|
11/20/2003
Democracy and the War on Terror
**UPDATE**
Note to readers: I decided to put President Bush’s speeches of
11/6 and 11/19 together. Both have similar themes and have
been labeled as historic.
---
President George W. Bush, Whitehall Palace, November 19,
2003.
Americans traveling to England always observe more similarities
to our country than differences. I’ve been here only a short time,
but I’ve noticed that the tradition of free speech – exercised with
enthusiasm – is alive and well here in London. We have that at
home, too. They now have that right in Baghdad, as well.
The people of Great Britain also might see some familiar traits in
Americans. We’re sometimes faulted for a na ve faith that
liberty can change the world. If that’s an error it began with
reading too much John Locke and Adam Smith. Americans
have, on occasion, been called moralists who often speak in
terms of right and wrong. That zeal has been inspired by
examples on this island, by the tireless compassion of Lord
Shaftesbury, the righteous courage of Wilberforce, and the firm
determination of the Royal Navy over the decades to fight and
end the trade in slaves.
It’s rightly said that Americans are a religious people. That’s, in
part, because the “Good News” was translated by Tyndale,
preached by Wesley, lived out in the example of William Booth.
At times, Americans are even said to have a puritan streak –
where might that have come from? Well, we can start with the
Puritans.
To this fine heritage, Americans have added a few traits of our
own: the good influence of our immigrants, the spirit of the
frontier. Yet, there remains a bit of England in every American.
So much of our national character comes from you, and we’re
glad for it.
The fellowship of generations is the cause of common beliefs.
We believe in open societies ordered by moral conviction. We
believe in private markets, humanized by compassionate
government. We believe in economies that reward effort,
communities that protect the weak, and the duty of nations to
respect the dignity and the rights of all. And whether one learns
these ideals in County Durham or in West Texas, they instill
mutual respect and they inspire common purpose.
More than an alliance of security and commerce, the British and
American peoples have an alliance of values. And, today, this
old and tested alliance is very strong.
The deepest beliefs of our nations set the direction of our foreign
policy. We value our own civil rights, so we stand for the human
rights of others. We affirm the God-given dignity of every
person, so we are moved to action by poverty and oppression and
famine and disease. The United States and Great Britain share a
mission in the world beyond the balance of power or the simple
pursuit of interest. We seek the advance of freedom and the
peace that freedom brings. Together our nations are standing and
sacrificing for this high goal in a distant land at this very hour.
And America honors the idealism and the bravery of the sons and
daughters of Britain.
The last President to stay at Buckingham Palace was an idealist,
without question. At a dinner hosted by King George V, in 1918,
Woodrow Wilson made a pledge; with typical American
understatement, he vowed that right and justice would become
the predominant and controlling force in the world.
President Wilson had come to Europe with his 14 Points for
Peace. Many complimented him on his vision; yet some were
dubious. Take, for example, the Prime Minister of France. He
complained that God, himself, had only 10 commandments.
Sounds familiar.
At Wilson’s high point of idealism, however, Europe was one
short generation from Munich and Auschwitz and the Blitz.
Looking back, we see the reasons why. The League of Nations,
lacking both credibility and will, collapsed at the first challenge
of the dictators. Free nations failed to recognize, much less
confront, the aggressive evil in plain sight. And so dictators
went about their business, feeding resentments and anti-
Semitism, bringing death to innocent people in this city and
across the world, and filling the last century with violence and
genocide.
Through world war and cold war, we learned that idealism, if it
is to do any good in this world, requires common purpose and
national strength, moral courage and patience in difficult tasks.
And now our generation has need of these qualities.
On September the 11th, 2001, terrorists left their mark of murder
on my country, and took the lives of 67 British citizens. With the
passing of months and years, it is the natural human desire to
resume a quiet life and to put that day behind us, as if waking
from a dark dream. The hope that danger has passed is
comforting, is understanding, and it is false. The attacks that
followed – on Bali, Jakarta, Casablanca, Bombay, Mombassa,
Najaf, Jerusalem, Riyadh, Baghdad, and Istanbul – were not
dreams. They’re part of the global campaign by terrorist
networks to intimidate and demoralize all who oppose them.
These terrorists target the innocent, and they kill by the
thousands. And they would, if they gain the weapons they seek,
kill by the millions and not be finished. The greatest threat of
our age is nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons in the hands
of terrorists, and the dictators who aid them. The evil is in plain
sight. The danger only increases with denial. Great
responsibilities fall once again to the great democracies. We will
face these threats with open eyes, and we will defeat them.
