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
323150484
label
Coast Guard Academy Commencement, 5/24/89 [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323150484
contentType
document
title
Coast Guard Academy Commencement, 5/24/89 [1]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13488-003
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Draft Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323150484
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
45a9c2eae939461b
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
2011-2184-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Draft Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13488
Folder ID Number:
13488-003
Folder Title:
Coast Guard Academy Commencement, 5/24/89 [1]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
15
7
4
037765SS
Document No.
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
5/24/89
DATE:
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT
SUBJECT:
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
STUDDERT
BATES
UNTERMEYER
BREEDEN
ROGERS
CARD
WINSTON
CICCONI
PINKERTON
BOSKIN
DEMAREST
FITZWATER
GRAY
HAGIN
REMARKS:
The attached has been forwarded to the President.
RESPONSE:
James W, Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
MAY 24, 1989
THANK YOU, ADMIRAL. [ACKNOWLEDGMENTS, ADMIRAL
YOST, SECRETARY SKINNER, ALEX HALEY, DISTINGUISHED
GUESTS.] I CONGRATULATE EACH MEMBER OF THIS YEAR'S
CLASS ON RECEIVING YOUR COMMISSION INTO SUCH A PROUD
SERVICE.
MENTION THE COAST GUARD, AND MOST PEOPLE THINK
ABOUT LIVES SAVED AT SEA, DARING RESCUE OPERATIONS.
BUT THOSE DAILY ACTS OF HEROISM ARE JUST ONE PART OF
THE VITAL WORK THE COAST GUARD PERFORMS. RIGHT NOW, IN
PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND, THE COAST GUARD CONTINUES TO WORK
AROUND THE CLOCK IN A MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN-UP
EFFORT. RIGHT NOW, OFF THE FLORIDA COAST, COAST GUARD
PATROLS ARE CHASING DOWN DRUG SMUGGLERS -- AND KEEPING
DRUGS OFF OUR STREETS. THAT MAY BE "ALL IN A DAY'S
WORK" FOR THE COAST GUARD -- BUT IT'S ABSOLUTELY VITAL
TO OUR NATIONAL HEALTH, WELL-BEING AND SECURITY.
- 2 -
I'M SURE ON THAT LONG FIRST DAY OF SWAB SUMMER,
YOU NEVER THOUGHT FOUR YEARS COULD PASS SO QUICKLY.
BUT THEY HAVE. YOU'VE WORKED HARD, BILLET NIGHT HAS
COME AND GONE YOU'RE READY -- "SEMPER PARATUS" IN
THE WORDS OF YOUR MOTTO -- READY TO ENTER THE COAST.
GUARD SERVICE, AND THE WORLD. THE TRUTH IS, THAT IS
WHAT COMMENCEMENT IS ALL ABOUT. THE WORLD IS YOURS,
AND TODAY'S CEREMONY IS REALLY PART OF THE CHANGE OF
COMMAND FROM ONE GENERATION TO THE NEXT.
TODAY, OUR WORLD -- YOUR WORLD -- IS CHANGING,
EAST AND WEST. TODAY I WANT TO SPEAK TO YOU ABOUT THE
WORLD WE WANT TO SEE, AND WHAT WE CAN DO TO BRING THAT
NEW WORLD INTO FOCUS.
WE LIVE IN A TIME WHEN WE ARE WITNESSING THE END
OF AN IDEA: THE FINAL CHAPTER OF THE COMMUNIST
EXPERIMENT. COMMUNISM IS NOW RECOGNIZED -- EVEN BY
MANY WITHIN THE COMMUNIST WORLD ITSELF -- AS A FAILED
SYSTEM: ONE THAT PROMISED ECONOMIC PROSPERITY BUT
FAILED TO DELIVER THE GOODS, A SYSTEM THAT BUILT A WALL
BETWEEN THE PEOPLE AND THEIR POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS.
- 3 -
BUT THE ECLIPSE OF COMMUNISM IS ONLY ONE HALF OF
THE STORY OF OUR TIME. THE OTHER IS THE ASCENDANCY OF
THE DEMOCRATIC IDEA.
NEVER BEFORE HAS THE IDEA OF
FREEDOM SO CAPTURED THE IMAGINATIONS OF MEN AND WOMEN
THE WORLD OVER. NEVER BEFORE HAS THE HOPE OF FREEDOM
BECKONED SO MANY. TRADE UNIONISTS IN WARSAW. THE
PEOPLE OF PANAMA. RULERS CONSULTING THE RULED IN THE
SOVIET UNION. AND EVEN AS WE SPEAK, THE WORLD IS
TRANSFIXED BY THE DRAMATIC EVENTS IN TIANANMEN SQUARE.
EVERYWHERE, THOSE VOICES ARE SPEAKING THE LANGUAGE OF
DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM. WE HEAR THEM; THE WORLD HEARS
THEM; AND AMERICA WILL DO ALL IT CAN TO ENCOURAGE THEM.
SO TODAY, I WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT OUR SECURITY
STRATEGY FOR THE 1990S -- ONE THAT ADVANCES AMERICAN
IDEALS, AND UPHOLDS AMERICAN AIMS.
AMIDST THE MANY CHALLENGES WE'LL FACE, THERE WILL
BE RISKS. BUT LET ME ASSURE YOU: WE'LL FIND MORE THAN
OUR SHARE OF OPPORTUNITIES. WE AND OUR ALLIES ARE
STRONG STRONGER THAN AT ANY POINT IN THE POST-WAR
PERIOD, AND MORE CAPABLE THAN EVER OF SUPPORTING THE
CAUSE OF FREEDOM.
- 4 -
THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY BEFORE US TO SHAPE A NEW
WORLD.
WHAT IS IT THAT WE WANT TO SEE? IT'S A GROWING
COMMUNITY OF DEMOCRACIES ANCHORING INTERNATIONAL PEACE
AND STABILITY, AND A DYNAMIC FREE MARKET SYSTEM
GENERATING PROSPERITY AND PROGRESS ON A GLOBAL SCALE.
THE ECONOMIC FOUNDATION OF THIS NEW ERA IS THE PROVEN
SUCCESS OF THE FREE MARKET -- AND NURTURING THAT
FOUNDATION ARE THE VALUES ROOTED IN FREEDOM AND
DEMOCRACY.
AMERICA WAS FOUNDED ON THESE VALUES; THEY GIVE US
THE CONFIDENCE THAT FLOWS FROM STRENGTH. so LET'S BE
CLEAR ABOUT ONE THING: AMERICA LOOKS FORWARD TO THE
CHALLENGE OF AN EMERGING GLOBAL MARKET. BUT THESE
VALUES ARE NOT OURS ALONE; THEY ARE NOW SHARED BY OUR
FRIENDS AND ALLIES AROUND THE GLOBE.
THE ECONOMIC RISE OF EUROPE AND THE NATIONS OF THE
PACIFIC RIM IS THE CROWNING SUCCESS OF OUR POST-WAR
POLICY.
- 5 -
THIS TIME IS A TIME OF TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY --
AND DESTINY IS IN OUR OWN HANDS. TO REACH THE WORLD WE
WANT TO SEE, WE'VE GOT HARD WORK AHEAD OF US.
0
WE MUST RESOLVE INTERNATIONAL TRADE PROBLEMS THAT
THREATEN TO PIT FRIENDS AND ALLIES AGAINST ONE ANOTHER.
0
WE MUST COMBAT MISGUIDED NOTIONS OF ECONOMIC
NATIONALISM THAT TELL US TO CLOSE OFF OUR ECONOMIES TO
FOREIGN COMPETITION, JUST WHEN THE GLOBAL MARKETPLACE
HAS BECOME A FACT OF LIFE.
0
WE MUST OPEN THE DOOR TO THE NATIONS OF EASTERN
EUROPE AND OTHER SOCIALIST COUNTRIES THAT EMBRACE FREE
MARKET REFORMS.
0
AND FINALLY, FOR DEVELOPING NATIONS HEAVILY
BURDENED WITH DEBT, WE MUST PROVIDE ASSISTANCE AND
ENCOURAGE THE MARKET REFORMS THAT WILL SET THOSE
NATIONS ON A PATH TOWARDS GROWTH.
- 6 -
IF WE SUCCEED, THE NEXT DECADE AND THE CENTURY
BEYOND WILL BE AN ERA OF UNPARALLELED GROWTH -- AN ERA
WHICH SEES THE FLOURISHING OF FREEDOM, PEACE AND
PROSPERITY AROUND THE WORLD.
BUT THIS NEW ERA CANNOT UNFOLD IN A CLIMATE WHERE
CONFLICT AND TORMOIL EXIST. THEREFORE, OUR GOALS MUST
ALSO INCLUDE SECURITY AND STABILITY: SECURITY FOR
OURSELVES, OUR ALLIES AND FRIENDS; STABILITY IN THE
INTERNATIONAL ARENA, AND AN END TO REGIONAL CONFLICTS.
