Our Man in Brussels
Today President Bush delivered what we hope will be a landmark address on the future of European-American relations. Working from the base of momentum that the recent very successful trips of Secretary of State Rice and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld created, the President delivered a speech that nicely sums up America's new foreign policy. The MSM, blind as usual, has painted the trip as a “mending fences” mission critical to the President’s success. Nothing could be further from the truth. President Bush’s core message has not changed one whit. If the President is, as the MSM insists, in Europe to kiss and make up, one would expect the President to adopt a different tone, speak a different language, "moderate" his positions. He did nothing of the sort.
What has changed is that the President is now coming off a series of political victories—elections in Kabul, re-election to the Presidency, elections in Iraq, a new movement for peace on his terms in the Israel-Palestine conflict, reform picking up pace in the entire Muslim world—that make it impossible for European governments to continue to view the Bush Administration as an aberration the next “normal” administration will correct. In addition, as the facts on the ground continue to trend Bush’s way, more and more people are beginning to realize that the President’s prescriptions were not the ravings of a wild-eyed “neo-con” fantasy but, rather, a “new realist” view that continues to be vindicated by events.
Because of the importance of this speech (transcript here), we present it here in full, with our commentary:
Guy -- or Mr. Prime Minister -- thank you for your kind introduction and thank you for your warm hospitality.
Distinguished guests, and ladies and gentlemen, Laura and I are really glad to be back. I'm really pleased to visit Brussels again, the capital of a beautiful nation, the seat of the European Union and the NATO alliance.
The United States and Belgium are close allies, and we will always be warm friends.
“Guy” would be Guy Verhofstadt, Prime Minister of the Belgian Government. The opening of the speech struck us as very classically Bush in that he was classy, gracious, complementary and endearing to people who, to put it lightly, don’t deserve such treatment at all. The rhetoric is understandable given the context of NATO, but, make no mistake about it, the United States and Belgium are not very close allies at all, let alone “warm friends.”
To get a picture of what the day-to-day relationship between Belgium and the United States has been like recently, just Google any old comment by former Belgian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Louis Michel, now in a job much more up his alley as one of the E.U.'s commissioners. Michel seemed to be channeling Chomsky and Moore during the entire run-up to the Iraq War, never failing to say things so outrageously out-of-touch with reality that it made us gape in awe when we remembered that every last drop of our children’s’ blood is dedicated by treaty to defending both Michel and the irresponsible state he represents.
As much as we wished the President could tell the Belgians exactly what we think of them, we understand the restraint. In the meantime, we take solace in Monty Python’s classic “Prejudice” sketch.
You know, on this journey to Europe, I follow in some large footsteps. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin arrived on this continent to great acclaim.
An observer wrote, "His reputation was more universal than [Gottfried Wilhelm] Leibniz or [Isaac] Newton, Frederick [the Great] or Voltaire, and his character more beloved and esteemed than any or all of them."
The observer went on to say, "There was scarcely a peasant or citizen who did not consider him as a friend to humankind."
I've been hoping for a similar reception.
But Secretary Rice told me I should be a realist.
Bush’s ability to poke fun at himself is, we think, a big strength. Instead of getting all huffy and offended by the ridiculous anti-American protests in Brussels, he just makes a joke about it and moves on. Very well done.
I appreciate the opportunity, in this great hall, to speak to the peoples of Europe.
For more than 60 years, our nations stood together to face great challenges of history. Together, we have opposed totalitarian ideologies with our might and with our patience. Together, we united this continent with our democratic values. And together we mark year by year the anniversaries of freedom, from D-Day to the liberation of death camps, to the victories of conscience in 1989.
Our trans-Atlantic alliance frustrated the plans of dictators, served the highest ideals of humanity and set a violent century on a new and better course. And as time goes by, we must never forget our shared achievements.
Yet our relationship is founded on more than nostalgia. In a new century, the alliance of Europe and North America is the main pillar of our security. Our robust trade is one of the engines of world's economy. Our example of economic and political freedom gives hope to millions who are weary of poverty and oppression.
In all these ways our strong friendship is essential to peace and prosperity across the globe, and no temporary debate, no passing disagreement of governments, no power on Earth will ever divide us.
Of course, we rarely stood “together” in reality. During the entire Cold War the United States had to continually fight with the governments of Europe (from which we exclude, Berkeley-style, the government of the U.K.) to keep their eye on the ball. We’d hardly call the Pershing era a feel-good comradely time of solidarity. But, as with Belgium, there is a need to gloss over some of the particulars in favor of the big picture. In that big picture, the President is surely right; the U.S. and the E.U. have more in common than they think and, united in a goal, they stand a much better chance of realizing it.
Today, America and Europe face a moment of consequence and opportunity. Together, we can once again set history on a hopeful course, away from poverty and despair and toward development and the dignity of self-rule; away from resentment and violence and toward justice and the peaceful settlement of differences.
Seizing this moment requires idealism; we must see in every person the right and the capacity to live in freedom. Seizing this moment requires realism; we must act wisely and deliberately in the face of complex challenges. And seizing this moment also requires cooperation, because when Europe and America stand together, no problem can stand against us.
As past debates fade, as great duties become clear, let us begin a new era of trans-Atlantic unity.
Here the President attempts to bridge the “idealist-realist” divide by pointing out that both perspectives are necessary for a balanced, healthy foreign policy. The root of our policy must be our ideals. On this, the Father of Our Country’s birthday, we can affirm again the great American belief that freedom and liberty are not the arbitrary gifts of governments, nor even multi-lateral organizations, but instead are the God-given rights of all people, of all races and religions, everywhere. As the Boss recently put it, Europeans may giggle at this fact, but it is nonetheless true: American foreign policy will always at root be based on our values. None of this is remarkable. Indeed, it would be remarkable indeed if our policies did not reflect who we are as a people. Nor is this a claim to Divine Right or infallibility. Rather, it is the belief of an imperfect people imperfectly trying to help the world if we can do it.
However, the “realists” are the people who must carry that idealism out into the real world. As people who just this morning attended bilateral meetings between our people and leaders of the government here in the Near Abroad, we can attest first hand to the need to root our policy in the language of the real world, lest we be seen as rich dilettantes out of our depth, seeking to gratify our need for “meaning” more than offering a real helping hand. The weight of history and culture are almost unbearably heavy. It will take hard-headed and clear-eyed thinking to bring the world along in a liberal direction.
And, as any realist will tell you, one thing we absolutely need if our new policies are to succeed is a reasonable level of trans-Atlantic unity, if only to prevent hostile powers from perceiving a split in the West that can be used to advantage. The President’s goal now, it seems to us, is to form a least-common-denominator unity, which is more valuable than it sounds.
Moving from where he wants to go to current problems, the President turned first to the most pressing issue in our new foreign policy.
The Middle East
Our greatest opportunity and immediate goal is peace in the Middle East. After many false starts and dashed hopes and stolen lives, a settlement of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is now within reach.
America and Europe have made a moral commitment: We will not stand by as another generation in the Holy Land grows up in an atmosphere of violence and hopelessness.
America and Europe also share a strategic interest. By helping to build a lasting peace, we will remove an unsettled grievance that is used to stir hatred and violence across the Middle East.
Our efforts are guided by a clear vision: We're determined to see two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.
The Palestinian people deserve a government that is representative, honest and peaceful. The people of Israel need an end to terror and a reliable, steadfast partner for peace. And the world must not rest until there is a just and lasting resolution to this conflict.
All the parties have responsibilities to meet.
Arab states must end incitement in their own media, cut off public and private funding for terrorism, stop their support for extremist education and establish normal relations with Israel.