The peace and security of free nations now rests on three pillars:
First, international organizations must be equal to the challenges
facing our world, from lifting up failing states to opposing
proliferation.
Like 11 Presidents before me, I believe in the international
institutions and alliances that America helped to form and helps
to lead. The United States and Great Britain have labored hard to
help make the United Nations what it is supposed to be – and
effective instrument of our collective security. In recent months,
we’ve sought and gained three additional resolutions on Iraq –
Resolutions 1441, 1483 and 1511 – precisely because the global
danger of terror demands a global response. The United Nations
has no more compelling advocate than your Prime Minister, who
at every turn has championed its ideals and appealed to its
authority. He understands, as well, that the credibility of the
U.N. depends on a willingness to keep its word and to act when
action is required.
America and Great Britain have done, and will do, all in their
power to prevent the United Nations from solemnly choosing its
own irrelevance and inviting the fate of the League of Nations.
It’s not enough to meet the dangers of the world with resolutions;
we must meet those dangers with resolve.
In this century, as in the last, nations can accomplish more
together than apart. For 54 years, America has stood with our
partners in NATO, the most effective multilateral institution in
history. We’re committed to this great democratic alliance, and
we believe it must have the will and the capacity to act beyond
Europe where threats emerge.
My nation welcomes the growing unity of Europe, and the world
needs America and the European Union to work in common
purpose for the advance of security and justice. America is
cooperating with four other nations to meet the dangers posed by
North Korea. America believes the IAEA must be true to its
purpose and hold Iran to its obligations.
Our first choice, and our constant practice, is to work with other
responsible governments. We understand, as well, that the
success of multilateralism is not measured by adherence to forms
alone, the tidiness of the process, but by the results we achieve to
keep our nations secure.
The second pillar of peace and security in our world is the
willingness of free nations, when the last resort arrives, to
restrain aggression and evil by force. There are principled
objections to the use of force in every generation, and I credit the
good motives behind these views.
Those in authority, however, are not judged only by good
motivations. The people have given us the duty to defend them.
And that duty sometimes requires the violent restraint of violent
men. In some cases, the measured use of force is all that protects
us from a chaotic world ruled by force.
Most in the peaceful West have no living memory of that kind of
world. Yet in some countries, the memories are recent: The
victims of ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, those who survived
the rapists and the death squads, have few qualms when NATO
applied force to help end those crimes. The women of
Afghanistan, imprisoned in their homes and beaten in the streets
and executed in public spectacles, did not reproach us for routing
the Taliban. The inhabitants of Iraq’s Baathist hell, with its
lavish palaces and its torture chambers, with its massive statues
and its mass graves, do not miss their fugitive dictator. They
rejoiced at this fall.
In all these cases, military action was preceded by diplomatic
initiatives and negotiations and ultimatums, and final chances
until the final moment. In Iraq, year after year, the dictator was
given the chance to account for his weapons programs, and end
the nightmare for his people. Now the resolutions he defied have
been enforced.
And who will say that Iraq was better off when Saddam Hussein
was strutting and killing, or that the world was safer when he
held power? Who doubts that Afghanistan is a more just society
and less dangerous without Mullah Omar playing host to
terrorists from around the world. And Europe, too, is plainly
better off with Milosevic answering for his crimes, instead of
committing more.
It’s been said that those who live near a police station find it hard
to believe in the triumph of violence, in the same way free
peoples might be tempted to take for granted the orderly societies
we have come to know. Europe’s peaceful unity is one of the
great achievements of the last half-century. And because
European countries now resolve differences through negotiation
and consensus, there’s sometimes an assumption that the entire
world functions in the same way. But consensus, there’s
sometimes an assumption that the entire world functions in the
same way. But let us never forget how Europe’s unity was
achieved – by allied armies of liberation and NATO armies of
defense. And let us never forget, beyond Europe’s borders, in a
world where oppression and violence are very real, liberation is
still a moral goal, and freedom and security still need defenders.
The third pillar of security is our commitment to the global
expansion of democracy, and the hope and progress it brings, as
the alternative to instability and to hatred and terror. We cannot
rely exclusively on military power to assure our long-term
security. Lasting peace is gained as justice and democracy
advance.