SUCH GOALS ARE CONSTANT, BUT THE STRATEGY WE
EMPLOY TO REACH THEM CAN, AND MUST, CHANGE AS THE WORLD
CHANGES. TODAY, THE NEED FOR A DYNAMIC AND ADAPTABLE
STRATEGY IS IMPERATIVE. WE MUST BE STRONG --
ECONOMICALLY, DIPLOMATICALLY, AND MILITARILY -- TO TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES OPEN TO US IN A WORLD OF
RAPID CHANGE.
AND NOWHERE WILL THE ULTIMATE CONSEQUENCES OF
CHANGE HAVE MORE SIGNIFICANCE FOR WORLD SECURITY THAN
WITHIN THE SOVIET UNION.
- 7 -
WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW IN THE USSR IS INDEED
DRAMATIC. THE PROCESS IS STILL ONGOING, UNFINISHED.
BUT MAKE NO MISTAKE: OUR POLICY IS TO SEIZE EVERY, AND
I MEAN EVERY, OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD A BETTER, MORE
STABLE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SOVIET UNION -- JUST AS IT
IS OUR POLICY TO DEFEND AMERICAN INTERESTS IN LIGHT OF
THE ENDURING REALITY OF SOVIET MILITARY POWER.
WE WANT TO SEE PERESTROIKA SUCCEED. WE WANT TO
SEE THE POLICIES OF GLASNOST AND PERESTROIKA -- SO FAR,
A REVOLUTION IMPOSED FROM THE TOP DOWN --
INSTITUTIONALIZED WITHIN THE SOVIET UNION. AND WE WANT
TO SEE PERESTROIKA EXTENDED AS WELL. WE WANT TO SEE A
SOVIET UNION THAT RESTRUCTURES ITS RELATIONSHIP TOWARD
THE REST OF THE WORLD A SOVIET UNION THAT IS A
FORCE FOR CONSTRUCTIVE SOLUTIONS TO THE WORLD'S
PROBLEMS.
- 8 -
THE GRAND STRATEGY OF THE WEST DURING THE POST-WAR
PERIOD HAS BEEN BASED ON THE CONCEPT OF CONTAINMENT:
CHECKING THE SOVIET UNION'S EXPANSIONIST AIMS, IN THE
HOPE THAT THE SOVIET SYSTEM ITSELF WOULD ONE DAY BE
FORCED TO CONFRONT ITS INTERNAL CONTRADICTIONS. THE
FERMENT IN THE SOVIET UNION TODAY AFFIRMS THE WISDOM OF
THIS STRATEGY. NOW WE HAVE A PRECIOUS OPPORTUNITY TO
MOVE BEYOND CONTAINMENT.
OUR GOAL -- INTEGRATING THE SOVIET UNION INTO THE
COMMUNITY OF NATIONS - -- IS EVERY BIT AS AMBITIOUS AS
CONTAINMENT WAS IN ITS TIME. AND IT HOLDS TREMENDOUS
PROMISE FOR INTERNATIONAL STABILITY.
COPING WITH A CHANGING SOVIET UNION WILL BE A
CHALLENGE OF THE HIGHEST ORDER. BUT THE SECURITY
CHALLENGES WE FACE TODAY DO NOT COME FROM THE EAST
ALONE. THE EMERGENCE OF REGIONAL POWERS IS RAPIDLY
CHANGING THE STRATEGIC LANDSCAPE.
- 9 -
IN THE MIDDLE EAST, IN SOUTH ASIA, IN OUR OWN
HEMISPHERE, A GROWING NUMBER OF NATIONS ARE ACQUIRING
ADVANCED AND HIGHLY DESTRUCTIVE CAPABILITIES - -- IN SOME
CASES, WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION, AND THE MEANS TO
DELIVER THEM. AND IT IS AN UNFORTUNATE FACT THAT THE
WORLD FACES INCREASING THREATS FROM ARMED INSURGENCIES,
TERRORISTS, AND (AS YOU IN THE COAST GUARD ARE WELL
AWARE) NARCOTICS TRAFFICKERS - -- AND, IN SOME REGIONS,
AN UNHOLY ALLIANCE OF ALL THREE.
OUR TASK IS CLEAR: WE MUST CURB THE PROLIFERATION
OF ADVANCED WEAPONRY; WE MUST CHECK THE AGGRESSIVE
AMBITIONS OF RENEGADE REGIMES; AND WE MUST ENHANCE THE
ABILITY OF OUR FRIENDS TO DEFEND THEMSELVES. WE HAVE
NOT YET MASTERED THIS COMPLEX CHALLENGE. WE AND OUR
ALLIES MUST CONSTRUCT A COMMON STRATEGY FOR STABILITY
IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD.
HOW WE AND OUR ALLIES DEAL WITH THESE DIVERSE
CHALLENGES DEPENDS ON HOW WELL WE UNDERSTAND THE KEY
ELEMENTS OF DEFENSE STRATEGY. LET ME FOCUS TODAY ON
TWO POINTS IN PARTICULAR.
- 10 -
0 FIRST, THE NEED FOR AN EFFECTIVE DETERRENT, ONE THAT
DEMONSTRATES TO OUR ALLIES AND ADVERSARIES ALIKE
AMERICAN STRENGTH AND RESOLVE;
0 SECOND, THE NEED TO MAINTAIN AN APPROACH TO ARMS
REDUCTION THAT PROMOTES STABILITY AT THE LOWEST
FEASIBLE LEVEL OF ARMAMENTS.
DETERRENCE IS CENTRAL TO OUR DEFENSE STRATEGY.
THE KEY TO KEEPING THE PEACE IS CONVINCING OUR
ADVERSARIES THAT THE COST OF AGGRESSION AGAINST US OR
OUR ALLIES IS SIMPLY UNACCEPTABLE.
IN TODAY'S WORLD, NUCLEAR FORCES ARE ESSENTIAL TO
DETERRENCE. OUR CHALLENGE IS TO PROTECT THOSE
DETERRENT SYSTEMS FROM ATTACK. THAT'S WHY WE WILL MOVE
PEACEKEEPER ICBMS OUT OF FIXED AND VULNERABLE SILOS --
MAKING THEM MOBILE AND THUS HARDER TO TARGET.
LOOKING TO THE LONGER-TERM, WE WILL ALSO DEVELOP
AND DEPLOY A NEW HIGHLY MOBILE SINGLE-WARHEAD MISSILE,
THE MIDGETMAN. WITH ONLY MINUTES OF WARNING, THESE NEW
MISSILES CAN RELOCATE OUT OF HARM'S WAY. ANY ATTACK
AGAINST SYSTEMS LIKE THESE WILL FAIL.
- 11 -
WE ARE ALSO RESEARCHING -- AND WE ARE COMMITTED TO
DEPLOY -- A MORE COMPREHENSIVE DEFENSIVE SYSTEM, KNOWN
AS SDI. OUR PREMISE IS STRAIGHT FORWARD: DEFENSE
AGAINST INCOMING MISSILES ENDANGERS NO PERSON AND NO
COUNTRY.
WE'RE ALSO WORKING TO REDUCE THE THREAT WE FACE --
BOTH NUCLEAR AND CONVENTIONAL. THE INF TREATY
DEMONSTRATES THAT WILLINGNESS. IN ADDITION, IN THE
PAST DECADE, NATO HAS UNILATERALLY REMOVED 2400
SHORTER-RANGE THEATER WARHEADS. BUT THEATER NUCLEAR
FORCES CONTRIBUTE TO STABILITY, NO LESS THAN STRATEGIC
FORCES. IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE TO DEPEND SOLELY ON
STRATEGIC NUCLEAR FORCES TO DETER CONFLICT IN EUROPE.
THE CONVENTIONAL BALANCE IN EUROPE IS JUST AS
IMPORTANT -- AND IS LINKED TO -- THE NUCLEAR BALANCE.
FOR MORE THAN 40 YEARS, THE WARSAW PACT'S MASSIVE
ADVANTAGE IN CONVENTIONAL FORCES HAS CAST A SHADOW OVER
EUROPE.
- 12 -
THE UNILATERAL REDUCTIONS PRESIDENT GORBACHEV HAS
PROMISED GIVE US HOPE THAT WE CAN NOW REDRESS THAT
IMBALANCE. WE WELCOME THOSE STEPS BECAUSE -- IF
IMPLEMENTED -- THEY WILL HELP REDUCE THE THREAT OF
SURPRISE ATTACK. AND THEY CONFIRM WHAT WE'VE SAID ALL
ALONG: THAT SOVIET MILITARY POWER FAR EXCEEDS THE
LEVELS NEEDED TO DEFEND THE LEGITIMATE SECURITY
INTERESTS OF THE USSR. AND WE MUST KEEP IN MIND THAT
THESE REDUCTIONS ALONE -- EVEN IF IMPLEMENTED -- ARE
NOT ENOUGH TO ELIMINATE THE SIGNIFICANT NUMERICAL
SUPERIORITY THE SOVIETS NOW ENJOY.
