germany Printed by naberDRUCK GmbH, Hgelsheim, Germany
To order more books for USD 29.90 contact info@verlag-inspiration.de or amazon.com.
383
A fantastic book. Hubertus Hoffmann knows

how to describe the genius of a man, who has
influenced the thinking and planning of the
Pentagon for several decades, probably more than
anyone before him. Only history will tell what the
consequences of his ominous presence have been.
Norman Mailer
Iconic American author (The Naked and the Dead, 1948)

and Pulitzer Prize Winner in 1969 and 1980
Fritz Kraemer was the greatest single influence

of my formative years. An extraordinary man who
will be part of my life as long as I draw breath.
Fritz Kraemer is more up-to-date than ever.

This book is a monument to a man for whom
values a moral-ethical system of coordinates and
convictions comprised the hallmark of his life,
values that Fritz Kraemer would not surrender under
any circumstances. People of this calibre are the
exception in all ages, but today among our superficial, value-free, me generation they ought to be
a protected species. I think it is high time to remember
Fritz Kraemer and to take this book to heart.
Klaus Naumann
General, Chief of Staff Bundeswehr 19911996
Chairman NATO Military Committee 1996 1999
Henry A. Kissinger
U.S. National Security Advisor 1969 1975
U.S. Secretary of State 1973 1977
For me, Dr Kraemers lifetime of service confirms

the importance of the Nations elites in pursuing
and advancing the value of a free society.
I can think of no individual whose patient
tutelage made a more meaningful contribution
to the shaping of my own worldview.
Alexander M. Haig Jr.

NATO SACEUR 1974 1979
U.S. Secretary of State 19811982
I like him and read his stuff I appreciate to have

an intelligent appraisal by someone who really
understands great forces at work in the world.
Its been very helpful.
Richard Nixon
U.S. President 1969 1974
Fritz Kraemer was the Pentagons only global

strategic thinker and the countrys only philosopher
who fought the good fight.
Edward L. Rowny
U.S. Lieutenant General and Ambassador
What a special person Fritz Kraemer was.

His courageous and brilliant career was an
example for us all. I had the highest respect for him.
Donald H. Rumsfeld
U.S. Secretary of Defense 1975 1977 and 20012006
If there is anyone in the Pentagon who has stood for

the good and the true, it is Fritz Kraemer. He knows
what he stands for and says what he stands for.
Herman Kahn
Fritz Kraemer was almost invariably right. I was
a great beneficiary of that. Hundreds of people
who have been touched by him do not only still
cherish his memory, but I believe have had their
lives affected by his ideas and his example.
I believe the spirit of Fritz Kraemer still lives.
Paul D. Wolfowitz
U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense 20012005
President World Bank 20052007
Futurologist and Founder Hudson Institute

Fritz Kraemer SECURITY

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fritz Kraemer SECURITY

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Hubertus Hoffmann

True Keeper of the Holy Flame

Stories told by Henry A. Kissinger, Alexander M. Haig Jr., Edward L. Rowny,

True Keeper of the Holy Flame

True Keeper of the Holy Flame

Stories told by Henry A. Kissinger, Alexander M. Haig Jr.,

Madeleine Kraemer Bryant, Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von

Vernon A. Walters and friends

A World Security Network Foundation Publication

U.S. Library of Congress Control Number: 2012931874

Preface: The True Keeper of the Holy Flame by Hubertus Hoffmann

The Prophet and the Policymaker by Henry A. Kissinger

Fritz G.A. KraemerMissionary, Mentor and Pentagon Strategist by Hubertus Hoffmann