In democratic and successful societies, men and women do not
swear allegiance to malcontents and murderers; they turn their
hearts and labor to building better lives. And democratic
governments do not shelter terrorist camps or attack their
peaceful neighbors; they honor the aspirations and dignity of
their own people. In our conflict with terror and tyranny, we
have an unmatched advantage, a power that cannot be resisted,
and that is the appeal of freedom to all mankind.
As global powers, both our nations serve the cause of freedom in
many ways, in many places. By promoting development, and
fighting famine and AIDS and other diseases, we’re fulfilling our
moral duties, as well as encouraging stability and building a
firmer basis for democratic institutions. By working for justice
in Burma, in the Sudan and in Zimbabwe, we give hope to
suffering people and improve the chances for stability and
progress. By extending the reach of trade we foster prosperity
and the habits of liberty. And by advancing freedom in the
greater Middle East, we help end a cycle of dictatorship and
radicalism that brings millions of people to misery and brings
danger to our own people.
The stakes in that region could not be higher. If the Middle East
remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a
place of stagnation and anger and violence for export. And as we
saw in the ruins of two towers, no distance on the map will
protect our lives and way of life. If the greater Middle East joins
the democratic revolution that has reached much of the world,
the lives of millions in that region will be bettered, and a trend of
conflict and fear will be ended at its source.
The movement of history will not come about quickly. Because
of our own democratic development – the fact that it was gradual
and, at times, turbulent – we must be patient with others. And
the Middle East countries have some distance to travel.
Arab scholars speak of a freedom deficit that has separated
whole nations from the progress of our time. The essentials of
social and material progress – limited government, equal justice
under law, religious and economic liberty, political participation,
free press, and respect for the rights of women – have been
scarce across the region. Yet that has begun to change. In an arc
of reform from Morocco to Jordan to Qatar, we are seeing
elections and new protections for women and the stirring of
political pluralism. Many governments are realizing that
theocracy and dictatorship do not lead to national greatness; they
end in national ruin. They are finding, as others will find, that
national progress and dignity are achieved when governments are
just and people are free.
The democratic progress we’ve seen in the Middle East was not
imposed from abroad, and neither will the greater progress we
hope to see. Freedom, by definition, must be chosen, and
defended by those who choose it. Our part, as free nations, is to
ally ourselves with reform, wherever it occurs.
Perhaps the most helpful change we can make is to change in our
own thinking. In the West, there’s been a certain skepticism
about the capacity or even the desire of Middle Eastern peoples
for self-government. We’re told that Islam is somehow
inconsistent with a democratic culture. Yet more than half of the
world’s Muslims are today contributing citizens in democratic
societies. It is suggested that the poor, in their daily struggles,
care little for self-government. Yet the poor, especially, need the
power of democracy to defend themselves against corrupt elites.
Peoples of the Middle East share a high civilization, a religion of
personal responsibility, and a need for freedom as deep as our
own. It is not realism to suppose that one-fifth of humanity is
unsuited to liberty; it is pessimism and condescension, and we
should have none of it.
We must shake off decades of failed policy in the Middle East.
Your nation and mine, in the past, have been willing to make a
bargain, to tolerate oppression for the sake of stability.
Longstanding ties often led us to overlook the faults of local
elites. Yet this bargain did not bring stability or make us safe. It
merely bought time, while problems festered and ideologies of
violence took hold.
As recent history has shown, we cannot turn a blind eye to
oppression just because the oppression is not in our own
backyard. No longer should we think tyranny is benign because
it is temporarily convenient. Tyranny is never benign to its
victims, and our great democracies should oppose tyranny
wherever it is found.
Now we’re pursuing a different course, a forward strategy of
freedom in the Middle East. We will consistently challenge the
enemies of reform and confront the allies of terror. We will
expect a higher standard from our friends in the region, and we
will meet our responsibilities in Afghanistan and in Iraq by
finishing the work of democracy we have begun.
There were good-faith disagreements in your country and mine
over the course and timing of military action in Iraq. Whatever
has come before, we now have only two options: to keep our
word, or to break our word. The failure of democracy in Iraq
would throw its people back into misery and turn that country
over to terrorists who wish to destroy us. Yet democracy will
succeed in Iraq, because our will is firm, our word is good, and
the Iraqi people will not surrender their freedom.