THROUGH NEGOTIATION, WE CAN NOW TRANSFORM THE
MILITARY LANDSCAPE OF EUROPE. THE ISSUES ARE COMPLEX.
THE STAKES ARE HIGH. BUT THE SOVIETS HAVE BEEN
FORTHCOMING, AND WE HOPE TO ACHIEVE THE REDUCTIONS WE
SEEK.
LET ME EMPHASIZE: OUR AIM IS NOTHING LESS THAN
REMOVING WAR AS AN OPTION IN EUROPE.
- 13 -
THE USSR HAS SAID IT IS WILLING TO ABANDON ITS
AGE-OLD RELIANCE ON OFFENSIVE STRATEGY. IT'S TIME TO
BEGIN. THIS SHOULD MEAN A SMALLER FORCE -- ONE LESS
RELIANT ON THE TANKS, ARTILLERY AND PERSONNEL CARRIERS
THAT PROVIDE THE SOVIETS' OFFENSIVE STRIKING POWER. A
RESTRUCTURED WARSAW PACT -- ONE THAT MIRRORS THE
DEFENSIVE POSTURE OF NATO -- WOULD MAKE EUROPE AND THE
WORLD MORE SECURE.
PEACE CAN ALSO BE ENHANCED BY MOVEMENT TOWARD MORE
OPENNESS IN MILITARY ACTIVITIES. TWO WEEKS AGO, I
PROPOSED AN "OPEN SKIES" INITIATIVE, TO EXTEND THE
CONCEPT OF OPENNESS. THAT PLAN FOR TERRITORIAL
OVERFLIGHTS WOULD INCREASE OUR MUTUAL SECURITY AGAINST
SUDDEN AND THREATENING MILITARY ACTIVITIES. IN THE
SAME SPIRIT, LET US EXTEND THIS OPENNESS TO MILITARY
EXPENDITURES AS WELL. I CALL ON THE SOVIETS TO DO AS
WE HAVE ALWAYS DONE. LET'S OPEN THE LEDGERS. PUBLISH
AN ACCURATE DEFENSE BUDGET.
- 14 -
BUT AS WE MOVE FORWARD WE MUST ALSO BE REALISTIC.
TRANSFORMATIONS OF THIS MAGNITUDE WILL NOT HAPPEN
OVERNIGHT. IF WE ARE TO REACH OUR GOALS, A GREAT DEAL
IS REQUIRED OF US, OUR ALLIES -- AND OF THE SOVIET
UNION. BUT WE CAN SUCCEED.
I BEGAN TODAY BY SPEAKING ABOUT THE TRIUMPH OF A
PARTICULARLY AMERICAN IDEAL: FREEDOM. I KNOW THERE
ARE THOSE WHO MAY THINK THERE'S SOMETHING PRESUMPTUOUS
ABOUT THAT CLAIM THOSE WHO WILL THINK IT BOASTFUL.
BUT IT'S NOT, FOR ONE SIMPLE REASON:
DEMOCRACY ISN'T OUR CREATION -- IT'S OUR
INHERITANCE.
WE CAN'T TAKE CREDIT FOR DEMOCRACY - -- BUT WE CAN
TAKE THAT PRECIOUS GIFT OF FREEDOM, PRESERVE IT AND
PASS IT ON -- AS MY GENERATION DOES TO YOU, AND YOU,
Too, WILL DO ONE DAY. AND PERHAPS - -- PROVIDED WE SEIZE
THE OPPORTUNITIES OPEN TO US -- WE CAN HELP OTHERS
ATTAIN THE FREEDOM WE CHERISH.
- 15 - -
AS I SAID ON THE CAPITOL STEPS THE DAY I TOOK THIS
OFFICE, "THERE IS BUT ONE JUST USE OF POWER, AND IT IS
TO SERVE PEOPLE." AS YOUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF, LET ME
CALL ON THIS COAST GUARD CLASS TO REAFFIRM WITH ME THAT
AMERICAN POWER WILL REMAIN ALWAYS IN SERVICE TO THE
ENDURING IDEALS OF DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM.
THANK YOU AND GOD BLESS AMERICA.
###
Document No.
037765
WHITE HOUSE STAFFING MEMORANDUM
5/19/89
DATE:
ACTION/CONCURRENCE/COMMENT DUE BY:
5:00 TODAY
SUBJECT:
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT
ACTION FYI
ACTION FYI
VICE PRESIDENT
MCCLURE N/C
SUNUNU
NEWMAN
SCOWCROFT
PORTER
DARMAN
STUDDERT
BATES
UNTERMEYER
BREEDEN
ROGERS
CARD
PINKERTON
CICCONI
WINSTON
DEMAREST
BOSKIN
FITZWATER
GRAY N/C
HAGIN
REMARKS:
Please provide your comments/recommendations directly to Chriss
Winston's office with an information copy to my office by
5:00 TODAY, FRIDAY, MAY 19. Thank you
RESPONSE:
James W. Cicconi
Assistant to the President
and Deputy to the Chief of Staff
Ext. 2702
McGroarty/Dooley
May 19, 1989
1053 MAY 19 MIDEC
9:00 am
Draft 3
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
MAY 24, 1989
Thank you, Admiral. I congratulate each member of this
year's class on receiving your commission into such a proud
service.
Mention the Coast Guard, and most people think about lives
saved at sea, daring rescue operations. But those daily acts of
heroism are just one part of vital work the Coast Guard performs.
Right now, in Prince William Sound, the Coast Guard is working
around the clock in a major environmental clean-up effort -- and
I know that some of you receiving commissions will soon be
joining the Coast Guard team in Alaska. Right now, off the
Florida coast, Coast Guard patrols are chasing down drug
smugglers -- and keeping drugs off our streets. That may be "all
in a day's work" for the Coast Guard -- but it's absolutely vital
to our national health, well-being and security.
((I spoke to your Superintendent earlier about what I'd be
saying here today, and he asked me one favor. He said:
"Whatever you do, please don't throw a scare into these new
Ensigns by telling them the world is theirs. "))
The truth is, that is what commencement is all about. The
world is yours, and today's ceremony is really part of the change
of command from one generation to the next. I'm sure on that
long first day of Swab Summer, you never thought four years could
2
pass so quickly. But they have. You've worked hard, Billet
Night has come and gone
You're ready -- "Semper Paratus" in
the words of your motto -- ready to enter the Coast Guard
service, and the world.
And today, our world -- your world -- is changing. The
signs are everywhere. Look east across the Atlantic. The
nations of Western Europe are expanding their economic ties,
uniting into a truly common market beginning in 1992. Look west,
to the nations of the Pacific Rim -- to Japan's emergence as a
world-class economic power, and to a half-dozen other Asian
countries moving quickly into the global economy's front ranks.
And changes in the socialist world are even more profound.
We live in a time when we are witnessing the end of an idea:
the final chapter in the evolution of the socialist experiment.
Socialism is now recognized -- even by many within the socialist
world itself -- as a failed system: One that promised economic
prosperity but failed to deliver the goods, a system that built a
wall between the people and their political aspirations.
But the eclipse of socialism is only one half of the story
of our time. The other is the ascendancy of the democratic idea.
Never before has the idea of freedom so captured the
imaginations of men and women the world over. Never before has
the hope of freedom beckoned so many -- students in Tiananmen
Square. Trade unionists in Warsaw. The people of Panama.
Millions throughout the Soviet Union, given a voice and vote.
3
Everywhere, those voices are speaking the language of democracy
and freedom.
Today I want to speak to you about the world we want to see,
and what we can do to bring that new world into existence. My
national security team has now completed a series of systematic
reviews that will help us chart that course. I want to speak
about our security strategy for the 1990s -- one that advances
American aims, and upholds American ideals.
Amidst the many challenges we'll face, there will be risks.
But let me assure you: we'll find more than our share of
opportunities. We and our allies are strong -- stronger than at
any point in the post-war period, and capable of advancing the
cause of freedom.
And the world we can help shape is cause for optimism.
Its outlines are clear: A growing community of democracies
anchoring international peace and stability, a dynamic free
market system generating prosperity and progress on a global
scale. The economic foundation of this new era is the free
market -- and developing that economic foundation is central to
our security strategy.
And let's be clear about one thing: the emergence of a
global market is a challenge America looks forward to -- not a
threat to our status as a world power.
We all know there are hand-wringers out there, talking about
an "America in decline." I can't explain how some people mistake
the triumph of American ideas as a sign of defeat and decline
4
The plain truth is: the economic rise of Europe and the nations
of the Pacific Rim isn't proof of American decline at all -- it
is the crowning success of our post-war alliance policy.
So the hand-wringers are wrong. Our time is a time of
tremendous opportunity -- and our destiny is in our hands. To
reach the world I just spoke of, we've got hard work ahead of us.