Palestinian leaders must confront and dismantle terrorist groups, fight corruption, encourage free enterprise and rest true authority with the people. Only a democracy can serve the hopes of Palestinians and make Israel secure and raise the flag of a free Palestine.
A successful Palestinian democracy should be Israel's top goal as well. So Israel must freeze settlement activity, help Palestinians build a thriving economy and ensure that a new Palestinian state is truly viable, with contiguous territory on the West Bank.
A state of scattered territories will not work.
As Palestinian leaders assume responsibility for Gaza and an increasingly larger territory, we will help them build the economic and political and security institutions needed to govern effectively.
And as that democracy rises, the United States and Europe will help the parties implement the road map to peace.
These vital steps are also difficult steps, because progress requires a new trust and because terrorists will do all they can to destroy that trust.
Yet we're moving forward and we're doing so in practical ways.
Next month in London, Prime Minister [Tony] Blair will host a conference to help the Palestinian people build the democratic institutions of their state.
[Palestinian Authority] President [Mahmoud] Abbas has the opportunity to put forward a strategy of reform which can and will gain support from the international community, including financial support. I hope he will seize the moment.
I've asked Secretary Rice to attend the conference and to convey America's strong support for the Palestinian people as they build a democratic state.
And I appreciate the prominent role that Prime Minister Blair and other European leaders are playing in the cause of peace.
We seek peace between Israel and Palestine for its own sake. We also know that a free and peaceful Palestine can add to the momentum of reform throughout the broader Middle East.
This passage more than any other illustrates just how strongly the winds of political fortune have shifted in the President’s favor. Nothing in the above passage is any different from when the President shocked the world by announcing that we are in favor of a Palestinian state, but only if the Palestinians elected new leadership, dumped the hateful Arafat (remember him?) and committed themselves to democracy.
At the time, the grandees of Europe, like Louis Michel, labeled the President’s approach counter-productive, if not downright reactionary. Yet, here we are a mere three years later, and the prospects for a peace settlement have not looked this good since the heady, disastrous days of Madrid and Oslo. We were constantly told that the road to peace in the Middle East passes through Jerusalem. As it turns out, Baghdad was a necessary first step. Not bad for a fascist chimp.
We were especially heartened to see the President call out the Arab states for teaching Jew-hatred and inciting terrorist violence. It’s hard to remember now, but there was a time not so long ago when only conservative blogsites seemed to be aware of the Nazi-like incitement preached in Arab schools. Now, it’s the stuff of Presidential speeches. You can bet that this is being translated into policy. Right now there is some luckless political officer in Riyadh or Cairo delivering the message that the U.S. has serious concerns about the Arabs’ bloody propaganda. The world won’t change overnight, but attention to the problem at this level can’t hurt.
Note also that the President has consciously put high expectations on Abbas, informing him that the opportunity is his to seize or to squander. As regular readers of this site will know, we have strong reservations about the P.A.’s ability to seriously undertake reforms, fight terrorism and live in peace with Israel. In fact, we just don’t see it happening. However, for the majority that disagree with this diagnosis it is important that they at least understand that the onus is not entirely on Israel. We remain skeptical, but cautiously hopeful.
If that hope is to have any chance of success, however, it is absolutely vital that the U.S. and the E.U. present a united front. This is why it is so significant that the U.K. has taken a lead role in some of the nuts-and-bolts negotiations. This situation is perfect for the U.K. as the traditional bridge over with Americans and Europeans meet and come to agreement. Blair has the right mix of idealism and realism to deal with the issue, though we continue to distrust the shameful anti-Semitism that seems to have deep roots in British culture, especially in the FCO. Time will tell.
In the long run, we cannot live in peace and safety if the Middle East continues to produce ideologies of murder and terrorists who seek the deadliest weapons.
Regimes that terrorize their own people will not hesitate to support terror abroad. The status quo of tyranny and hopelessness in the Middle East, the false stability of dictatorship and stagnation can only lead to deeper resentment in a troubled region and further tragedy in free nations.
The future of our nations and the future of the Middle East are linked and our peace depends on their hope and development and freedom.
Lasting successful reform in a broader Middle East will not be imposed from the outside. It must be chosen from within.
Governments must choose to fight corruption, abandon old habits of control, protect the rights of conscience and the rights of minorities.
Governments must invest in the health and education of their people, and take responsibility for solving problems instead of simply blaming others.
Citizens must choose to hold their governments accountable. The path isn't always easy, as any free people can testify. Yet there's reason for confidence.
Ultimately men and women who seek the success of their nation will reject an ideology of oppression and anger and fear. Ultimately men and women will embrace participation and progress.
And we are seeing evidence in an arc of reform from Morocco to Bahrain to Iraq to Afghanistan.
Our challenge is to encourage this progress by taking up the duties of great democracies. We must be on the side of democratic reformers. We must encourage democratic movements. And we must support democratic transitions in practical ways.
Europe and America should not expect or demand that reforms come all at once. It didn't happen in our own histories: My country took many years to include minorities and women in the full promise of America, and that struggle hasn't ended.
Yet while our expectations must be realistic, our ideals must be firm and they must be clear. We must expect higher standards from our friends and partners in the Middle East.
The government of Saudi Arabia can demonstrate its leadership in the region by expanding the role of its people in determining their future. And the great and proud nation of Egypt, which showed the way toward peace in the Middle East, can now show the way toward democracy in the Middle East.
As he did in his State of the Union Address, the President once again made it clear that our “allies” are not immune to the changes we expect to see in the Middle East. And by pointing out that the “arc of reform” embraces what the USG euphemistically calls the “Greater Middle East” (since we can’t say the “Muslim world”), the President once again was able to point to a range of recent successes big and small, from Morocco to Afghanistan.
The absolute highlight of the speech was, however, when the President remarked that “governments must invest in the health and education of their people, and take responsibility for solving problems instead of simply blaming others.”
He gets it. He really, really gets it. You can comb through fifty issues of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy before you’d get a surer sign that the man who dictates our foreign policy knows the reality on the ground, the reason the Arab media harps so relentlessly on Israel and the United States.
Syria and Lebanon
Our shared commitment to democratic progress is being tested in Lebanon, a once-thriving country that now suffers under the influence of an oppressive neighbor.
Just as the Syrian regime must take stronger action to stop those who support violence and subversion in Iraq, it must end its support for terrorist groups seeking to destroy the hope of peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
Syria must also end its occupation of Lebanon.
The Lebanese people have the right to be free, and the United States and Europe share an interest in a democratic, independent Lebanon.
My nation and France worked to pass Security Council Resolution 1559, which demands that Lebanon's sovereignty be respected, that foreign troops and agents be withdrawn, and that free elections be conducted without foreign interference.
In the last several months, the world has seen men and women voting in historic elections from Kabul to Ramallah to Baghdad. And without Syrian interference, Lebanon's parliamentary elections in the spring can be another milestone of liberty.
The up-coming Lebanese elections can be a watershed and, with this passage, the President has committed the U.S. to supporting the pro-independence crowds in the street in Beirut today. Once again, the moron has us on the right side of history. Who would have thought 3 years ago that Bush was more attuned to the “Arab street” than the Secretary General of the United Nations! The call for Syria to quit Lebanon and to allow free and fair elections will become, with the help of France, too strong for The Great Ophthalmologist to resist in the end.
We could realistically find ourselves looking at a free Iraq and Lebanon and a reforming Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia not by the end of Bush’s second term but by the end of this year. A newly independent Lebanon, with its Western and Christian links, could become a cornerstone of a reforming Middle East. Perhaps Beirut once again will be the “Paris of the East.”