Since the liberation of Iraq, we have seen changes that could
hardly have been imagined a year ago. A new Iraqi police force
protects the people, instead of bullying them. More than 150
Iraqi newspapers are now in circulation, printing what they
choose, not what they’re ordered. Schools are open with
textbooks free of propaganda. Hospitals are functioning and are
well-supplied. Iraq has a new currency, the first battalion of a
new army, representative local governments, and a Governing
Council with an aggressive timetable for national sovereignty.
This is substantial progress. And much of it has proceeded faster
than similar efforts in Germany and Japan after World War II.
Yet the violence we are seeing in Iraq today is serious. And it
comes from Baathist holdouts and Jihadists from other countries,
and terrorists drawn to the prospect of innocent bloodshed. It is
the nature of terrorism and the cruelty of a few to try to bring
grief in the loss to many. The armed forces of both our countries
have taken losses, felt deeply by our citizens. Some families
now live with a burden of great sorrow. We cannot take the pain
away. But these families can know they are not alone. We pray
for their strength; we pray for their comfort; and we will never
forget the courage of the ones they loved.
The terrorists have a purpose, a strategy to their cruelty. They
view the rise of democracy in Iraq as a powerful threat to their
ambitions. In this, they are correct. They believe their acts of
terror against our coalition, against international aid workers and
against innocent Iraqis, will make us recoil and retreat. In this,
they are mistaken.
We did not charge hundreds of miles into the heart of Iraq and
pay a bitter cost of casualties, and liberate 25 million people,
only to retreat before a band of thugs and assassins. We will
help the Iraqi people establish a peaceful and democratic country
in the heart of the Middle East. And by doing so, we will defend
our people from danger.
The forward strategy of freedom must also apply to the Arab-
Israeli conflict. It’s a difficult period in a part of the world that
has known many. Yet, our commitment remains firm. We seek
justice and dignity. We seek a viable, independent state for the
Palestinian people, who have been betrayed by others for too
long. We seek security and recognition for the state of Israel,
which has lived in the shadow of random death for too long.
These are worthy goals in themselves, and by reaching them we
will also remove an occasion and excuse for hatred and violence
in the broader Middle East.
Achieving peace in the Holy Land is not just a matter of the
shape of a border. As we work on the details of peace, we must
look to the heart of the matter, which is the need for a viable
Palestinian democracy. Peace will not be achieved by
Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, who tolerate and
profit from corruption and maintain their ties to terrorist groups.
These are the methods of the old elites, who time and again had
put their own self-interest above the interest of the people they
claim to serve. The long-suffering Palestinian people deserve
better. They deserve true leaders, capable of creating and
governing a Palestinian state.
Even after the setbacks and frustrations of recent months,
goodwill and hard effort can bring about a Palestinian state and a
secure Israel. Those who would lead a new Palestine should
adopt peaceful means to achieve the rights of their people and
create the reformed institutions of a stable democracy.
Israel should freeze settlement construction, dismantle
unauthorized outposts, end the daily humiliation of the
Palestinian people, and not prejudice final negotiations with the
placements of walls and fences.
Arab states should end incitement in their own media, cut off
public and private funding for terrorism, and establish normal
relations with Israel.
Leaders in Europe should withdraw all favor and support from
any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays their cause.
And Europe’s leaders – and all leaders – should strongly oppose
anti-Semitism, which poisons public debates over the future of
the Middle East.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have great objectives before us that
make our Atlantic alliance as vital as it has ever been. We will
encourage the strength and effectiveness of international
institutions. We will use force when necessary in the defense of
freedom. And we will raise up an ideal of democracy in every
part of the world. On these three pillars we will build the peace
and security of all free nations in a time of danger.
So much good has come from our alliance of conviction and
might. So much now depends on the strength of this alliance as
we go forward. America has always found strong partners in
London, leaders of good judgment and blunt counsel and
backbone when times are tough. And I have found all those
qualities in your current Prime Minister, who has my respect and
my deepest thanks.
The ties between our nations, however, are deeper than the
relationship between leaders. These ties endure because they are
formed by the experience and responsibilities and adversity we
have shared. And in the memory of our peoples, there will
always be one experience, one central event when the seal was
fixed on the friendship between Britain and the United States:
The arrival in Great Britain of more than 1.5 million American
soldiers and airmen in the 1940s was a turning point in the
Second World War. For many Britons, it was a first close look at
Americans, other than in the movies. Some of you here today
may still remember the “friendly invasion.” Our lads, they took
some getting used to. There was even a saying about what many
of them were up to – in addition to be “overpaid and over here.”