We've got to resolve international trade problems that
threaten to pit friends and allies against one another.
We've got to combat misguided notions of economic
nationalism that tell us to close off our economies to foreign
competition, just when the global marketplace is a fact of life.
We've got to open the door to the nations of Eastern Europe
and other socialist countries that embrace free market reforms.
And finally, for developing nations heavily burdened with
debt, we've got to provide debt relief and encourage the market
reforms that will set those nations on a path towards growth.
If we succeed, the next decade and the new century beyond
will be an era of unparalleled growth -- an era which sees the
flourishing of freedom, peace and prosperity around the globe.
But this new era cannot unfold in a climate where conflict
and instability prevail. Our goals must also include security
and stability: security for ourselves, our allies and friends;
stability in the international arena, and an end to regional
conflicts.
Those goals don't change, but the strategy we employ to
reach those goals can, and must. Today, the need for a dynamic
5
and adaptable strategy is imperative. We must use all the means
at our disposal -- economic, diplomatic, and military -- to take
advantage of the opportunities open to us in a world of rapid
change.
Nowhere is change more evident than in the Soviet Union, and
nowhere are the ultimate consequences of change more important
for world security.
I firmly believe that what we're seeing now in the USSR is
significant and far-reaching. I also know that the process is
still ongoing and unfinished. It is the policy of this
Administration to seize every opportunity to build a better, more
stable relationship with the Soviet Union -- just as it is our
policy to defend American interests in light of the enduring
reality of Soviet military power. Socialism may no longer be a
moral force in the world, but it is still -- in the Soviet Union
-- a military force of considerable power.
I want to see perestroika succeed. I want to see the
policies of glasnost and perestroika -- so far, a revolution
imposed from the top down -- institutionalized into the Soviet
system. And I want to see perestroika extended as well. I want
to see a Soviet Union that restructures its relationship within
the community of nations
A Soviet Union that is a force for
constructive solutions to the world's problems -- not a power
that seeks to exploit and create international conflict to
further its own ends.
6.
The grand strategy of the West during the post-war period
has centered on the concept of containment: checking the Soviet
Union's expansionist aims, in the hope that the Soviet system
itself would one day be forced to confront its internal
contradictions. The fact that that is happening today spells the
ultimate success of our strategy -- and creates an opportunity to
move beyond containment.
The goal we've now set for ourselves -- integrating the
Soviet Union into the community of nations -- is every bit as
ambitious as containment was in its time. And it is a goal that
holds tremendous promise for international stability.
Coping with a changing Soviet Union will be a challenge of
the highest order. But the security challenges we face today do
not come from the East alone. The emergence of regional powers
is rapidly changing the strategic landscape.
In the Middle East, in South Asia, in Latin America, a
growing number of nations are acquiring advanced and highly
destructive capabilities -- in some cases, weapons of mass
destruction, and the means to deliver them. And it is an
unfortunate fact that the world faces increasing threats from
armed insurgencies, terrorists, and (as you in the Coast Guard
are well aware) narcotics traffickers -- and, in some regions, an
unholy alliance of all three.
Our task is clear: We must curb the proliferation of
advanced weaponry, check the aggressive ambitions of renegade
regimes, and build up -- by means of economic and security
7
assistance -- the ability of friendly nations to defend
themselves. Our review shows that we have not yet mastered this
complex challenge -- that we and our allies must construct a
common strategy for stability in the developing world.
How we and our allies deal with these diverse challenges
depends on how well we understand the key elements of defense
strategy. Let me focus today on three points in particular.
First, the need for an effective deterrent, one that
demonstrates to our allies and adversaries alike American
strength and resolve;
Second, the need for a dynamic and durable alliance structure;
Third, we must maintain an approach to arms reduction that
promotes stability at lower levels of armaments.
Deterrence is central to our defense strategy. The key to
keeping the peace is convincing our adversaries that the costs of
aggression against us are simply unacceptable.
Conventional capability is crucial. We must be able to
defend our interests well forward of our own shores, and to
project power when and where we need to, to protect American
citizens and interests.
But our nuclear forces remain our ultimate deterrent.
My
decision to move ahead on a rail-mobile MX force -- and beyond
that to develop and deploy the mobile single-warhead Midgetman
missile -- will provide the survivable land-based deterrent that
will help us keep the peace well into the next century. And
maintaining a credible deterrent means moving forward on SDI as
8
well, to strengthen our deterrent by relying increasingly on
defense, and less on the threat of retaliation.
In addition to an effective deterrent, our defense strategy
depends upon strong alliances. Coalition defense has been the
cornerstone of our security strategy for the past four decades.
With the growing trend towards economic interdependence, now is
no time for the U.S. to adopt a "go it alone" security policy.
But let me make equally clear that we view our alliances as
true partnerships. The United States expects its alliance
partners -- many now major economic powers in their own right --
to contribute their fair share to our common defense.
Those who think we've outgrown our alliance system are
wrong. A strong security partnership among the democracies of
the world will be the key to peace in the 21st Century.
But as our alliances mature, we must make sure our
expectations remain realistic. Alliances of sovereign democratic
nations will never be free of controversy. But we must never
forget that disagreements between democracies are "family
quarrels" -- differences that don't obscure the common aims and
enduring interests we share.
Finally, we must seek to strengthen our security through
significant arms reductions, both nuclear and conventional.
But reductions alone are not enough. Even deep reductions
in strategic nuclear arsenals would leave the U.S. and USSR with
enormous destructive power. Our aim must be strategic stability:
a balance in which neither side can hope to destroy the forces of
9
the other without bringing destruction on itself. Any agreement
that fails to pass that test is not in our national interest.
Next month, our negotiators will be back at the table in
Geneva, working to hammer out a treaty that achieves real
reductions, ensures stability -- and allows us to know with
confidence that any agreement we sign is honored and observed.
In the area of conventional arms reductions, the U.S. and
its NATO allies seek stability at lower levels of armaments --
and an agreement that eliminates the massive conventional
superiority of the Warsaw Pact forces. President Gorbachev's
promise to make a unilateral cut in Soviet conventional forces is
a welcome first step -- but it's still a long way from the deep
reductions in tanks, artillery and troop strength that will bring
real stability to the nations of Europe.
The complex calculations and analysis that are constant
factors in setting our course should not obscure the plain truths
that guide our defense strategy:
If we remain strong, we remain safe. If we work in concert
with our allies, we add their strengths to our own. If we seek
stability as well as real reductions in the weapons of war, we
make ourselves and our allies more secure.
I began today by speaking about the triumph of a
particularly American idea: freedom. I know there will be
people who think there's something presumptuous about that --
people who will think it boastful to talk about that triumph.
But it's not, for one simple reason:
10
Democracy isn't our creation -- it's our inheritance.
We can't take credit for democracy -- but we can take the
precious gift of freedom, preserve it and pass it on -- as my
generation does to you, and you, too, will do one day. And
perhaps -- provided we seize the opportunities open to us -- we
can help others attain the freedom we cherish.
As I said on the Capitol steps the day I took this office,
"There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people."
As your Commander in Chief, let me call on today's class to
reaffirm with me that American power will remain always in
service to the enduring ideals of democracy and freedom.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 23, 1989
INFORMATION
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
DAN MCGROARTY mur
THROUGH: CHRISS WINSTON an
RE:
U.S. COAST GUARD COMMENCEMENT
I. SUMMARY
At 12:15 p.m., on Wednesday, May 23, you will speak at the
U.S. Coast Guard commencement ceremony in New London,
Connecticut.
II. DISCUSSION
Your address focuses primarily on nuclear strategy and
modernization questions, with some treatment as well of the
conventional force balance. The Speechwriters believe the text
can be cut to nine pages, but NSC has failed to indicate passages
that could be excluded to shorten the speech.
We would appreciate your guidance regarding any passages
that you wish to delete.
McGroarty/Rice/Dooley
May 23, 1989
8:00 am
Draft 7
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
MAY 24, 1989
Thank you, Admiral. I congratulate each member of this
year's class on receiving your commission into such a proud
service.
Mention the Coast Guard, and most people think about lives
saved at sea, daring rescue operations. But those daily acts of
heroism are just one part of vital work the Coast Guard performs.
Right now, in Prince William Sound, the Coast Guard is working
around the clock in a major environmental clean-up effort -- and
I know that some of you receiving commissions will soon be
joining the Coast Guard team in Alaska. Right now, off the
Florida coast, Coast Guard patrols are chasing down drug
smugglers -- and keeping drugs off our streets. That may be "all
in a day's work" for the Coast Guard -- but it's absolutely vital
to our national health, well-being and security.