Iraq and Afghanistan
Commitment to democratic progress is being honored in Afghanistan. That country's building a democracy that reflects the Afghan traditions and history and shows the way for other nations in the region.
The elected president is working to disarm and demobilize militias in preparation for the national assembly elections to be held this spring.
And the Afghan people know the world is with them. After all, Germany is providing vital police training, the United Kingdom is helping to fight drug trade, Italy is giving assistance on judicial reform, NATO's growing security mission is commanded by a Turkish general. The European governments are helping Afghanistan to succeed, and America appreciates your leadership.
Together, we must make clear to the Iraqi people that the world is also with them, because they have certainly shown their character to the world.
An Iraqi man who lost a leg in a car bombing last year made sure he was there to vote on January 30. He said, "I would have crawled here if I had to. I don't want terrorists to kill other Iraqis like they tried to kill me. Today, I'm voting for peace."
Every vote cast in Iraq was an act of defiance against terror. And the Iraqi people have earned our respect.
Some Europeans joined the fight to liberate Iraq, while others did not. Yet all of us recognize courage when we see it. And we saw it in the Iraqi people.
And all nations now have an interest in the success of a free and democratic Iraq, which will fight terror, which will be a beacon of freedom and which will be a source of true stability in the region.
In coming months, Iraq's newly elected assembly will carry out the important work of establishing a government, providing security, enhancing basic services and writing a democratic constitution.
Now is the time for established democracies to give tangible political, economic and security assistance to the world's newest democracy.
The elections in Iraq drastically changed the calculus of European political leaders when it comes to Iraq. Only the far-left and the Islamists continue to speak of an “occupation” or “puppet government” after the Iraqi people demonstrated that pro-radical political parties and agendas have virtually no popular support within Iraq.
From this fact, the President is able to draw the parallel between the process after which Europe approved assisting the U.S. (Afghanistan) to that now unfolding in Iraq. If there was reason to set aside differences about the need to go to war then, there are even more reasons to do so now; Iraq is many times more significant to European planners than Afghanistan.
We do not think we’re under any illusions about how substantive such aid will be. The heavy lifting will continue to be done by the serious nations, meaning the Anglosphere. But the symbolic importance of a at-least-nominally allied West is an important ideological consideration in the struggle against Islamic Fascism as it was against Stalinism.
Iran
In Iran, the free world shares a common goal. For the sake of peace, the Iranian regime must end its support for terrorism and must not develop nuclear weapons.
In safeguarding the security of free nations, no option can be taken permanently off the table. Iran is, however, different from Iraq. We're in the early stages of diplomacy.
The United States is a member of the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] board of governors, which has taken the lead on this issue. We're working closely with Britain, France and Germany as they oppose Iran's nuclear ambitions and as they insist that Tehran comply with international law.
Results of this approach now depend largely on Iran.
We also look for Iran to finally deliver on promised reform. The time has arrived for the Iranian regime to listen to the Iranian people and respect their rights and join in the movement toward liberty that is taking place all around them.
Across the Middle East, from the Palestinian territories to Lebanon to Iraq to Iran, I believe that the advance of freedom within nations will build a peace among nations. (Emphasis added).
Here, the President both signaled that he understands the stakes in Iran and that he intends to handle it if need be. Diplomacy is the preferred tool at the moment, but don’t kid yourself: the Mullahs (or Moolahs, if you wish) will never acquire nuclear weapons, Russia and the rest of the world be damned.
Most significant here was the use of the phrase “[f]or the sake of peace” which, not entirely uncoincidentally, was the exact phrase the President used in reference to Iraq during the run-up to the Iraq War. And, as then, the decision for us to go to war or not depends “largely on Iran.”
We think there is a real danger that the Islamic Republic is seriously misjudging both American will and American capability on this issue. Like Saddam before them, the Iranian Government seems to think that some sort of international consensus will save its skin at the end of the day.
Think again.
Europe
And one reason for this belief is the experience of Europe. In two world wars, Europe saw the aggressive nature of tyranny and the terrible cost of mistrust and division.
In the Cold War, Europe saw the so-called stability of Yalta was a constant source of injustice and fear.
And Europe also saw how the rise of democratic movements like Solidarity could part an iron curtain drawn by tyrants.
The spread of freedom has helped to resolve old disputes, and the enlargement of NATO and the European Union have made partners out of former rivals.
America supports Europe's democratic unity for the same reason we support the spread of democracy in the Middle East: because freedom leads to peace. America supports a strong Europe, because we need a strong partner in the hard work of advancing freedom and peace in the world.
European leaders demonstrated this vision in Ukraine. Presidents [Aleksander] Kwasniewski of Poland, [Valdas] Adamkus of Lithuania, Javier Solana of the EU helped to resolve the election crisis and bring Ukraine back into the camp of freedom.
As a free government takes hold in that country, and as the government of President [Viktor] Yushchenko pursues vital reforms, Ukraine should be welcomed by the Europe Atlantic family.
We must support new democracies, so members of our alliance must continue to reach out to Georgia, for last year, a peaceful protest overturned a stolen election and unleashed the forces of democratic change.
State’s EUR bureau must be buzzing with these pronouncements. Where to start? The “stability” of the Middle East is like the “stability” of Yalta: it freezes millions in hopeless tyranny and we no longer accept it. And, contrary to the view of leading E.U. nations and Russia herself, we support fully Ukraine’s ascension into both NATO and the E.U. (Imagine NATO exercises mere hours from Moscow!)
Again, the President has sided with the democratic people in the street instead of the powers-that-be. No wonder the Left hates him so; he’s stealing their shtick.
Russia
The MSM has been playing with President Bush’s Second Inaugural Address by demanding that he read the riot act to every anti-liberal regime in the world, but none more so than Russia. Since he famously declared that he had looking into Putin’s soul and found an ally, the President has lacked a degree of credibility when it comes to Russia. With this speech, the President has finally acknowledged that there is a problem in Moscow and that we need to pay more attention to it.
I also believe that Russia's future lies within the family of Europe and the trans-Atlantic community.
America supports WTO [World Trade Organization] membership for Russia, because meeting WTO standards will strengthen the gains of freedom and prosperity in that country.
Yet for Russia to make progress as a European nation, the Russian government must renew a commitment to democracy and the rule of law.
We recognize that reform will not happen overnight. We must always remind Russia, however, that our alliance stands for a free press, a vital opposition, the sharing of power and the rule of law.
And the United States and all European countries should place democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia.
Expect to see the U.S. begin to take a tougher line with Putin’s government, and not a moment too soon.
Foreign Aid
As we seek freedom in other nations, we must also work to renew the values that make freedom possible.
As I said in my inaugural address, we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time. We must reject anti-Semitism from any source, and we must condemn violence such as we have witnessed in the Netherlands.
All our nations must work to integrate minorities into the mainstream of society and to teach the value of tolerance to each new generation.
The nations in our great alliance have many advantages and many blessings. We also have a call beyond our comfort. We must raise our sights to the wider world.
Our ideals and our interests lead in the same direction. By bringing progress and hope to nations in need, we can improve many lives and lift up failing states and remove the causes and sanctuaries of terror.
Our alliance is determined to promote development and integrate developing nations into the world economy. The measure of our success must be the results we achieve not merely the resources we spent.
Together we created the Monterrey Consensus, which links new aid from developed nations to real reform in developing ones.
The strategy is working. Throughout the developing world, governments are confronting corruption, the rule of law is taking root and people are enjoying new freedoms.
Developed nations have responded by increasing assistance by a third.
Through the Millennium Challenge Account, my nation is increasing our aid to developing nations that govern justly, expand economic freedom and invest in the education and health of their people.