At a reunion in North London some years ago, an American pilot
who had settled in England after his military service, said, “Well,
I’m still over here, and probably overpaid. So two out of three
isn’t bad.”
In that time of war, the English people did get used to the
Americans. They welcomed soldiers and fliers into their villages
and homes, and took to calling them, “our boys.” About 70,000
of those boys did their part to affirm our special relationship.
They returned home with English brides.
Americans gained a certain image of Britain, as well. We saw an
island threatened on every side, a leader who did not waver, and
a country of the firmest character. And that has not changed.
The British people are the sort of partners you want when serious
work needs doing. The men and women of this Kingdom are
kind and steadfast and generous and brave. And America is
fortunate to call this country our closest friend in the world. May
God bless you all.
---
President George W. Bush at the 20th Anniversary of the
National Endowment for Democracy, United States Chamber of
Commerce, November 6, 2003.
I have been critical at times of the Bush policy in Iraq, fearing
that the administration will cut and run before our mission is
accomplished. Words are merely that, words, without them
being put into action. What follows, however, is a game plan
that, if carried out, can lead to a far better world for all.
---
The roots of our democracy can be traced to England, and to its
Parliament. In June of 1982, President Ronald Reagan spoke at
Westminster Palace and declared, the turning point had arrived in
history. He argued that Soviet communism had failed, precisely
because it did not respect its own people – their creativity, their
genius and their rights.
President Reagan said that the day of Soviet tyranny was passing,
that freedom had a momentum which would not be halted. He
gave this organization its mandate: to add to the momentum of
freedom across the world. Your mandate was important 20 years
ago; it is equally important today.
A number of critics were dismissive of that speech by the
President. According to one editorial of the time, “It seems hard
to be a sophisticated European and also an admirer of Ronald
Reagan.” Some observers on both sides of the Atlantic
pronounced the speech simplistic and na ve, and even dangerous.
In fact, Ronald Reagan’s words were courageous and optimistic
and entirely correct.
The great democratic movement President Reagan described was
already well underway. In the early 1970s, there were about 40
democracies in the world. By the middle of that decade, Portugal
and Spain and Greece held free elections. Soon there were new
democracies in Latin America, and free institutions were
spreading in Korea, in Taiwan, and in East Asia. This very week
in 1989, there were protests in East Berlin and in Leipzig. By the
end of that year, every communist dictatorship in Central
America had collapsed. Within another year, the South African
government released Nelson Mandela. Four years later, he was
elected president of his country – ascending, like Walesa and
Havel, from prisoner of state to head of state.
As the 20th century ended, there were around 120 democracies in
the world – and I can assure you more are on the way. Ronald
Reagan would be pleased, and he would not be surprised.
We’ve witnessed, in little over a generation, the swiftest advance
of freedom in the 2,500 year story of democracy. Historians in
the future will offer their own explanations for why this
happened. Yet we already know some of the reasons they will
cite. It is no accident that the rise of so many democracies took
place in a time when the world’s most influential nation was
itself a democracy.
The United States made military and moral commitments in
Europe and Asia, which protected free nations from aggression,
and created the conditions in which new democracies could
flourish. As we provided security for whole nations, we also
provided inspiration for oppressed peoples. In prison camps, in
banned union meetings, in clandestine churches, men and women
knew that the whole world was not sharing their own nightmare.
They knew of at least one place – a bright and hopeful land –
where freedom was valued and secure. And they prayed that
America would not forget them, or forget the mission to promote
liberty around the world.
Historians will note that in many nations, the advance of markets
and free enterprise helped to create a middle class that was
confident enough to demand their own rights. They will point to
the role of technology in frustrating censorship and central
control – and marvel at the power of instant communications to
spread the truth, the news, and courage across borders.
Historians in the future will reflect on an extraordinary,
undeniable fact: Over time, free nations grow stronger and
dictatorships grow weaker. In the middle of the 20th century,
some imagined that the central planning and social regimentation
were a shortcut to national strength. In fact, the prosperity, and
social vitality and technological progress of a people are directly
determined by extent of their liberty. Freedom honors and
unleashes human creativity – and creativity determines the
strength and wealth of nations. Liberty is both the plan of
Heaven for humanity, and the best hope for progress here on
Earth.