((I spoke to your Superintendent earlier about what I'd be
saying here today, and he asked me one favor. He said:
"Whatever you do, please don't throw a scare into these new
Ensigns by telling them the world is theirs. "))
The truth is, that is what commencement is all about. The
world is yours, and today's ceremony is really part of the change
of command from one generation to the next. I'm sure on that
long first day of Swab Summer, you never thought four years could
2
pass so quickly. But they have. You've worked hard, Billet
Night has come and gone
You're ready -- "Semper Paratus" in
the words of your motto -- ready to enter the Coast Guard
service, and the world.
Today, our world -- your world -- is changing, East and
West.
We live in a time when we are witnessing the end of an idea:
the final chapter in the evolution of the communist experiment.
Communism is now recognized -- even by many within the communist
world itself -- as a failed system: One that promised economic
prosperity but failed to deliver the goods, a system that built a
wall between the people and their political aspirations.
But the eclipse of communism is only one half of the story
of our time. The other is the ascendancy of the democratic idea.
Never before has the idea of freedom so captured the
imaginations of men and women the world over. Never before has
the hope of freedom beckoned so many. Students in Tiananmen
Square. Trade unionists in Warsaw. The people of Panama.
Rulers consulting the ruled in the Soviet Union. Everywhere,
those voices are speaking the language of democracy and freedom.
Today, we find ourselves at a turning point: at the end of
one era, on the threshold of the next.
There's a world of difference between transition and
transformation -- between a process in progress, and one that is
final and complete. It is ironic that some think now is the time
to deemphasize the very pillars of stability -- our alliances,
3
our military forces -- that make our future so promising. That
would be a grave mistake. History will not forgive us if --in
our haste to declare our work done -- we abandon course, and fail
to lay a firm foundation, one step at a time, for the peace and
freedoms we seek.
Our goals and values are clear and enduring. But our
strategy must be flexible and adaptive -- ready to take advantage
of opportunities that advance our interests. We have all the
instruments of power at our disposal: a strong economy,
unmatched technological prowess -- and a moral message that
resonates around the world.
And yet, there is no substitute for strong and capable
military forces. Make no mistake: we seek military superiority
over no one. Our aim is to deter aggression -- to secure the
peaceful and stable conditions essential to the realizing the
hopes of a new era.
Communism may no longer be a moral force in the world, but
the Soviet Union is still a military force of enormous power.
Over the past two decades, the Soviet Union has acquired
extraordinary military power -- and it has used that power to
conduct a foreign policy opposed to Western interests.
The price of containing Soviet military power in Europe and
Asia has been high. I speak here not of dollars, marks or
francs. The defense of freedom is always worth the cost. I
speak of the fear two generations have faced; the specter of a
military imbalance that seemed to invite war -- a fear deepened
4
by the secrecy surrounding the military preparations of the
Warsaw Pact. I speak of the Soviet Union's strategic nuclear
forces -- large, modern, a single missile carrying many warheads.
Those forces appeared to be good for only one thing: a disarming
first strike against the United States.
For decades, the U.S. sought -- without real success -- to
convince the Soviet Union to transform the size and nature of its
military forces through arms control. Today, for the first time
in forty years, I believe that the Soviet Union may be ready to
significantly reduce and restructure its military forces.
The catalyst for change may well be the pressures of a
failing economy -- one that can no longer bear the heavy costs of
the excessive military build-up of the past two decades. But
whatever the motivation of the Soviet leadership, I welcome the
chance now before us -- the chance to transform the military
balance, to create a world where the mission of military forces
in Europe is clearly to deter aggression -- not to attack.
Let me be clear: a transformation of this magnitude will
not happen overnight. A great deal is required of us, our
allies, and the Soviet Union if we are to reach this goal. But
we can succeed -- if we remain strong, if we resist utopian
visions, and if we and our allies work with the Soviet Union to
build the changes we want to see into solid agreements.
We must remember: Peace is born of strength. It is ironic
that people think the long peace that Europe has enjoyed -- and
the trend toward democracy evident elsewhere in the world -- is
5
reason for us to relax our military strength. Developments in
the Soviet Union remain uncertain. A strong military will
impress upon Soviet leadership that nothing can be gained by
turning back to a more militaristic course. Our forces remain a
reliable guarantee that we and our allies are safe and secure.
And we must recognize the plain truth that the preservation
of peace rests upon modern nuclear forces. Conventional forces
alone cannot prevent war. Two destructive world wars are proof
enough of that. The paradox of our time is that nuclear weapons
themselves that have made the prevention of war imperative.
World war today is deterred by the certain knowledge that no
nuclear aggressor can himself escape nuclear destruction.
Our goal is to maintain a deterrent that no aggressor dares
attack -- no matter how important the interests, or how high the
stakes. We are drawing on some of the brightest minds in science
and exploring our most advanced technologies to bring us closer
to the day when we can defend ourselves against nuclear attack.
I have directed continued development of SDI options -- and I
will deploy strategic defenses when they are ready. Effective
defenses will enhance deterrence.
For now, the cornerstone of security and stability remains a
nuclear arsenal that can survive attack. Let me tell you what I
mean when I talk about a survivable force. I mean a nuclear
force no aggressor can hope to destroy, without bringing about
his own destruction. An aggressor who knows a significant
portion of our forces will survive a first strike is one who will
6
never carry out his attack. A survivable force makes nuclear
attack unthinkable.
That is why I have decided to enhance the survivability of
our own land-based missiles. We will move Peacekeeper ICBMs out
of vulnerable silos and make them mobile -- harder to target and
more survivable. Taking our most modern silo-based missiles and
redeploying them in a mobile mode is the best near-term solution
to increased survivability.
Looking to the longer-term, I have directed the development
and deployment of a new mobile single-warhead missile, the
Midgetman. Because a Midgetman force will be so highly
survivable, there is no conceivable reason -- no matter how grave
the crisis -- for the Soviets to try to attack it. These
systems, along with our bomber and submarine-based forces give us
the sturdy triad of nuclear forces no aggressor can attack with
impunity.
To accompany our military programs we need an arms control
strategy that will enhance survivability -- and create conditions
for increased confidence and cooperation between the U.S. and
USSR. That is why we've agreed to return to the table in Geneva,
to resume talks on strategic nuclear forces, and nuclear testing.
We want reductions -- but reductions alone are not enough.
Agreements that result in reductions without reducing the risk of
war do not serve our interests. Vulnerable land-based systems
carrying multiple warheads are an inviting target -- a problem of
too many eggs in one basket. Mobile missiles are more
7
survivable, but also far harder to verify: We can't count what
we can't find. Our worry is that this could increase the
incentives for cheating. And if several warheads are carried by
each mobile missile, the problem -- and the penalty for failing
to detect cheating -- is compounded.
We don't have answers to all these problems. But we will go
to Geneva with new ideas on how best to build on the significant
areas of agreement that already exist.
The principle of security through stability does not apply
to the United States alone. Our security is bound to that of our
allies. We cannot rely on rhetoric to deter a would-be
aggressor. Our theater and tactical nuclear forces give
substance to that reality -- a link that extends deterrence
beyond our shores and serves to strengthen our common security.
We are committed to reducing nuclear weapons when doing so
strengthens alliance security and international stability. In
the past decade, NATO has unilaterally removed [...] warheads --
to a level 35% lower than in 1979. But theater nuclear forces
contribute to our stability no less than strategic forces. We do
not want to find ourselves dependent on the threat of a strategic
nuclear exchange to deter the threat of war.
The fact that conventional weapons alone do not deter war
does not make the conventional balance less important. NATO has
had to rely more heavily on nuclear weapons because of the
significant conventional force advantage of the Warsaw Pact.
8
The unilateral reductions President Gorbachev has promised
give us hope that we can now redress that imbalance -- not
because they transform the balance of conventional forces: none
of the promised reductions will seriously affect the significant
numerical superiority the Soviets now enjoy. We welcome those
steps because they confirm what we've said all along: Soviet
military power far exceeds the levels needed to defend the
legitimate security interests of the USSR.
The negotiations we are now engaged in offer a chance to
transform the military landscape of Europe. The issues are
exceedingly complex and the stakes enormously high -- but the
Soviets have been forthcoming, and I am genuinely hopeful that we
will achieve the reductions we seek.
But as in the case of nuclear forces, numbers alone are not
enough. Our aim is nothing less than removing war as an option
in Europe. The USSR has said it is willing to restructure its
forces. We want the Soviets to deploy a smaller force -- one
less reliant on the tanks, artillery and personnel carriers that
provide the Soviets' offensive striking power. A restructured
Warsaw Pact -- one that cannot threaten a major offensive against
the West -- would make Europe and the world more secure.
The same can be said for a movement toward more openness in
military activities. In recent years, we have invited observers
to each other's military exercises, and expanded the exchange of
information on our military forces and their activities. Two
weeks ago, I proposed an "open sky" initiative, to take the
9
concept of openness one step further: a plan for both sides to
allow territorial overflights that, together with satellite
surveillance, will increase our security against sudden and
threatening military activities. In the same spirit, we want to
see openness extend to Soviet military expenditures as well. I
call on the Soviets to do as we have always done: to publish,
for the first time in Soviet history, an accurate defense budget.