While still providing humanitarian assistance and support, the developed nations are taking a wiser approach to other aid. Instead of subsidizing failure year after year, we must reward progress and improve lives.
Our alliance is determined to encourage commerce among nations, as open markets create jobs and lift income and draw whole nations into an expanding circle of freedom and opportunity.
Europe and America will continue to increase trade. And as we do so, we'll resolve our trade disagreements in a cooperative spirit.
And we should share the benefits of fair and free trade with others. That's why we'll continue to advance the Doha Development Agenda and bring global trade talks to a successful conclusion.
We should all pursue fiscal policies in our nations -- sound fiscal policies of low taxes and fiscal restraint and reform that promote a stable world financial system and foster economic growth.
Our alliance is determined to show good stewardship of the Earth, and that requires addressing the serious long-term challenge of global climate change. All of us expressed our views on the Kyoto Protocol, and now we must work together on the way forward.
Emerging technologies, such as hydrogen-powered vehicles, electricity from renewable energy sources, clean coal technology, will encourage economic growth that is environmentally responsible.
By researching, by developing, by promoting new technologies across the world, all nations, including the developing countries, can advance economically while slowing the growth in global greenhouse gases and avoid pollutants that undermine public health.
All of us can use the power of human ingenuity to improve the environment for generations to come.
Our alliance is determined to meet natural disasters, famine and disease with swift and compassionate help.
As we meet today, American and European personnel are aiding the victims of the tsunami in Asia. Our combined financial commitment to tsunami relief and reconstruction is nearly $4 billion.
We're working through the global fund to combat AIDS and other diseases across the world. And America's emergency plan has focused additional resources on nations where the needs are greatest.
Through all these efforts, we encourage stability and progress to build a firmer basis for democratic institutions. And above all, we fulfill a moral duty to heal the sick and feed the hungry and comfort the afflicted.
We think this long section is that most likely to be glossed over by Americans, and that is a shame. Here, the President has laid out the case for an American version of foreign aid, one that demands results and is not based on the latest “social justice” fad in Berlin.
The remarks about the need to move beyond the Kyoto debate to work together on environmental issues should be met with grace by the Europeans, but it won’t. Kyoto is simply too religious an issue to be discussed dispassionately. However, just as the U.S. demands the right to determine what its national security priorities are, so to does Europe. We think their concerns are over-blown and driven by more than just science, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work with them on this issue. Cooperation is a two-way street, and the President’s willingness to more-or-less admit that is a key to moving the Atlantic Alliance forward.
Terrorism
Our alliance is also determined to defend our security, because we refuse to live in a world dominated by fear.
Terrorist movements seek to intimidate free peoples and reverse the course of history by committing dramatic acts of murder.
We will not be intimidated and the terrorists will not stop the march of freedom.
I thank the nations of Europe for your strong cooperation in the war on terror. Together, we have disrupted terrorist financing, strengthened intelligence sharing, enhanced our law enforcement cooperation and improved the security of international commerce and travel.
We're pursuing terrorists wherever they hide.
German authorities recently arrested two terrorists plotting to attack American interests in Iraq. Both will be prosecuted under new German laws enacted after September 11.
Just last week, the United Nations added Muhsin al-Fadhli to its al Qaeda and Taliban sanctions committee list. This man is a known al Qaeda operative and [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi associate [who] provided support to the terrorists who conducted the 2002 bombing of a French oil tanker.
Working together, America, France and other nations will bring him to justice.
For the sake of the security of our people, for the sake of peace, we will be relentless in chasing down the ideologues of hate.
On September 11, America turned first to our immediate security and to the pursuit of an enemy. And that vital work goes on. We've also found that a narrow definition of security is not enough.
While confronting a present threat, we have accepted the long-term challenge of spreading hope and liberty and prosperity as the great alternatives to terror.
As we defeat the agents of terror, we'll also remove the sources of terror. This strategy's not an American strategy or European strategy or Western strategy: Spreading liberty for the sake of peace is the cause of all mankind.
This approach not only reduces the danger to free peoples, it honors the dignity of all peoples, by placing human rights and human freedom at the center of our agenda.
Our alliance has the ability and the duty to tip the balance of history in the favor of freedom.
We know there are many obstacles and we know the road is long. Albert Camus said that freedom is a long-distance race. We're in that race for the duration.
And there is reason for optimism. Oppression is not the wave of the future; it is the desperate tactic of a few backward-looking men.
Democratic nations grow in strength because they reward and respect the creative gifts of their people. Freedom is the direction of history, because freedom is the permanent hope of humanity.
America holds these values because of ideals long held on this continent. We proudly stand in the tradition of the Magna Carta, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the North Atlantic Treaty.
The signers of that treaty pledged to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilization of their peoples founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.
In this new century, the United States and Europe reaffirm that commitment and renew our great alliance of freedom.
May God bless you all.
The invocation of Albert Camus is very significant, and we’re not just saying that because his works inspire us and grace our masthead. Like Camus, the President is aware of the need for human action to secure that which should be, which must be. Like Camus, the President is aware of the need for us to take responsibility for our times, to make the hard decisions.
“[T]he desperate tactic of a few backward-looking men….”
We can’t think of a better definition of “terrorism” than that. With this speech the President has aligned the foreign policy of the United States on the side of liberty and with the reformers of the suffering worlds’ peoples. It stands in sharp contrast to the world of theocratic fascism.
Europe has a choice. It can take our outstretched arm and work with us or it can continue to award Michael Moore awards. It can work for liberty or it can help the cause of Islamic Fascism through inaction. It can accentuate our shared ideals, or it can mock cowboys.
It can be a serious power or a continent in its dotage.
Ball is in your court, Brussels. Let’s see what you got.
UPDATE: We would like to ask any of our European readers if they could tell us whether or not the President's speech was broadcast live there.
UPDATE: As many commentators have pointed out (ouch!) this long post was posted before it was closely proof-read, as is our custom. We were so anxious to get this out to you that we must have pushed "publish" instead of "save." We apologize for the temporary illiteracy.
UPDATE: Reader "Belgian pro Bush" has forwarded to us a story about recent comments from Belgium's new Foreign Minister with regard to Iran. It makes for happy reading indeed:
BRUSSELS - Iran may yet be persuaded to curb its nuclear plans -- but only because diplomatic efforts are backed by the threat of US military action, Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht was quoted as saying on Monday.
“I think the negotiations have a serious chance of succeeding but only because of the American threat,” De Gucht told Belgian daily De Morgen.“Those talks only have a chance if you maintain a strategy of sticks and carrots. And we have to be willing to admit that the United States are the stick.”
Iran will be high on the agenda during US President George W. Bush’s visit to Europe this week. The five-day trip aims to foster a friendly atmosphere early in his second term and deal with problems including Iran, Syria and NATO’s future.Europe and the United States are divided on the debate over Iran’s nuclear programme, which Tehran insists is for power generation but which Washington says is aimed at building a nuclear weapon.
The European Union, led by France, Germany and Britain, has offered trade and political benefits if Iran gives up uranium enrichment, and believes it would bolster the EU’s leverage if the United States got involved in the bargaining.
“We should not believe that the Iranians only want to use their nuclear technology for civilian purposes. The country wants an atomic bomb,” De Gucht said.
Belgium in 2003 strongly opposed the US-led invasion in Iraq.
“Iran will have to give in or there will be big trouble. The United States will never accept Iran possessing a nuclear bomb. Never,” De Gucht added.“Iran possessing a nuclear bomb would be a very destabilising element in the Middle East.”
Hearing sense from a European FM?!?
Perhaps we were too harsh on our Belgian friends. So, for the record: we love Brugges, Belgian french fries kick serious butt, Belgian ale rules and one of the best shows we've ever seen was Paul Weller in Brussels with a seriously cool crowd.