The progress of liberty is a powerful trend. Yet, we also know
that liberty, if not defended, can be lost. The success of freedom
is not determined by some dialectic of history. By definition, the
success of freedom rests upon the choices and the courage of free
peoples, and upon their willingness to sacrifice. In the trenches
of World War I, through a two-front war in the 1940s, the
difficult battles of Korea and Vietnam, and in missions of rescue
and liberation on nearly every continent, Americans have amply
displayed our willingness to sacrifice for liberty.
The sacrifices of Americans have not always been recognized or
appreciated, yet they have been worthwhile. Because we and our
allies were steadfast, Germany and Japan are democratic nations
that no longer threaten the world. A global nuclear standoff with
the Soviet Union ended peacefully – as did the Soviet Union.
The nations of Europe are moving towards unity, not dividing
into armed camps and descending into genocide. Every nation
has learned, or should have learned, an important lesson:
Freedom is worth fighting for, dying for, and standing for – and
the advance of freedom leads to peace.
And now we must apply that lesson in our own time. We’ve
reached another great turning point – and the resolve we show
will shape the next stage of the world democratic movement.
Our commitment to democracy is tested in countries like Cuba
and Burma and North Korea and Zimbabwe – outposts of
oppression in our world. The people in these nations live in
captivity, and fear and silence. Yet, these regimes cannot hold
back freedom forever – and, one day, from prison camps and
prison cells, and from exile, the leaders of new democracies will
arrive. Communism, and militarism and rule by the capricious
and corrupt are the relics of a passing era. And we will stand
with these oppressed peoples until the day of their freedom
finally arrives.
Our commitment to democracy is tested in China. That nation
now has a sliver, a fragment of liberty. Yet, China’s people will
eventually want their liberty pure and whole. China has
discovered that economic freedom leads to national wealth.
China’s leaders will also discover that freedom is indivisible –
that social and religious freedom is also essential to national
greatness and national dignity. Eventually, men and women who
are allowed to control their own wealth will insist on controlling
their own lives and their own country.
Our commitment to democracy is also tested in the Middle East,
which is my focus today, and must be a focus of American policy
for decades to come. In many nations of the Middle East –
countries of great strategic importance – democracy has not yet
taken root. And the questions arise: Are the peoples of the
Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions
of men and women and children condemned by history or culture
to live in despotism? Are they alone never to know freedom, and
never even to have a choice in the matter? I, for one, do not
believe it. I believe every person has the ability and the right to
be free.
Some skeptics of democracy assert that the traditions of Islam
are inhospitable to the representative government. This “cultural
condescension,” as Ronald Reagan termed it, has a long history.
After the Japanese surrender in 1945, a so-called Japan expert
asserted that democracy in that former empire would “never
work.” Another observer declared the prospects for democracy
in post-Hitler Germany are, and I quote, “most uncertain at best.”
Seventy-four years ago, The Sunday London Times declared
nine-tenths of the population of India to be “illiterates not caring
a fig for politics.” Yet when Indian democracy was imperiled in
the 1970s, the Indian people showed their commitment to liberty
in a national referendum that saved their form of government.
Time after time, observers have questioned whether this country,
or that people, or this group, are “ready” for democracy – as if
freedom were a prize you win for meeting our own Western
standards of progress. In fact, the daily work of democracy itself
is the path of progress. It teaches cooperation, the free exchange
of ideas, and the peaceful resolution of differences. As men and
women are showing, from Bangladesh to Botswana, to
Mongolia, it is the practice of democracy that makes a nation
ready for democracy, and every nation can start on this path.
It should be clear to all that Islam – the faith of one-fifth of
humanity – is consistent with democratic rule. Democratic
progress is found in many predominantly Muslim countries – in
Turkey and Indonesia, and Senegal and Albania, Niger and
Sierra Leone. Muslim men and women are good citizens of
India and South Africa, of the nations of Western Europe, and of
the United States of America.
More than half of all the Muslims in the world live in freedom
under democratically constituted governments. They succeed in
democratic societies, not in spite of their faith, but because of it.
A religion that demands individual moral accountability, and
encourages the encounter of the individual with God, is fully
compatible with the rights and responsibilities of self-
government.
Yet there’s a great challenge today in the Middle East. In the
words of a recent report by Arab scholars, the global wave of
democracy has – and I quote – “barely reached the Arab states.”