Mentoring and Tutoring Dr Kraemer Style by Hubertus Hoffmann

Provocative Weakness by Fritz Kraemer

Infamous Conspiracy Theory by Hubertus Hoffmann

The Woman behind the Man by Madeleine Kraemer Bryant

Personality Plays a Decisive Role by Fritz Kraemer

A Daughters Impressions by Madeleine Kraemer Bryant

Enhance Patriotism and Overcome Provocative Weakness by Klaus Naumann

A Man of the Performance Elite by Friedrich Merz

You Have to Struggle against Evil by Paul Wolfowitz

Godfather of the Neocons? by Hubertus Hoffmann

Character Counts, not Position and Title by Fritz Kraemer

On ElitismLook for Men and Women of Excellence! by Fritz Kraemer

I am a Missionary! by Fritz Kraemer

An Admirer of General MacArthur and General Patton by Fritz Kraemer

Tactics or Conviction, Power or Influence by Fritz Kraemer

Mass Societies by Fritz Kraemer

Independence as Goal by Fritz Kraemer

The Swiss Mountainscape Around Me by Fritz Kraemer

The Overestimation of Intelligence and Brilliancy by Fritz Kraemer

Dr Kraemer: The True Dr Strangelove? by Hubertus Hoffmann

Absolute and Metaphysical Values by Fritz Kraemer

On Science and Faith by Britta Bjorkander Kraemer

Spiritual Destitution, Soulless Societies, Relative Truths by Fritz Kraemer

Devouring Information by Henry Kissinger and Fritz Kraemer

Relativism in Modern Societies by Fritz Kraemer

Grand Strategist in the Pentagon by Edward L. Rowny

A Medieval Knight in the 20th Century by Leslie Upton

Dr Kraemers Soft Power Elements of Peace-making by Hubertus Hoffmann

De- and Re-GenerationBourgeois America by Fritz Kraemer

Power is not a Privilege but an Obligation by Fritz Kraemer

U.S. Generals by Fritz Kraemer

How Fritz Kraemer Discovered Alexander Haig by Fritz Kraemer

What it Means to be an American Soldier by Fritz Kraemer

Nothing is Possible without Power by Fritz Kraemer

Washington behind Closed Doors by Fritz Kraemer

Fighting the Cold War from the Pentagon by Hubertus Hoffmann

A Diplomat Often Lacks a Sense of Reality by Fritz Kraemer

U.S. PowerWe Have to Shape Reality by Fritz Kraemer

9/11 by Fritz Kraemer

When a Bourgeois Society becomes Powerless by Fritz Kraemer

Modern Man is Not Only a Homo Economicus by Fritz Kraemer

In Memory of Jay Lovestonea Convinced Trade Unionist of AFL-CIO by Fritz Kraemer

We, the Bourgeois People by Fritz Kraemer

The Greatest Threat to the World: Moral Relativism by Fritz Kraemer

Why Kraemer and Kissinger Split by Hubertus Hoffmann

Fritz Kraemer as an Aristocrat in the Pentagon by Herman Kahn

A Man of Unshakeable Selflessness by Vernon A. Walters

No Interests to Represent, no Projects to Sell by Fritz Kraemer

A Prussian throughout His Life by Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von Preussen

Elite, Chivalry, Aristocracy, Honor by Fritz Kraemer

Preface: The True Keeper of the Holy Flame by Hubertus Hoffmann

The Prophet and the Policymaker by Henry A. Kissinger

Fritz G.A. KraemerMissionary, Mentor and Pentagon Strategist by Hubertus Hoffmann

Mentoring and Tutoring Dr Kraemer Style by Hubertus Hoffmann

Provocative Weakness by Fritz Kraemer

Infamous Conspiracy Theory by Hubertus Hoffmann

The Woman behind the Man by Madeleine Kraemer Bryant

Personality Plays a Decisive Role by Fritz Kraemer

A Daughters Impressions by Madeleine Kraemer Bryant

Enhance Patriotism and Overcome Provocative Weakness by Klaus Naumann

A Man of the Performance Elite by Friedrich Merz

You Have to Struggle against Evil by Paul Wolfowitz

Godfather of the Neocons? by Hubertus Hoffmann

Character Counts, not Position and Title by Fritz Kraemer

On ElitismLook for Men and Women of Excellence! by Fritz Kraemer

I am a Missionary! by Fritz Kraemer

An Admirer of General MacArthur and General Patton by Fritz Kraemer

Tactics or Conviction, Power or Influence by Fritz Kraemer

Mass Societies by Fritz Kraemer

Independence as Goal by Fritz Kraemer

The Swiss Mountainscape Around Me by Fritz Kraemer

The Overestimation of Intelligence and Brilliancy by Fritz Kraemer

Dr Kraemer: The True Dr Strangelove? by Hubertus Hoffmann

Absolute and Metaphysical Values by Fritz Kraemer

On Science and Faith by Britta Bjorkander Kraemer

Spiritual Destitution, Soulless Societies, Relative Truths by Fritz Kraemer

Devouring Information by Henry Kissinger and Fritz Kraemer

Relativism in Modern Societies by Fritz Kraemer

Grand Strategist in the Pentagon by Edward L. Rowny

A Medieval Knight in the 20th Century by Leslie Upton

Dr Kraemers Soft Power Elements of Peace-making by Hubertus Hoffmann

De- and Re-GenerationBourgeois America by Fritz Kraemer

Power is not a Privilege but an Obligation by Fritz Kraemer

U.S. Generals by Fritz Kraemer

How Fritz Kraemer Discovered Alexander Haig by Fritz Kraemer

What it Means to be an American Soldier by Fritz Kraemer

Nothing is Possible without Power by Fritz Kraemer

Washington behind Closed Doors by Fritz Kraemer

Fighting the Cold War from the Pentagon by Hubertus Hoffmann

A Diplomat Often Lacks a Sense of Reality by Fritz Kraemer

U.S. PowerWe Have to Shape Reality by Fritz Kraemer

9/11 by Fritz Kraemer

When a Bourgeois Society becomes Powerless by Fritz Kraemer

Modern Man is Not Only a Homo Economicus by Fritz Kraemer

In Memory of Jay Lovestonea Convinced Trade Unionist of AFL-CIO by Fritz Kraemer

We, the Bourgeois People by Fritz Kraemer

The Greatest Threat to the World: Moral Relativism by Fritz Kraemer

Why Kraemer and Kissinger Split by Hubertus Hoffmann

Fritz Kraemer as an Aristocrat in the Pentagon by Herman Kahn

A Man of Unshakeable Selflessness by Vernon A. Walters

No Interests to Represent, no Projects to Sell by Fritz Kraemer

A Prussian throughout His Life by Wilhelm-Karl Prinz von Preussen

Elite, Chivalry, Aristocracy, Honor by Fritz Kraemer

Otto von Bismarck by Fritz Kraemer

Excellence by Fritz Kraemer

Kraemerism by Fritz Kraemer

Democracy is SplendidEgalitarian Democracy is Deadly by Fritz Kraemer

Be Proud, My Son! by Fritz Kraemer

Arrogance and Absolute Values by Fritz Kraemer

Cleverling by Fritz Kraemer

Loneliness is the Price of Excellency by Fritz Kraemer

Inner Musicality is Needed for a Good Politician by Fritz Kraemer

Can the Office of Statesman be Learned? by Fritz Kraemer

What Qualities Must a Statesman Have? by Fritz Kraemer

What We Can Learn from History by Fritz Kraemer

Dr Fritz Kraemers Guidelines for You by Hubertus Hoffmann

Show Physical Courage, Take Risks! by Fritz Kraemer

Read Shakespeare! by Fritz Kraemer

Simplicity is the Final Result of Incredible Complication by Fritz Kraemer

Fritz Kraemer Today by Hubertus Hoffmann

The World Security Network Foundation

World 3.0 by Hubertus Hoffmann