And Poirot is our favorite Agatha Christie character.
What has changed is that the President is now coming off a series of political victories—elections in Kabul, re-election to the Presidency, elections in Iraq, a new movement for peace on his terms in the Israel-Palestine conflict, reform picking up pace in the entire Muslim world—that make it impossible for European governments to continue to view the Bush Administration as an aberration the next “normal” administration will correct. In addition, as the facts on the ground continue to trend Bush’s way, more and more people are beginning to realize that the President’s prescriptions were not the ravings of a wild-eyed “neo-con” fantasy but, rather, a “new realist” view that continues to be vindicated by events.
Because of the importance of this speech (transcript here), we present it here in full, with our commentary:
Guy -- or Mr. Prime Minister -- thank you for your kind introduction and thank you for your warm hospitality.
Distinguished guests, and ladies and gentlemen, Laura and I are really glad to be back. I'm really pleased to visit Brussels again, the capital of a beautiful nation, the seat of the European Union and the NATO alliance.
The United States and Belgium are close allies, and we will always be warm friends.
“Guy” would be Guy Verhofstadt, Prime Minister of the Belgian Government. The opening of the speech struck us as very classically Bush in that he was classy, gracious, complementary and endearing to people who, to put it lightly, don’t deserve such treatment at all. The rhetoric is understandable given the context of NATO, but, make no mistake about it, the United States and Belgium are not very close allies at all, let alone “warm friends.”
To get a picture of what the day-to-day relationship between Belgium and the United States has been like recently, just Google any old comment by former Belgian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Louis Michel, now in a job much more up his alley as one of the E.U.'s commissioners. Michel seemed to be channeling Chomsky and Moore during the entire run-up to the Iraq War, never failing to say things so outrageously out-of-touch with reality that it made us gape in awe when we remembered that every last drop of our children’s’ blood is dedicated by treaty to defending both Michel and the irresponsible state he represents.
As much as we wished the President could tell the Belgians exactly what we think of them, we understand the restraint. In the meantime, we take solace in Monty Python’s classic “Prejudice” sketch.
You know, on this journey to Europe, I follow in some large footsteps. More than two centuries ago, Benjamin Franklin arrived on this continent to great acclaim.
An observer wrote, "His reputation was more universal than [Gottfried Wilhelm] Leibniz or [Isaac] Newton, Frederick [the Great] or Voltaire, and his character more beloved and esteemed than any or all of them."
The observer went on to say, "There was scarcely a peasant or citizen who did not consider him as a friend to humankind."
I've been hoping for a similar reception.
But Secretary Rice told me I should be a realist.
Bush’s ability to poke fun at himself is, we think, a big strength. Instead of getting all huffy and offended by the ridiculous anti-American protests in Brussels, he just makes a joke about it and moves on. Very well done.
I appreciate the opportunity, in this great hall, to speak to the peoples of Europe.
For more than 60 years, our nations stood together to face great challenges of history. Together, we have opposed totalitarian ideologies with our might and with our patience. Together, we united this continent with our democratic values. And together we mark year by year the anniversaries of freedom, from D-Day to the liberation of death camps, to the victories of conscience in 1989.
Our trans-Atlantic alliance frustrated the plans of dictators, served the highest ideals of humanity and set a violent century on a new and better course. And as time goes by, we must never forget our shared achievements.
Yet our relationship is founded on more than nostalgia. In a new century, the alliance of Europe and North America is the main pillar of our security. Our robust trade is one of the engines of world's economy. Our example of economic and political freedom gives hope to millions who are weary of poverty and oppression.
In all these ways our strong friendship is essential to peace and prosperity across the globe, and no temporary debate, no passing disagreement of governments, no power on Earth will ever divide us.
Of course, we rarely stood “together” in reality. During the entire Cold War the United States had to continually fight with the governments of Europe (from which we exclude, Berkeley-style, the government of the U.K.) to keep their eye on the ball. We’d hardly call the Pershing era a feel-good comradely time of solidarity. But, as with Belgium, there is a need to gloss over some of the particulars in favor of the big picture. In that big picture, the President is surely right; the U.S. and the E.U. have more in common than they think and, united in a goal, they stand a much better chance of realizing it.
Today, America and Europe face a moment of consequence and opportunity. Together, we can once again set history on a hopeful course, away from poverty and despair and toward development and the dignity of self-rule; away from resentment and violence and toward justice and the peaceful settlement of differences.
Seizing this moment requires idealism; we must see in every person the right and the capacity to live in freedom. Seizing this moment requires realism; we must act wisely and deliberately in the face of complex challenges. And seizing this moment also requires cooperation, because when Europe and America stand together, no problem can stand against us.
As past debates fade, as great duties become clear, let us begin a new era of trans-Atlantic unity.
Here the President attempts to bridge the “idealist-realist” divide by pointing out that both perspectives are necessary for a balanced, healthy foreign policy. The root of our policy must be our ideals. On this, the Father of Our Country’s birthday, we can affirm again the great American belief that freedom and liberty are not the arbitrary gifts of governments, nor even multi-lateral organizations, but instead are the God-given rights of all people, of all races and religions, everywhere. As the Boss recently put it, Europeans may giggle at this fact, but it is nonetheless true: American foreign policy will always at root be based on our values. None of this is remarkable. Indeed, it would be remarkable indeed if our policies did not reflect who we are as a people. Nor is this a claim to Divine Right or infallibility. Rather, it is the belief of an imperfect people imperfectly trying to help the world if we can do it.
However, the “realists” are the people who must carry that idealism out into the real world. As people who just this morning attended bilateral meetings between our people and leaders of the government here in the Near Abroad, we can attest first hand to the need to root our policy in the language of the real world, lest we be seen as rich dilettantes out of our depth, seeking to gratify our need for “meaning” more than offering a real helping hand. The weight of history and culture are almost unbearably heavy. It will take hard-headed and clear-eyed thinking to bring the world along in a liberal direction.
And, as any realist will tell you, one thing we absolutely need if our new policies are to succeed is a reasonable level of trans-Atlantic unity, if only to prevent hostile powers from perceiving a split in the West that can be used to advantage. The President’s goal now, it seems to us, is to form a least-common-denominator unity, which is more valuable than it sounds.
Moving from where he wants to go to current problems, the President turned first to the most pressing issue in our new foreign policy.
The Middle East
Our greatest opportunity and immediate goal is peace in the Middle East. After many false starts and dashed hopes and stolen lives, a settlement of the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is now within reach.
America and Europe have made a moral commitment: We will not stand by as another generation in the Holy Land grows up in an atmosphere of violence and hopelessness.
America and Europe also share a strategic interest. By helping to build a lasting peace, we will remove an unsettled grievance that is used to stir hatred and violence across the Middle East.
Our efforts are guided by a clear vision: We're determined to see two democratic states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security.
The Palestinian people deserve a government that is representative, honest and peaceful. The people of Israel need an end to terror and a reliable, steadfast partner for peace. And the world must not rest until there is a just and lasting resolution to this conflict.
All the parties have responsibilities to meet.
Arab states must end incitement in their own media, cut off public and private funding for terrorism, stop their support for extremist education and establish normal relations with Israel.
Palestinian leaders must confront and dismantle terrorist groups, fight corruption, encourage free enterprise and rest true authority with the people. Only a democracy can serve the hopes of Palestinians and make Israel secure and raise the flag of a free Palestine.
A successful Palestinian democracy should be Israel's top goal as well. So Israel must freeze settlement activity, help Palestinians build a thriving economy and ensure that a new Palestinian state is truly viable, with contiguous territory on the West Bank.