This kind of restructuring and openness in the military
sphere is the kind that can lead to lower tensions and greater
trust between our two nations -- and a safer more secure world.
As we look toward that day, we know now that our defense
strategy will be tested severely in the developing world. A
growing number of nations are now acquiring advanced and highly
destructive military capabilities -- in some cases, nuclear,
chemical and biological weapons, and the means to deliver them.
And it is an unfortunate fact that the world faces increasing
threats from armed insurgencies, terrorists, and (as you in the
Coast Guard are well aware) narcotics traffickers -- and, in some
regions, an unholy alliance of all three. These emerging
challenges will test our traditional concepts of security as
never before.
Forging a global strategy for defense is made more difficult
by the serious budget constraints that we face. The 12%
reduction in real defense spending over the past five years has
cut into our capabilities. More tough choices lie ahead -- but
one is already made. I will not as Commander-in-Chief, preside
10
over a return to the "hollow army" of the 1970s -- a force under-
trained and ill-equipped to perform its missions. You who choose
to serve in America's Armed Forces deserve better. You have my
word: our military will be battle ready. You'll have the tools
and training you need to do your job.
The reviews we are now completing address the full range of
security problems before us. As a global power, it should not
surprise us that our ingenuity will be tested in matching our
security responsibilities with our resources in the years ahead.
But as I go to Europe to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the
Atlantic Alliance, I cannot help but notice how far we've come --
and how bright our future is.
I began today by speaking about the triumph of a
particularly American idea: freedom. I know there will be
people who think there's something presumptuous about that --
people who will think it boastful to talk about that triumph.
But it's not, for one simple reason: America knows her place in
democracy's unfolding drama.
Democracy isn't our creation -- it's our inheritance.
We can't take credit for democracy -- but we can take the
precious gift of freedom, preserve it and pass it on -- as my
generation does to you, and you, too, will do one day.
As I said on the Capitol steps the day I took this office,
"There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people."
As your Commander in Chief, let me call on today's class to
reaffirm with me that American power will remain always in
11
service to the enduring ideals of democracy and freedom. And
let those who follow be able to say that in resisting the
pressures of the moment, we delivered peace, freedom and
prosperity -- lasting and secure.
# # #
McGroarty/Rice/Dooley
May 21, 1989
2:00 pm
Draft 5
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
MAY 24, 1989
Thank you, Admiral. I congratulate each member of this
year's class on receiving your commission into such a proud
service.
Mention the Coast Guard, and most people think about lives
saved at sea, daring rescue operations. But those daily acts of
heroism are just one part of vital work the Coast Guard performs.
Right now, in Prince William Sound, the Coast Guard is working
around the clock in a major environmental clean-up effort -- and
I know that some of you receiving commissions will soon be
joining the Coast Guard team in Alaska. Right now, off the
Florida coast, Coast Guard patrols are chasing down drug
smugglers -- and keeping drugs off our streets. That may be "all
in a day's work" for the Coast Guard -- but it's absolutely vital
to our national health, well-being and security.
((I spoke to your Superintendent earlier about what I'd be
saying here today, and he asked me one favor. He said:
"Whatever you do, please don't throw a scare into these new
Ensigns by telling them the world is theirs.") )
The truth is, that is what commencement is all about. The
world is yours, and today's ceremony is really part of the change
of command from one generation to the next. I'm sure on that
long first day of Swab Summer, you never thought four years could
2
pass so quickly. But they have. You've worked hard, Billet
Night has come and gone
You're ready -- "Semper Paratus" in
the words of your motto -- ready to enter the Coast Guard
service, and the world.
More than forty years ago, the United States answered the
call of a world ravaged by war, and took on responsibilities we
still bear today. America itself, protected by vast oceans, was
in no imminent danger. Our choice was a moral choice: a
decision to take on global responsibilities in defense of
freedom. And our decision was also firmly in our interest. We
are a global power because we know that our freedom and
prosperity are treasures we cannot enjoy in isolation.
It was never our goal to dominate, to stand unquestioned,
claiming to have all the answers to the world's problems. That
is not democracy's way. Our aim was to build a foundation for
freedom, a community dedicated to the democratic idea -- so that
even the nations that fought against us would one day work with
us as fellow democracies. The splendid success of that strategy
is what provides the tremendous opportunities now open to us.
Today, our world -- your world -- is changing. The signs
are everywhere. Look east across the Atlantic. The nations of
Western Europe are expanding their economic ties, uniting into a
truly common market beginning in 1992. Look west, to the nations
of the Pacific Rim -- to Japan's emergence as a world-class
economic power, and to a half-dozen other Asian countries moving
quickly into the global economy's front ranks. Among these
3
nations we now have like-minded partners. America does not need
to nor can we-- go it alone.
Changes in the communist world are even more profound.
We live in a time when we are witnessing the end of an idea:
the final chapter in the evolution of the communist experiment.
Communism is now recognized -- even by many within the communist
world itself -- as a failed system: One that promised economic
prosperity but failed to deliver the goods, a system that built a
wall between the people and their political aspirations.
But the eclipse of communism is only one half of the story of our
time. The other is the ascendancy of the democratic idea.
Never before has the idea of freedom so captured the imaginations
of men and women the world over. Never before has the hope of
freedom beckoned so many -- students in Tiananmen Square. Trade
unionists in Warsaw. The people of Panama. Rulers consulting
the ruled in the Soviet Union. Everywhere, those voices are
speaking the language of democracy and freedom.
Today, we find ourselves at a turning point: at the end of
one era, on the threshold of the next.
There's a world of difference between transition and
transformation -- between a process in progress, and one that is
final and complete. It is ironic that some think now is the time
to deemphasize the very pillars of stability -- our alliances,
our military forces -- that now make our future so promising.
That would be a grave mistake. History will not forgive us if --
in our haste to declare our work done -- we abandon course, and
4
fail to lay a firm foundation, one step at a time, for the
enduring peace and freedoms we seek.
Our goals and values are clear and enduring. But our
strategy must be flexible and adaptive -- ready to take advantage
of opportunities that advance our interests. We have all the
instruments of power at our disposal: a strong economy,
unmatched technological prowess --- and a moral message that
resonates around the world.
And yet, there is no substitute for strong and capable
military forces. Make no mistake: we seek military superiority
over no one. Our aim is to deter aggression -- to secure the
peacful and stable conditions essential to the realizing the
hopes of a new era.
Our principle adversary remains the Soviet Union. Communism
may no longer be a moral force in the world, but the Soviet Union
is still a military force of considerable power. Over the past
two decades, the Soviet Union has acquired extraordinary military
power, nuclear and conventional -- and it has used that power to
conduct a foreign policy opposed to Western interests.
Today, for the first time in forty years, we have reason to
hope the Soviet Union is ready to reduce and restructure its
forces -- and to adopt a less aggressive policy toward the
nations of the world.
We welcome the unilateral reductions President Gorbachev has
announced -- not because they transform the balance of
conventional forces: none of the promised reductions will
5
seriously affect the significant numerical superiority the
Soviets now enjoy. We welcome those steps because they
acknowledge what we've said all along: Soviet military power far
exceeds the levels needed to defend the legitimate security
interests of the USSR.
If these unilateral cuts are a sign that the Soviets now
accept this premise, we are ready to work with them to create a
world where nations no longer need to fear one another -- a world
that does not live under the specter of war.
The United States is ready to move beyond containment. We
are ready to work with the Soviet Union towards a new
relationship-- one based on the interests we share in solving the
problems and seizing the opportunities before us to build a
better world.
Building that new relationship will be a challenge of the
highest order. But the security challenges we face today do not
come from the East alone. The emergence of regional powers is
rapidly changing the strategic landscape.
A growing number of nations are now acquiring advanced and
highly destructive military capabilities -- in some cases,
nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and the means to
deliver them. And it is an unfortunate fact that the world faces
increasing threats from armed insurgencies, terrorists, and (as
you in the Coast Guard are well aware) narcotics traffickers --
and, in some regions, an unholy alliance of all three.
6
Our task is clear: We must curb the proliferation of
advanced weaponry, and check the aggressive ambitions of renegade
regimes. We cannot sustain our values nor achieve our goals
unless this challenge is also met. But we are not and cannot be
the world's policeman. We and our allies and others who share
our vision of the future need to forge a common strategy for
stability in the developing world.
America needs a strategy and forces not only to defend us
today but to carry us into the new world of the 21st century.
We seek a military balance that neither threatens nor
invites attack. We seek reductions that enhance stability and
reduce the risk of war. We seek military forces that deter
aggression but do not intimidate. We seek a world with thousands
of nuclear warheads dismantled, ten of thousands of tanks
destroyed and millions of soldiers returned to civilian life-- A
world where increased openness about military activities builds
confidence and the fear of surprise attack is virtually gone.