They continue: “This freedom deficit undermines human
development and is one of the most painful manifestations of
lagging political development.” The freedom deficit they
describe has terrible consequences, of the people of the Middle
East and for the world. In many Middle Eastern countries,
poverty is deep and it is spreading, women lack rights and are
denied schooling. Whole societies remain stagnant while the
world moves ahead. These are not the failures of a culture or a
religion. These are the failures of political and economic
doctrines.
As the colonial era passed away, the Middle East saw the
establishment of many military dictatorships. Some rulers
adopted the dogmas of socialism, seized total control of political
parties and the media and universities. They allied themselves
with the Soviet bloc and with international terrorism. Dictators
in Iraq and Syria promised the restoration of national honor, a
return to ancient glories. They’ve left instead a legacy of torture,
oppression, misery, and ruin.
Other men, and groups of men, have gained influence in the
Middle East and beyond through an ideology of theocratic terror.
Behind their language of religion is the ambition for absolute
political power. Ruling cabals like the Taliban show their
version of religious piety in public whippings of women, ruthless
suppression of any difference or dissent, and support for
terrorists who arm and train to murder the innocent. The Taliban
promised religious purity and national pride. Instead, by
systematically destroying a proud and working society, they left
behind suffering and starvation.
Many Middle Eastern governments now understand that military
dictatorship and theocratic rule are a straight, smooth highway to
nowhere. But some governments still cling to the old habits of
central control. There are governments that still fear and repress
independent thought and creativity, and private enterprise – the
human qualities that make for strong and successful societies.
Even when these nations have vast natural resources, they do not
respect or develop their greatest resources – the talent and energy
of men and women working and living in freedom.
Instead of dwelling on past wrongs and blaming others,
governments in the Middle East need to confront real problems,
and serve the true interests of their nations. The good and
capable people of the Middle East all deserve responsible
leadership. For too long, many people in that region have been
victims and subjects – they deserve to be active citizens.
Governments across the Middle East and North Africa are
beginning to see the need for change. Morocco has a diverse
new parliament; King Mohammed has urged it to extend the
rights to women. Here is how His Majesty explained his reforms
to parliament: “How can society achieve progress while women,
who represent half the nation, see their rights violated and suffer
as a result of injustice?” The King of Morocco is correct: The
future of Muslim nations will be better for all with the full
participation of women.
In Bahrain last year, citizens elected their own parliament for the
first time in nearly three decades. Oman has extended the vote to
all adult citizens; Qatar has a new constitution; Yemen has a
multiparty political system; Kuwait has a directly elected
national assembly; and Jordan held historic elections this
summer. Recent surveys in Arab nations reveal broad support
for political pluralism, the rule of law, and free speech. These
are the stirrings of Middle Eastern democracy, and they carry the
promise of greater change to come.
As changes come to the Middle Eastern region, those with power
should ask themselves: Will they be remembered for resisting
reform, or for leading it? In Iran, the demand for democracy is
strong and broad, as we saw last month when thousands gathered
to welcome home Shirin Ebadi, the winner of the Nobel Peace
Prize. The regime in Tehran must heed the democratic demands
of the Iranian people, or lose its last claim to legitimacy.
For the Palestinian people, the only path to independence and
dignity and progress is the path of democracy. And the
Palestinian leaders who block and undermine democratic reform,
and feed hatred and encourage violence are not leaders at all.
They’re the main obstacles to peace, and to the success of the
Palestinian people.
The Saudi government is taking first steps toward reform,
including a plan for gradual introduction of elections. By giving
the Saudi people a greater role in their own society, the Saudi
government can demonstrate true leadership in the region.
The great and proud nation of Egypt has shown the way toward
peace in the Middle East, and now should show the way toward
democracy in the Middle East. Champions of democracy in the
region understand that democracy is not perfect, it is not the path
to utopia, but it’s the only path to national success and dignity.
As we watch and encourage reforms in the region, we are
mindful that modernization is not the same as Westernization.
Representative governments in the Middle East will reflect their
own cultures. They will not, and should not, look like us.
Democratic nations may be constitutional monarchies, federal
republics, or parliamentary systems. And working democracies
always need time to develop – as did our own. We’ve taken a
200-year journey toward inclusion and justice – and this makes
us patient and understanding as other nations are at different
stages of this journey.