A state of scattered territories will not work.
As Palestinian leaders assume responsibility for Gaza and an increasingly larger territory, we will help them build the economic and political and security institutions needed to govern effectively.
And as that democracy rises, the United States and Europe will help the parties implement the road map to peace.
These vital steps are also difficult steps, because progress requires a new trust and because terrorists will do all they can to destroy that trust.
Yet we're moving forward and we're doing so in practical ways.
Next month in London, Prime Minister [Tony] Blair will host a conference to help the Palestinian people build the democratic institutions of their state.
[Palestinian Authority] President [Mahmoud] Abbas has the opportunity to put forward a strategy of reform which can and will gain support from the international community, including financial support. I hope he will seize the moment.
I've asked Secretary Rice to attend the conference and to convey America's strong support for the Palestinian people as they build a democratic state.
And I appreciate the prominent role that Prime Minister Blair and other European leaders are playing in the cause of peace.
We seek peace between Israel and Palestine for its own sake. We also know that a free and peaceful Palestine can add to the momentum of reform throughout the broader Middle East.
This passage more than any other illustrates just how strongly the winds of political fortune have shifted in the President’s favor. Nothing in the above passage is any different from when the President shocked the world by announcing that we are in favor of a Palestinian state, but only if the Palestinians elected new leadership, dumped the hateful Arafat (remember him?) and committed themselves to democracy.
At the time, the grandees of Europe, like Louis Michel, labeled the President’s approach counter-productive, if not downright reactionary. Yet, here we are a mere three years later, and the prospects for a peace settlement have not looked this good since the heady, disastrous days of Madrid and Oslo. We were constantly told that the road to peace in the Middle East passes through Jerusalem. As it turns out, Baghdad was a necessary first step. Not bad for a fascist chimp.
We were especially heartened to see the President call out the Arab states for teaching Jew-hatred and inciting terrorist violence. It’s hard to remember now, but there was a time not so long ago when only conservative blogsites seemed to be aware of the Nazi-like incitement preached in Arab schools. Now, it’s the stuff of Presidential speeches. You can bet that this is being translated into policy. Right now there is some luckless political officer in Riyadh or Cairo delivering the message that the U.S. has serious concerns about the Arabs’ bloody propaganda. The world won’t change overnight, but attention to the problem at this level can’t hurt.
Note also that the President has consciously put high expectations on Abbas, informing him that the opportunity is his to seize or to squander. As regular readers of this site will know, we have strong reservations about the P.A.’s ability to seriously undertake reforms, fight terrorism and live in peace with Israel. In fact, we just don’t see it happening. However, for the majority that disagree with this diagnosis it is important that they at least understand that the onus is not entirely on Israel. We remain skeptical, but cautiously hopeful.
If that hope is to have any chance of success, however, it is absolutely vital that the U.S. and the E.U. present a united front. This is why it is so significant that the U.K. has taken a lead role in some of the nuts-and-bolts negotiations. This situation is perfect for the U.K. as the traditional bridge over with Americans and Europeans meet and come to agreement. Blair has the right mix of idealism and realism to deal with the issue, though we continue to distrust the shameful anti-Semitism that seems to have deep roots in British culture, especially in the FCO. Time will tell.
In the long run, we cannot live in peace and safety if the Middle East continues to produce ideologies of murder and terrorists who seek the deadliest weapons.
Regimes that terrorize their own people will not hesitate to support terror abroad. The status quo of tyranny and hopelessness in the Middle East, the false stability of dictatorship and stagnation can only lead to deeper resentment in a troubled region and further tragedy in free nations.
The future of our nations and the future of the Middle East are linked and our peace depends on their hope and development and freedom.
Lasting successful reform in a broader Middle East will not be imposed from the outside. It must be chosen from within.
Governments must choose to fight corruption, abandon old habits of control, protect the rights of conscience and the rights of minorities.
Governments must invest in the health and education of their people, and take responsibility for solving problems instead of simply blaming others.
Citizens must choose to hold their governments accountable. The path isn't always easy, as any free people can testify. Yet there's reason for confidence.
Ultimately men and women who seek the success of their nation will reject an ideology of oppression and anger and fear. Ultimately men and women will embrace participation and progress.
And we are seeing evidence in an arc of reform from Morocco to Bahrain to Iraq to Afghanistan.
Our challenge is to encourage this progress by taking up the duties of great democracies. We must be on the side of democratic reformers. We must encourage democratic movements. And we must support democratic transitions in practical ways.
Europe and America should not expect or demand that reforms come all at once. It didn't happen in our own histories: My country took many years to include minorities and women in the full promise of America, and that struggle hasn't ended.
Yet while our expectations must be realistic, our ideals must be firm and they must be clear. We must expect higher standards from our friends and partners in the Middle East.
The government of Saudi Arabia can demonstrate its leadership in the region by expanding the role of its people in determining their future. And the great and proud nation of Egypt, which showed the way toward peace in the Middle East, can now show the way toward democracy in the Middle East.
As he did in his State of the Union Address, the President once again made it clear that our “allies” are not immune to the changes we expect to see in the Middle East. And by pointing out that the “arc of reform” embraces what the USG euphemistically calls the “Greater Middle East” (since we can’t say the “Muslim world”), the President once again was able to point to a range of recent successes big and small, from Morocco to Afghanistan.
The absolute highlight of the speech was, however, when the President remarked that “governments must invest in the health and education of their people, and take responsibility for solving problems instead of simply blaming others.”
He gets it. He really, really gets it. You can comb through fifty issues of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Policy before you’d get a surer sign that the man who dictates our foreign policy knows the reality on the ground, the reason the Arab media harps so relentlessly on Israel and the United States.
Syria and Lebanon
Our shared commitment to democratic progress is being tested in Lebanon, a once-thriving country that now suffers under the influence of an oppressive neighbor.
Just as the Syrian regime must take stronger action to stop those who support violence and subversion in Iraq, it must end its support for terrorist groups seeking to destroy the hope of peace between Israelis and Palestinians.
Syria must also end its occupation of Lebanon.
The Lebanese people have the right to be free, and the United States and Europe share an interest in a democratic, independent Lebanon.
My nation and France worked to pass Security Council Resolution 1559, which demands that Lebanon's sovereignty be respected, that foreign troops and agents be withdrawn, and that free elections be conducted without foreign interference.
In the last several months, the world has seen men and women voting in historic elections from Kabul to Ramallah to Baghdad. And without Syrian interference, Lebanon's parliamentary elections in the spring can be another milestone of liberty.
The up-coming Lebanese elections can be a watershed and, with this passage, the President has committed the U.S. to supporting the pro-independence crowds in the street in Beirut today. Once again, the moron has us on the right side of history. Who would have thought 3 years ago that Bush was more attuned to the “Arab street” than the Secretary General of the United Nations! The call for Syria to quit Lebanon and to allow free and fair elections will become, with the help of France, too strong for The Great Ophthalmologist to resist in the end.
We could realistically find ourselves looking at a free Iraq and Lebanon and a reforming Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia not by the end of Bush’s second term but by the end of this year. A newly independent Lebanon, with its Western and Christian links, could become a cornerstone of a reforming Middle East. Perhaps Beirut once again will be the “Paris of the East.”
Iraq and Afghanistan
Commitment to democratic progress is being honored in Afghanistan. That country's building a democracy that reflects the Afghan traditions and history and shows the way for other nations in the region.
The elected president is working to disarm and demobilize militias in preparation for the national assembly elections to be held this spring.