These are the principles that can and must guide both our defense
planning and our arms control strategy proceed from these
principles.
To preserve the peace, we must have modern nuclear forces.
The advent of nuclear weapons has made the prevention of war
imperative. It is one of the paradoxes of our age that the
horrors of nuclear war--understood by all help to keep the
peace. An aggressor today knows that a nuclear attack would
invite devastating retaliation.
7
We are drawing on some of the brightest minds in science and
exploring our most advanced technologies to bring us closer to
the day when we can defend ourselves against nuclear attack. I
have directed continued development of SDI options, and I will
deploy strategic defenses when they are ready. But in today's
world, the cornerstone of security and stability remains a
survivable offensive nuclear force.
Let me tell you what I mean by the word survivable. I mean
a nuclear force no aggressor can hope to destroy, without
bringing about his own destruction. An aggressor who knows a
significant portion of our forces will survive a first strike is
one who will never carry out his attack. A survivable force
makes nuclear attack unthinkable.
Enhanced survivability means greater stability. This is why
I have decided to move Peacekeeper ICBMs out of vulnerable silos
and make them mobile-- and more survivable. That is why I have
directed the development and deployment the mobile single-warhead
Midgetman missile -- will provide the survivable land-based
deterrent that will help us keep the peace well into the next
century. These and other improvements to our strategic forces
will provide a deterrent that no agressor can attack with
impunity and no nation can regard as provocative.
People yearn for a world without nuclear weapons. But
mankind has learned to split the atom. Having partaken from that
tree of knowledge--there is no turning back. Our task is to
temper our knowledge with wisdom. Together, nuclear adversaries
8
must learn to manage the terrifying reality. That is why
effective arms control agreements are a partner with defense
modernization.
Next month, the U.S. and Soviet Union will return to the
table in Geneva, to resume talks on strategic nuclear forces,
defense and space, and nuclear testing. Reductions alone are not
enough. Our goal must be stablizing reductions that reduce the
risks of war. Even deep cuts in our strategic nuclear arsenals
would leave in place enormous destructive power. The
survivability of the forces that remain is as crucial as the cuts
we make.
The principle of security through stability does not apply
to the United States alone. Our security is bound to that of our
allies. Our theater and tactical nuclear forces play an
indispensable role in giving substance to that reality -- a link
that extends deterrence beyond our shores and serves to
strengthen our common security.
We are committed to reducing and -- where possible --
nuclear weapons when that course strengthens alliance security
and international stability. But let me say it again: however
much we may wish it otherwise, the nuclear genie cannot be put
back in the bottle. Modern, diverse, theater nuclear forces are
essential to our security as is the strategic nuclear triad.
Conventional forces alone cannot deter war, but they too
must be a strong, modern and capable element of our deterrent.
The United States and its allies are negotiating with the Warsaw
9
Pact to reach an agreement eliminating the vast conventional
superiority of East over West. The Soviets have been forthcoming
and we believe that they are serious. The issues are monstrously
complex and the stakes enormously high, but I am more hopeful now
than I have been for years that we will achieve the reductions we
seek. We may succeed in dismantling XXXx of tanks, XXXX of
artillery, XXXX of men and the skies above Europe will be open to
territorial overflights that make military activities transparent
and less threatening. If my hope is fulfilled we will have taken
a huge step toward a new era in which great armies no longer face
each other across a divided Europe.
As we look to that day for Europe, we know now that our
defense strategy will be tested severely in the developing world.
Dramatic changes point toward a new era there too-- one in which
people seek democracy and prosperity along a path frought with
dangers. Those dangers threaten both their future and our
interests. We have a special responsibility to safeguard the
promise of that new era too. Our friends must know that our
military power is capable and flexible enough to meet this
challenge.
Forging a global strategy for defense is made more difficult
by the serious budget constraints that we face. Tough choices
lie ahead. One is already made. I will not as Commander-in-
Chief, preside over a return to the "hollow army" of the 1970s --
a force under-trained and ill-equipped to perform its missions.
You who choose to serve in America's Armed Forces deserve better.
10
You have my word: our military will be battle ready. You'll
have the tools and training you need to do your job.
We must spend limited resources wisely. In the world we're
now entering, the ingenuity and technological prowess that have
served our nation so well must be turned to our security
advantage. We will not neglect our research and development
base. To do so would shortchange our future. In a world so
filled with promise that would be a crime.
It is ironic that people think that the long peace that
Europe has enjoyed-- and the trends toward democracy elsewhere in
the world is reason to diminish our commitment to our military
strength. Peace is born of strength. A democracy builds and
maintains its military forces in hopes it will never have to use
them. I've seen the face of battle. I know military force must
be an option of last resort. That is why I am so strongly
committed to maintaining a deterrent that prevents war and
preserves the peace.
Let me assure you too that I know that military power rests upon
our economic and technological strength, and our competitiveness
in the world marketplace.
If, in the post-war world, our military power has been
democracy's shield, our economic power has been its sword --
piercing the illusion that communism was the road to prosperity.
I am concerned about maintaining our own economic strength, and
that of the international community.
11
And let's be clear about one thing: the emergence of a
global market is a challenge America is now preparing for -- not
a threat to our status as a world power.
We are clear-headed about the challenges we'll face in an
evolving global economy. As a nation, we've met those challenges
before. I'm confident we can meet and master them today.
We've got to resolve international trade problems that
threaten to pit friends and allies against one another.
We've got to combat misguided notions of economic nationalism
that tell us that tell us to close off our economies to foreign
competition, just when the global marketplace is a fact of life.
We've got to open the door to the nations of Eastern Europe
and other socialist countries that embrace free market reforms.
O
And finally, for developing nations heavily burdened with
debt, we've got to provide debt relief and encourage the market
reforms that will set those nations on a path towards growth.
I began today by speaking about the triumph of a
particularly American idea: freedom. I know there will be
people who think there's something presumptuous about that --
people who will think it boastful to talk about that triumph.
But it's not, for one simple reason: America knows her place in
democracy's unfolding drama.
Democracy isn't our creation -- it's our inheritance.
We can't take credit for democracy -- but we can take the
precious gift of freedom, preserve it and pass it on -- as my
generation does to you, and you, too, will do one day.
12
As I said on the Capitol steps the day I took this office,
"There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people."
As your Commander in Chief, let me call on today's class to
reaffirm with me that American power will remain always in
service to the enduring ideals of democracy and freedom. And
let those who follow be able to say that in resisting the
pressures of the moment, we delivered peace, freedom and
propserity -- lasting and secure.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 23, 1989
INFORMATION
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
DAN MCGROARTY mur
THROUGH: CHRISS WINSTON an
RE:
U.S. COAST GUARD COMMENCEMENT
I. SUMMARY
At 12:15 p.m., on Wednesday, May 23, you will speak at the
U.S. Coast Guard commencement ceremony in New London,
Connecticut.
II. DISCUSSION
Your address focuses primarily on nuclear strategy and
modernization questions, with some treatment as well of the
conventional force balance. The Speechwriters believe the text
can be cut to nine pages, but NSC has failed to indicate passages
that could be excluded to shorten the speech.
We would appreciate your guidance regarding any passages
that you wish to delete.
McGroarty/Rice/Dooley
May 23, 1989
8:00 am
Draft 7
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: COAST GUARD ACADEMY COMMENCEMENT
NEW LONDON, CONNECTICUT
MAY 24, 1989
Thank you, Admiral. I congratulate each member of this
year's class on receiving your commission into such a proud
service.
Mention the Coast Guard, and most people think about lives
saved at sea, daring rescue operations. But those daily acts of
heroism are just one part of vital work the Coast Guard performs.
Right now, in Prince William Sound, the Coast Guard is working
around the clock in a major environmental clean-up effort -- and
I know that some of you receiving commissions will soon be
joining the Coast Guard team in Alaska. Right now, off the
Florida coast, Coast Guard patrols are chasing down drug
smugglers -- and keeping drugs off our streets. That may be "all
in a day's work" for the Coast Guard -- but it's absolutely vital
to our national health, well-being and security.
((I spoke to your Superintendent earlier about what I'd be
saying here today, and he asked me one favor. He said:
"Whatever you do, please don't throw a scare into these new
Ensigns by telling them the world is theirs.' "))
The truth is, that is what commencement is all about. The
world is yours, and today's ceremony is really part of the change
of command from one generation to the next. I'm sure on that
long first day of Swab Summer, you never thought four years could
2
pass so quickly. But they have. You've worked hard, Billet
Night has come and gone
You're ready -- "Semper Paratus" in
the words of your motto -- ready to enter the Coast Guard
service, and the world.
Today, our world -- your world -- is changing, East and
West.
We live in a time when we are witnessing the end of an idea:
the final chapter in the evolution of the communist experiment.
Communism is now recognized -- even by many within the communist
world itself -- as a failed system: One that promised economic
prosperity but failed to deliver the goods, a system that built a
wall between the people and their political aspirations.