There are, however, essential principles common to every
successful society, in every culture. Successful societies limit
the power of the state and the power of the military – so that
governments respond to the will of the people, and not the will of
an elite. Successful societies protect freedom with the consistent
and impartial rule of law, instead of selecting applying –
selectively applying the law to punish political opponents.
Successful societies allow room for healthy civic institutions –
for political parties and labor unions and independent
newspapers and broadcast media. Successful societies guarantee
religious liberty – the right to serve and honor God without fear
of persecution. Successful societies privatize their economies,
and secure the rights of property. They prohibit and punish
official corruption, and invest in the health and education of their
people. They recognize the rights of women. And instead of
directing hatred and resentment against others, successful
societies appeal to the hopes of their own people.
These vital principles are being applied in the nations of
Afghanistan and Iraq. With the steady leadership of President
Karzai, the people of Afghanistan are building a modern and
peaceful government. Next month, 500 delegates will convene a
national assembly in Kabul to approve a new Afghan
constitution. The proposed draft would establish a bicameral
parliament, set national elections next year, and recognize
Afghanistan’s Muslim identity, while protecting the rights of all
citizens. Afghanistan faces continuing economic and security
challenges – it will face those challenges as a free and stable
democracy.
In Iraq, the Coalition Provisional Authority and the Iraqi
Governing Council are also working together to build a
democracy – and after three decades of tyranny, this work is not
easy. The former dictator ruled by terror and treachery, and left
deeply ingrained habits of fear and distrust. Remnants of his
regime, joined by foreign terrorists, continue their battle against
order and against civilization. Our coalition is responding to
recent attacks with precision raids, guided by intelligence
provided by the Iraqis, themselves. And we’re working closely
with Iraqi citizens as they prepare a constitution, as they move
toward free elections and take increasing responsibility for their
own affairs. As in the defense of Greece in 1947, and later in the
Berlin Airlift, the strength and will of free peoples are now being
tested before a watching world. And we will meet this test.
Securing democracy in Iraq is the work of many hands.
American and coalition forces are sacrificing for the peace of
Iraq and for the security of free nations. Aid workers from many
countries are facing danger to help the Iraqi people. The
National Endowment for Democracy is promoting women’s
rights, and training Iraqi journalists, and teaching the skills of
political participation. Iraqis, themselves – police and border
guards and local officials – are joining in the work and they are
sharing in the sacrifice.
This is a massive and difficult undertaking – it is worth our
effort, it is worth our sacrifices, because we know the stakes.
The failure of Iraqi democracy would embolden terrorists around
the world, increase dangers to the American people, and
extinguish the hopes of millions in the region. Iraqi democracy
will succeed – and that success will send forth the news, from
Damascus to Tehran – that freedom can be the future of every
nation. The establishment of a free Iraq at the heart of the
Middle East will be a watershed event in the global democratic
revolution.
Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the
lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe –
because in the long run, stability cannot be purchased at the
expense of liberty. As long as the Middle East remains a place
where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of
stagnation, resentment, and violence ready for export. And with
the spread of weapons that can bring catastrophic harm to our
country and to our friends, it would be reckless to accept the
status quo.
Therefore, the United States has adopted a new policy, a forward
strategy of freedom in the Middle East. This strategy requires
the same persistence and energy and idealism we have shown
before. And it will yield the same results. As in Europe, as in
Asia, as in every region of the world, the advance of freedom
leads to peace.
The advance of freedom is the calling of our time; it is the calling
of our country. From the Fourteen Points to the Four Freedoms,
to the Speech at Westminster, America has put our power at the
service of principle. We believe that liberty is the design of
nature; we believe that liberty is the direction of history. We
believe that human fulfillment and excellence come in the
responsible exercise of liberty. And we believe that freedom –
the freedom we prize – is not for us alone, it is the right and the
capacity of all mankind.
Working for the spread of freedom can be hard. Yet, America
has accomplished hard tasks before. Our nation is strong; we’re
strong of heart. And we’re not alone. Freedom is finding allies
in every country; freedom finds allies in every culture. And as
we meet the terror and violence of the world, we can be certain
the author of freedom is not indifferent to the fate of freedom.
With all the tests and all the challenges of our age, this is, above
all, the age of liberty. Each of you at this Endowment is fully
engaged in the great cause of liberty. And I thank you. May God
bless your work. And may God continue to bless America.
---
Hott Spotts will return December 4. Happy Thanksgiving.
Brian Trumbore
|