And the Afghan people know the world is with them. After all, Germany is providing vital police training, the United Kingdom is helping to fight drug trade, Italy is giving assistance on judicial reform, NATO's growing security mission is commanded by a Turkish general. The European governments are helping Afghanistan to succeed, and America appreciates your leadership.
Together, we must make clear to the Iraqi people that the world is also with them, because they have certainly shown their character to the world.
An Iraqi man who lost a leg in a car bombing last year made sure he was there to vote on January 30. He said, "I would have crawled here if I had to. I don't want terrorists to kill other Iraqis like they tried to kill me. Today, I'm voting for peace."
Every vote cast in Iraq was an act of defiance against terror. And the Iraqi people have earned our respect.
Some Europeans joined the fight to liberate Iraq, while others did not. Yet all of us recognize courage when we see it. And we saw it in the Iraqi people.
And all nations now have an interest in the success of a free and democratic Iraq, which will fight terror, which will be a beacon of freedom and which will be a source of true stability in the region.
In coming months, Iraq's newly elected assembly will carry out the important work of establishing a government, providing security, enhancing basic services and writing a democratic constitution.
Now is the time for established democracies to give tangible political, economic and security assistance to the world's newest democracy.
The elections in Iraq drastically changed the calculus of European political leaders when it comes to Iraq. Only the far-left and the Islamists continue to speak of an “occupation” or “puppet government” after the Iraqi people demonstrated that pro-radical political parties and agendas have virtually no popular support within Iraq.
From this fact, the President is able to draw the parallel between the process after which Europe approved assisting the U.S. (Afghanistan) to that now unfolding in Iraq. If there was reason to set aside differences about the need to go to war then, there are even more reasons to do so now; Iraq is many times more significant to European planners than Afghanistan.
We do not think we’re under any illusions about how substantive such aid will be. The heavy lifting will continue to be done by the serious nations, meaning the Anglosphere. But the symbolic importance of a at-least-nominally allied West is an important ideological consideration in the struggle against Islamic Fascism as it was against Stalinism.
Iran
In Iran, the free world shares a common goal. For the sake of peace, the Iranian regime must end its support for terrorism and must not develop nuclear weapons.
In safeguarding the security of free nations, no option can be taken permanently off the table. Iran is, however, different from Iraq. We're in the early stages of diplomacy.
The United States is a member of the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] board of governors, which has taken the lead on this issue. We're working closely with Britain, France and Germany as they oppose Iran's nuclear ambitions and as they insist that Tehran comply with international law.
Results of this approach now depend largely on Iran.
We also look for Iran to finally deliver on promised reform. The time has arrived for the Iranian regime to listen to the Iranian people and respect their rights and join in the movement toward liberty that is taking place all around them.
Across the Middle East, from the Palestinian territories to Lebanon to Iraq to Iran, I believe that the advance of freedom within nations will build a peace among nations. (Emphasis added).
Here, the President both signaled that he understands the stakes in Iran and that he intends to handle it if need be. Diplomacy is the preferred tool at the moment, but don’t kid yourself: the Mullahs (or Moolahs, if you wish) will never acquire nuclear weapons, Russia and the rest of the world be damned.
Most significant here was the use of the phrase “[f]or the sake of peace” which, not entirely uncoincidentally, was the exact phrase the President used in reference to Iraq during the run-up to the Iraq War. And, as then, the decision for us to go to war or not depends “largely on Iran.”
We think there is a real danger that the Islamic Republic is seriously misjudging both American will and American capability on this issue. Like Saddam before them, the Iranian Government seems to think that some sort of international consensus will save its skin at the end of the day.
Think again.
Europe
And one reason for this belief is the experience of Europe. In two world wars, Europe saw the aggressive nature of tyranny and the terrible cost of mistrust and division.
In the Cold War, Europe saw the so-called stability of Yalta was a constant source of injustice and fear.
And Europe also saw how the rise of democratic movements like Solidarity could part an iron curtain drawn by tyrants.
The spread of freedom has helped to resolve old disputes, and the enlargement of NATO and the European Union have made partners out of former rivals.
America supports Europe's democratic unity for the same reason we support the spread of democracy in the Middle East: because freedom leads to peace. America supports a strong Europe, because we need a strong partner in the hard work of advancing freedom and peace in the world.
European leaders demonstrated this vision in Ukraine. Presidents [Aleksander] Kwasniewski of Poland, [Valdas] Adamkus of Lithuania, Javier Solana of the EU helped to resolve the election crisis and bring Ukraine back into the camp of freedom.
As a free government takes hold in that country, and as the government of President [Viktor] Yushchenko pursues vital reforms, Ukraine should be welcomed by the Europe Atlantic family.
We must support new democracies, so members of our alliance must continue to reach out to Georgia, for last year, a peaceful protest overturned a stolen election and unleashed the forces of democratic change.
State’s EUR bureau must be buzzing with these pronouncements. Where to start? The “stability” of the Middle East is like the “stability” of Yalta: it freezes millions in hopeless tyranny and we no longer accept it. And, contrary to the view of leading E.U. nations and Russia herself, we support fully Ukraine’s ascension into both NATO and the E.U. (Imagine NATO exercises mere hours from Moscow!)
Again, the President has sided with the democratic people in the street instead of the powers-that-be. No wonder the Left hates him so; he’s stealing their shtick.
Russia
The MSM has been playing with President Bush’s Second Inaugural Address by demanding that he read the riot act to every anti-liberal regime in the world, but none more so than Russia. Since he famously declared that he had looking into Putin’s soul and found an ally, the President has lacked a degree of credibility when it comes to Russia. With this speech, the President has finally acknowledged that there is a problem in Moscow and that we need to pay more attention to it.
I also believe that Russia's future lies within the family of Europe and the trans-Atlantic community.
America supports WTO [World Trade Organization] membership for Russia, because meeting WTO standards will strengthen the gains of freedom and prosperity in that country.
Yet for Russia to make progress as a European nation, the Russian government must renew a commitment to democracy and the rule of law.
We recognize that reform will not happen overnight. We must always remind Russia, however, that our alliance stands for a free press, a vital opposition, the sharing of power and the rule of law.
And the United States and all European countries should place democratic reform at the heart of their dialogue with Russia.
Expect to see the U.S. begin to take a tougher line with Putin’s government, and not a moment too soon.
Foreign Aid
As we seek freedom in other nations, we must also work to renew the values that make freedom possible.
As I said in my inaugural address, we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time. We must reject anti-Semitism from any source, and we must condemn violence such as we have witnessed in the Netherlands.
All our nations must work to integrate minorities into the mainstream of society and to teach the value of tolerance to each new generation.
The nations in our great alliance have many advantages and many blessings. We also have a call beyond our comfort. We must raise our sights to the wider world.
Our ideals and our interests lead in the same direction. By bringing progress and hope to nations in need, we can improve many lives and lift up failing states and remove the causes and sanctuaries of terror.
Our alliance is determined to promote development and integrate developing nations into the world economy. The measure of our success must be the results we achieve not merely the resources we spent.
Together we created the Monterrey Consensus, which links new aid from developed nations to real reform in developing ones.
The strategy is working. Throughout the developing world, governments are confronting corruption, the rule of law is taking root and people are enjoying new freedoms.
Developed nations have responded by increasing assistance by a third.
Through the Millennium Challenge Account, my nation is increasing our aid to developing nations that govern justly, expand economic freedom and invest in the education and health of their people.
While still providing humanitarian assistance and support, the developed nations are taking a wiser approach to other aid. Instead of subsidizing failure year after year, we must reward progress and improve lives.
Our alliance is determined to encourage commerce among nations, as open markets create jobs and lift income and draw whole nations into an expanding circle of freedom and opportunity.
