Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
7346437
label
Text of Remarks by the President to be Delivered to the Pittsburgh Economic Club [Ford Speech or Statement]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
7346437
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Text of Remarks by the President to be Delivered to the Pittsburgh Economic Club [Ford Speech or Statement]
citationUrl
collections
White House Press Releases (Ford Administration)
Press Releases
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
7346437
levelOfDescription
item
productionDates
day
25
logicalDate
1976-10-25
month
10
year
1976
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
b7f3b68a3e721ad7
ocrText
Digitized from Box 33 of the White House Press Releases at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE UNTIL 6:00 am EDT
OCTOBER 25, 1976
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1976
Office of the White House Press Secretary
(Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)
THE WHITE HOUSE
TEXT OF REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
TO BE DELIVERED TO THE
PITTSBURGH ECONOMIC CLUB
GRAND BALLROOM
PITTSBURGH HILTON HOTEL
Some 20 years ago, speaking before the League of Women Voters, President
Eisenhower was asked about the goals of United States foreign policy.
"The foreign policy of our nation is not difficult to state, 11 he said. "We are
for peace -- peace first, last and always.
Today that remains the central purpose of American foreign policy. It
has been the purpose of every Administration since I went to Washington more
than a quarter of a century ago.
In fact, looking back over those years, through the terms of six Presidents --
three Democrats and three Republicans -- you will find that while the
emphasis may have changed from one Administration to the next, the founda-
tions of American foreign policy have remained essentially the same.
There have been misjudments.
Sometimes we have made commitments
that have exceeded our capabilities. Sometimes we have been heavy-handed.
But the record of achievement far exceeds that of failure.
Throughout my time as President, I have shaped our foreign policy according
to these four basic principles:
First, we have sought to maintain America's unquestioned military
strength;
Second, we have tried to maintain and strengthen our friendships with
our allies;
Third, working from a position of strength, we have sought to reduce
tensions in the world and to avert the threat of a nuclear holocaust;
Finally, we have tried to act as leader and as peacemaker in resolving
the many difficult problems that have arisen within a community of nations
that has been constantly expanding.
There is no better testimony to the wisdom of our policies than the fact
that today America is at peace. Not a single one of our men is fighting or
dying on any foreign battlefield. The draft no longer hangs over the heads
of the younger generation.
Today America is strong, ready to meet any challenge to our security. Our
relationships with our allies have never been better -- a point that has been
echoed repeatedly as leaders of other nations have streamed to our shores
to share in our Bicentennial celebration. And our adversaries respect us:
they respect our commitment to freedom and they respect our strength and
our will to protect it.
The peace that exists today is directly related to our collective hard work
and skillful diplomacy. I am very proud of what we have accomplished. I
am very proud to be the first President since Dwight Eisenhower to seek
election with America at peace.
MORE
- 2 -
What now concerns me is that during the closing weeks of this Presidenti al
campaign, it has become apparent that merica is now being asked by my
opponent to make a fundamental change in the direction and conduct of U. S.
foreign policy. As citizens and as voters, you are being asked to decide
whether you wish to build on the great traditions of & merican foreign poli cy--
the traditions that can keep us strong and at peace--or whether you wish to
break from those traditions, venturing into the unknown wit a doctrine that
is untested, untried, and in my view, potentially dangerous.
This doctrine deviates substantially from the solid principles of the bipartisan
foreign and defense policie of the past 30 years. It has a strong flavor of
isolationism. If it is applied in practice in the same way that it is described
in campaign oratory, there is a si gnificant risk it could lead to maj or inter-
national crises. Let us look a few moments at the most signifi cant differences
between the policies of my Administration and those that are offered as an
alternative.
During the two and a half years of my Presidency, I have fought hard to
strengthen our national defense. When I took office, defense spending was
a smaller share of the national budget than at any time since before the
Korean War. We were at the razor's edge in defense strength. If the Congress
had continued cutting our defense budgets, we would assuredly have drifted
into a position of military inferiority.