Europe and America will continue to increase trade. And as we do so, we'll resolve our trade disagreements in a cooperative spirit.
And we should share the benefits of fair and free trade with others. That's why we'll continue to advance the Doha Development Agenda and bring global trade talks to a successful conclusion.
We should all pursue fiscal policies in our nations -- sound fiscal policies of low taxes and fiscal restraint and reform that promote a stable world financial system and foster economic growth.
Our alliance is determined to show good stewardship of the Earth, and that requires addressing the serious long-term challenge of global climate change. All of us expressed our views on the Kyoto Protocol, and now we must work together on the way forward.
Emerging technologies, such as hydrogen-powered vehicles, electricity from renewable energy sources, clean coal technology, will encourage economic growth that is environmentally responsible.
By researching, by developing, by promoting new technologies across the world, all nations, including the developing countries, can advance economically while slowing the growth in global greenhouse gases and avoid pollutants that undermine public health.
All of us can use the power of human ingenuity to improve the environment for generations to come.
Our alliance is determined to meet natural disasters, famine and disease with swift and compassionate help.
As we meet today, American and European personnel are aiding the victims of the tsunami in Asia. Our combined financial commitment to tsunami relief and reconstruction is nearly $4 billion.
We're working through the global fund to combat AIDS and other diseases across the world. And America's emergency plan has focused additional resources on nations where the needs are greatest.
Through all these efforts, we encourage stability and progress to build a firmer basis for democratic institutions. And above all, we fulfill a moral duty to heal the sick and feed the hungry and comfort the afflicted.
We think this long section is that most likely to be glossed over by Americans, and that is a shame. Here, the President has laid out the case for an American version of foreign aid, one that demands results and is not based on the latest “social justice” fad in Berlin.
The remarks about the need to move beyond the Kyoto debate to work together on environmental issues should be met with grace by the Europeans, but it won’t. Kyoto is simply too religious an issue to be discussed dispassionately. However, just as the U.S. demands the right to determine what its national security priorities are, so to does Europe. We think their concerns are over-blown and driven by more than just science, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work with them on this issue. Cooperation is a two-way street, and the President’s willingness to more-or-less admit that is a key to moving the Atlantic Alliance forward.
Terrorism
Our alliance is also determined to defend our security, because we refuse to live in a world dominated by fear.
Terrorist movements seek to intimidate free peoples and reverse the course of history by committing dramatic acts of murder.
We will not be intimidated and the terrorists will not stop the march of freedom.
I thank the nations of Europe for your strong cooperation in the war on terror. Together, we have disrupted terrorist financing, strengthened intelligence sharing, enhanced our law enforcement cooperation and improved the security of international commerce and travel.
We're pursuing terrorists wherever they hide.
German authorities recently arrested two terrorists plotting to attack American interests in Iraq. Both will be prosecuted under new German laws enacted after September 11.
Just last week, the United Nations added Muhsin al-Fadhli to its al Qaeda and Taliban sanctions committee list. This man is a known al Qaeda operative and [Abu Musab al-] Zarqawi associate [who] provided support to the terrorists who conducted the 2002 bombing of a French oil tanker.
Working together, America, France and other nations will bring him to justice.
For the sake of the security of our people, for the sake of peace, we will be relentless in chasing down the ideologues of hate.
On September 11, America turned first to our immediate security and to the pursuit of an enemy. And that vital work goes on. We've also found that a narrow definition of security is not enough.
While confronting a present threat, we have accepted the long-term challenge of spreading hope and liberty and prosperity as the great alternatives to terror.
As we defeat the agents of terror, we'll also remove the sources of terror. This strategy's not an American strategy or European strategy or Western strategy: Spreading liberty for the sake of peace is the cause of all mankind.
This approach not only reduces the danger to free peoples, it honors the dignity of all peoples, by placing human rights and human freedom at the center of our agenda.
Our alliance has the ability and the duty to tip the balance of history in the favor of freedom.
We know there are many obstacles and we know the road is long. Albert Camus said that freedom is a long-distance race. We're in that race for the duration.
And there is reason for optimism. Oppression is not the wave of the future; it is the desperate tactic of a few backward-looking men.
Democratic nations grow in strength because they reward and respect the creative gifts of their people. Freedom is the direction of history, because freedom is the permanent hope of humanity.
America holds these values because of ideals long held on this continent. We proudly stand in the tradition of the Magna Carta, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the North Atlantic Treaty.
The signers of that treaty pledged to safeguard the freedom, common heritage and civilization of their peoples founded on the principles of democracy, individual liberty and the rule of law.
In this new century, the United States and Europe reaffirm that commitment and renew our great alliance of freedom.
May God bless you all.
The invocation of Albert Camus is very significant, and we’re not just saying that because his works inspire us and grace our masthead. Like Camus, the President is aware of the need for human action to secure that which should be, which must be. Like Camus, the President is aware of the need for us to take responsibility for our times, to make the hard decisions.
“[T]he desperate tactic of a few backward-looking men….”
We can’t think of a better definition of “terrorism” than that. With this speech the President has aligned the foreign policy of the United States on the side of liberty and with the reformers of the suffering worlds’ peoples. It stands in sharp contrast to the world of theocratic fascism.
Europe has a choice. It can take our outstretched arm and work with us or it can continue to award Michael Moore awards. It can work for liberty or it can help the cause of Islamic Fascism through inaction. It can accentuate our shared ideals, or it can mock cowboys.
It can be a serious power or a continent in its dotage.
Ball is in your court, Brussels. Let’s see what you got.
UPDATE: We would like to ask any of our European readers if they could tell us whether or not the President's speech was broadcast live there.
UPDATE: As many commentators have pointed out (ouch!) this long post was posted before it was closely proof-read, as is our custom. We were so anxious to get this out to you that we must have pushed "publish" instead of "save." We apologize for the temporary illiteracy.
UPDATE: Reader "Belgian pro Bush" has forwarded to us a story about recent comments from Belgium's new Foreign Minister with regard to Iran. It makes for happy reading indeed:
BRUSSELS - Iran may yet be persuaded to curb its nuclear plans -- but only because diplomatic efforts are backed by the threat of US military action, Belgian Foreign Minister Karel De Gucht was quoted as saying on Monday.
“I think the negotiations have a serious chance of succeeding but only because of the American threat,” De Gucht told Belgian daily De Morgen.“Those talks only have a chance if you maintain a strategy of sticks and carrots. And we have to be willing to admit that the United States are the stick.”
Iran will be high on the agenda during US President George W. Bush’s visit to Europe this week. The five-day trip aims to foster a friendly atmosphere early in his second term and deal with problems including Iran, Syria and NATO’s future.Europe and the United States are divided on the debate over Iran’s nuclear programme, which Tehran insists is for power generation but which Washington says is aimed at building a nuclear weapon.
The European Union, led by France, Germany and Britain, has offered trade and political benefits if Iran gives up uranium enrichment, and believes it would bolster the EU’s leverage if the United States got involved in the bargaining.
“We should not believe that the Iranians only want to use their nuclear technology for civilian purposes. The country wants an atomic bomb,” De Gucht said.
Belgium in 2003 strongly opposed the US-led invasion in Iraq.
“Iran will have to give in or there will be big trouble. The United States will never accept Iran possessing a nuclear bomb. Never,” De Gucht added.“Iran possessing a nuclear bomb would be a very destabilising element in the Middle East.”
Hearing sense from a European FM?!?
Perhaps we were too harsh on our Belgian friends. So, for the record: we love Brugges, Belgian french fries kick serious butt, Belgian ale rules and one of the best shows we've ever seen was Paul Weller in Brussels with a seriously cool crowd.
And Poirot is our favorite Agatha Christie character.