One of the most significant achievements of this Administration is that we have
now reversed that slide. And as long as I am President, we are going to have
an f rmy, a Navy, an Air Force and a Marine Corps that are unsurpassed in
military capability. I know it is costly. As President Eisenhower once said,
"A good defense is never a cheap defense.' But for the sake of peace and
freedom we must be willing to make the sacrifices that maintain America's
military might.
Now consider the alternative that is being offered to the American people in this
election. Instead of maintaining our military strength, the alternative pro-
posed is to slash billions from our defense budget, stripping us not of waste
but of military muscle. The B-1 bomber is a prime example. I believe it is
essential to our security to go forward with production of this new aircraft whic
which has met and surpassed every test to date. It would replace the aging
B-52, so that our pilots can defend America in aircraft that give us a reliable
capability for penetrating improved air defense systems of our potential ad-
versaries. So the differences in defense spending are clear: I want to continue
on a course which I believe will keep us strong and free; the alternative is to
head down a road which could raise doubts about our strength and determination
on the part of our friends and potential adversaries.
A second basic principle of America's policy is to maintain strong, durable
relationships with our allies.
When I took office, America was inthe midst of a constitutional crisis. We
were still suffering from the bitterness of Vietnam. And we were faced with
a deteriorating economy. The world was watching to see if we would recover.
They knew it was critical to their own future, because if America became
mired in self-doubts, then the peace of the world would be jeopardized.
I am proud of our record during this period of testing:
-- We have led the world out of the most dangerous recession since the 1930's
and launched our economic recovery without producing another round
of devastating inflation.
MORE
-3-
The economic comeback of the industrialized democracies is being
accomplished not with the beggar-thy-neighbor policies of the 1930s
but with an unprecedented degree of cooperation, as witnessed by
the Summit Meetings in France and Puerto Rico of the leading
industrial democracies.
In Europe, we have injected new vigor into the Atlantic alliance.
We have successfully resisted Congressional pressures to reduce
our NATO troop commitments, we have worked closely with our
allies on the energy crisis, on the non-proliferation of nuclear
weapons, on economic policies and on coordinating our approaches
to East-West diplomacy. The alliance in Europe has never been
stronger.
We have also made significant progress in the Middle East. The
United States stands staunchly by Israel, supplying in just two years
time over 40% of all U.S. aid to that country since its founding in
1949. At the same time, we have earned the respect and confidence
of the Arab nations. Today, the United States is the only major leader
trusted by both sides in the Middle East: they want our leadership,
and we will continue to provide it.
Vie can also look to A sia with new confidence today. We now enjoy
the strongest links ever with Japan. This was symbolized by the
first visit ever of the Emperor to the U.S. and my own visit to his
homeland -- the first visit to Japan by an American President.
We have remained steadfast in the Korean peninsula. We have put
the Vietnam war behind us in a way which has protected our essential
interest and maintained America's respect in that part of the world.
We have opened the door to better relations with China.
Now let us look at the alternative that is being offered in this election.
Instead of holding firm in Asia, we are told that we should pull our
troops and major weapons systems out of Korea -- an invitation to
disaster not only there but in Japan as well.
In Europe, we are told that we should not "close the door" to consul-
tations and "friendships" with the communist leaders of Italy, France
and Portugal. I am deeply concerned over the impact that such an
approach would have upon the democratic parties that have, for
decades, waged a struggle to preserve freedom against communist
tyranny.
In the Middle East, the alternative appars distinctly hostile to our
friendships with moderate Arab states. I can tell you from experience
that such a total departure from current policies could drive these
countries into the arms of the Soviets, threatening the stability of
the area and eventually inflicting enormous harm upon the very country
that it purports to help, the State of Israel.
Let us look now at still another basic principle of our foreign policy: to
reduce tensions with our adversaries and reduce the threat of nuclear war.
Over the past two years, we have taken significant strides down the path
toward halting and reversing the strategic arms spiral. Early in my Admin-
istration I met with General Secretary Brezhnev in Vladivostok, where we
pledged our mutual efforts to reach a new agreement limiting nuclear arma-
ments. Today an agreement embodying the Vladivostok accords is 90%
complete. I am confident that it can be successfully concluded in the near
future, and that we can work for even further reductions in nuclear weapons.
When that agreement is reached, the prospects for reducing the dangers of
a nuclear holocaust will brighten around the world.
MORE
- 4
But let us never forget American Presidents have learned that tough talk
by itself is insufficient; it is too easily dismissed as bombast. Our
rhetoric must be backed by substance, a strong national defense, strong a
alliances, and strong diplomacy.
In place of a strong defense, the alternative called for in this election is a
weakened defense. In place of strong alliances, we are offered troop.
pullbacks and sweeping reviews of America's commitments to its allies. In
place of the strategic arms agreement at Vladivostok--wndih provides for
equal numbers at a level requiring Soviet reductions--the alternative pro-
posed is a freeze at current levels. This major step backward would lock
us into force levels which for the Soviet Union would be higher than agreed at
Vladivostok and for the United States significantly lower.
In the past, American Presidents have always known they should never say in
advance precisely what course of action this country would take inthe event
of an ernational crisis. The reason for such an approach ought to be
obvious enough. When a potential adversary knows what you will and won't
do in advance, your flexibility is limited and his is increased. He can probe
with impunity or redirect his efforts at more tempting targets. The
acquisition of knowledge about such intentions in advance is one of the major
reasons why countries spend vast sums for intelligence activities. Thus,
it was with some suprise that I heard a specific proposal for total economic
warfare against the Arabs in the event of another oil embargo. I though such
a statement of a specific course of action in advance was a singular mistake
which, once made, would not be repeated. I was, therefore, surprised to hear
him make the same mistake at Williamsburg in his ill-advised comments
concerning what he might or might not do if the future security of Yugoslavia
was threatened. Statements of this kind, as we learned over twenty-five
years ago, instead of serving the cause of peace, invite conflict. They invite
aggression rather than deter it. I have to assume that this statement simply
reflects inexperience.
Ladies and genetlemen: Even though America is at peace today, we must
recognize that we continue to live in a dangerous world--a world hostile to
freedom. Unrest is still seething in many parts of the globe.
The challenge to American diplomacy during these next four years will be
equal to any other period in our lifetime. We must complete negotiations on
a SALT agreement to replace the current treaty, which expires in October
of 1977. We must continue our efforts to defuse the powderkeg in Southern
Africa. We must work toachieve ajust, stable peace in the Middle East. We
must Festore prosperity. And we must deal intelligently and compassionately
with the new agenda of world issues such as nuclear proliferation, economic
interdependence, food, energy, pollution, and growing populations.
We can succeed in these tasks only if we remain true to the great principles
that have guided United States foreign policy for more than a quarter of a
century.
This is not atime to weaken to our own defense, to refuse to equip our troops
with essential new weapons, to undermine democratic leaders by hinting at
new relationships with communist leaders in Western Europe, to withdraw
our troops from South Korea, to upset the balance in the Middle East, or to
concede such nations as Yugoslavia to the Soviet sphere.
This is a time to benefit from and build upon the wisdom we have inherited.
MORE
-5-
The peace we enjoy today is not an accident.
The peace we have today is a product of the patient diplomacy and the
determination of the past.
To preserve the peace, we must be willing to pay the price for a mighty
military force.
To preserve the peace, we must be willing to shoulder the burdens of our
alliances and friendships.
To preserve the peace, we must be tough-minded and persistent in dealing with
O ur adversaries. Never -- not once -- can we drop our guard.
To preserve the peace, we must apply the enormous talent and technology of
America to advancing gains made in far-flung corners of the world,
stretching from the Middle East to Africa.
To preserve the peace, we must be generous and compassionate toward
others less fortunate than ourselves.
Finally, to preserve the peace, we must be true to the ideals of America --
to our love of freedom and dignity and justice for all humankind.
These are my goals as your President. They are the goals of a great nation.
With your help, with your prayers, I will continue their pursuit during the
next four years. And I pledge to you today, that as long as I am your Presi-
dent, I will never let you down.
Thank you.
END