But the eclipse of communism is only one half of the story
of our time. The other is the ascendancy of the democratic idea.
Never before has the idea of freedom so captured the
imaginations of men and women the world over. Never before has
the hope of freedom beckoned so many. Students in Tiananmen
Square
Trade unionists in Warsaw. The people of Panama.
And, most recently, the
Rulers consulting the ruled in the Soviet Union.
Everywhere,
dramatic
those voices are speaking the language of democracy and freedom.
cevents
in
Today, we find ourselves at a turning point: at the end of
one era, on the threshold of the next.
Tranamen
Square.
There's a world of difference between transition and
transformation -- between a process in progress, and one that is
final and complete. It is ironic that some think now is the time
to deemphasize the very pillars of stability -- our alliances,
3
our military forces -- that make our future so promising. That
would be a grave mistake. History will not forgive us if --in
our haste to declare our work done -- we abandon course, and fail
to lay a firm foundation, one step at a time, for the peace and
freedoms we seek.
Our goals and values are clear and enduring. But our
strategy must be flexible and adaptive -- ready to take advantage
of opportunities that advance our interests. We have all the
instruments of power at our disposal: a strong economy,
unmatched technological prowess -- and a moral message that
resonates around the world.
And yet, there is no substitute for strong and capable
military forces. Make no mistake: we seek military superiority
over no one. Our aim is to deter aggression -- to secure the
peaceful and stable conditions essential to the realizing the
hopes of a new era.
Communism may no longer be a moral force in the world, but
the Soviet Union is still a military force of enormous Strength@ power.
Over the past two decades, the Soviet Union has acquired
extraordinary military power and it has used that power to
Strangth sde
conduct a foreign policy opposed to Western interests.
The price of containing Soviet military power in Europe and
Asia has been high. I speak here not of dollars, marks or
francs. The defense of freedom is always worth the cost. I
speak of the fear two generations have faced; the specter of a
military imbalance that seemed to invite war -- a fear deepened
4
by the secrecy surrounding the military preparations of the
Warsaw Pact. I speak of the Soviet Union's strategic nuclear
forces -- large, modern, a single missile carrying many warheads.
Those forces appeared to be good for only one thing: a disarming
first strike against the United States.
For decades, the U.S. sought -- without real success -- to
convince the Soviet Union to transform the size and nature of its
military forces through arms control. Today, for the first time
there is a %
x
in forty years, E -believe that the Soviet Union may be ready to
significantly reduce and restructure its military forces.
The catalyst for change may well be the pressures of a
failing economy -- one that can no longer bear the heavy costs of
the excessive military build-up of the past two decades. But
whatever the motivation of the Soviet leadership, I welcome the
chance now before us -- the chance to transform the military
balance, to create a world where the mission of military forces
in Europe is clearly to deter aggression -- not to attack.
Let me be clear: a transformation of this magnitude will
not happen overnight. A great deal is required of us, our
allies, and the Soviet Union if we are to reach this goal. But
we can succeed -- if we remain strong, if we resist utopian
visions, and if we and our allies work with the Soviet Union to
build the changes we want to see into solid agreements.
We must remember: Peace is born of strength. It is ironic
that people think the long peace that Europe has enjoyed -- and
the trend toward democracy evident elsewhere in the world -- is
5
reason for us to relax our military strength. Developments in
the Soviet Union remain uncertain. A strong military will
impress upon Soviet leadership that nothing can be gained by
turning back to a more militaristic course. Our forces remain a
reliable guarantee that we and our allies are safe and secure.
And we must recognize the plain truth that the preservation
of peace rests upon modern nuclear forces. Conventional forces
alone cannot prevent war. Two destructive world wars are proof
enough of that. The paradox of our time is that nuclear weapons
themselves that have made the prevention of war imperative.
World war today is deterred by the certain knowledge that no
nuclear aggressor can himself escape nuclear destruction.
H
Our goal is to maintain a deterrent that no aggressor dares
attack -- no matter how important the interests, or how high the
stakes. We are drawing on some of the brightest minds in science
and exploring our most advanced technologies to bring us closer
to the day when we can defend ourselves against nuclear attack.
My direction on SDI is clear - vigorous development will I continue,
I have directed continued development of SDI options and
will deploy strategic defenses when they are ready. Effective
defenses will enhance deterrence.
For now, the cornerstone of security and stability remains a
nuclear arsenal that can survive attack. Let me tell you what why
15 so impor tant
mean when I talk about a survivable force. I mean a nuclear
force no aggressor can hope to destroy, without bringing about
his own destruction. An aggressor who knows a significant
portion of our forces will survive a first strike is one who will
4 Over the last queration, the S.U. has
been biulding wer-more menaing sharteyic nuclear forces
lange, modem missiles, each carrying many warheads.
Those forces appeared to be designed for a devastating
This means that the more summiable
our forces are, The templed
an asspessor may be-- - even during
6 ca fines of Cresss to launch a
never carry out his attack.
A survivable force makes nuclear
fert shite.
attack unthinkable.
and
That is why I have decided to enhance the survivability of
the less
our own land-based missiles. We will move Peacekeeper ICBMs out
the
of vulnerable silos and make them mobile -- harder to target and temptation,
more survivable. Taking our most modern silo-based missiles and
the
greater
redeploying them in a mobile mode is the best near-term solution
the
torincrease Stiengthen stategic survivability. Stability by
stability stable lity
Looking to the longer-term, I have directed the development
of the
nuclear
and deployment of a new mobile single-warhead missile, the
balance
Midgetman A Because a Midgetman force will be so highly
survivable, there is no conceivable reason -- no matter how grave
the crisis -- for the Soviets to try to attack it. These
systems, along with our bomber and submarine-based forces give us
the sturdy triad of nuclear forces no aggressor can attack with
impunity.
To accompany our military programs we need an arms control
strategy that will enhance survivability -- and create conditions
for increased confidence and cooperation between the U.S. and
USSR. That is why we ve agreed to return to the table in Geneva
proposed a
next month,
to resume talks on strategic nuclear forces, and nuclear testing.
B
We want reductions -- but reductions alone are not enough
Agreements that result in reductions without reducing the risk of
war do not serve our interests. Vulnerable land-based systems
carrying multiple warheads are an inviting target -- a problem of
too many eggs in one basket. Mobile missiles are more
7
survivable, but also far harder to verify: We can't count what
we can't find. Our worry is that this could increase the
incentives for cheating And if several warheads are carried by
each mobile missile, the problem -- and the penalty for failing
to detect cheating -- is compounded.
are wor big on then and other problems And
We don it have answers to all these problems. But we will go
to Geneva with new ideas on how best to build on the significant
areas of agreement that already exist.
The principle of security through stability does not apply
to the United States alone. Our security is bound to that of our
allies. We cannot rely on rhetoric to deter a would-be
aggressor. Our theater and tactical nuclear forces give
substance to that reality -- a link that extends deterrence
beyond our shores and serves to strengthen our common security.
reductions in We are committed to reducing nuclear weapons when doing so
The INF treaty demonstrates on willinguess to negotiate
strengthens alliance security and international stability. In
2400
the past decade, NATO has unilaterally removed [...] warheads --
to a level 35% lower than in 1979. But theater nuclear forces
contribute to our stability no less than strategic forces. We do
not want to find ourselves dependent on the threat of a strategic
soldy
nuclear exchange to deter the threat of war of conflict in Europe.
P.
The fact that conventional weapons alone do not deter war
If is important to remember that the conventional balance in
does not make the conventional balance less important. NATO has
Europe is every bit as important as -- and linhed to - -
had to rely more heavily on nuclear weapons because of the
the nuclear balance. The Warsaw Pact's massive
significant conventional force advantage of the Warsaw Pact.
H. So we all comm committed to maintaining
modem, effective us nuclear forces based we Europe--
forces that are militarily effective and that permit no
doubt that the US co committed to the defense of
its allies Our vital intenest, Our fundamarkel
goals, and our enduring values perjut no less.
conventional force advantage has last a
shadow of was over 8 Europe for more then 40 years
The unilateral reductions President Gorbachev has promised
give us hope that we can now redress that imbalance -- not
because they transform the balance of conventional forces: none
of the promised reductions will seriously affect the significant
numerical superiority the Soviets now enjoy. We welcome those
steps because they I confirm what we've said all along Soviet
not but only
that
1
military power far exceeds the levels needed to defend the
legitimate security interests of the USSR
if imp lemented, such steps
will also help re duce the
The negotiations we are now engaged in offer a chance to
transform the military landscape of Europe. The issues are
theat of
exceedingly complex and the stakes enormously high -- but the
a surpvise attach
Soviets have been forthcoming, and I am genuinely hopeful that we
will achieve the reductions we seek.
But as in the case of nuclear forces, numbers alone are not
enough. Our aim is nothing less than removing war as an option
in Europe. The USSR has said it is willing to restructure its
forces. We want the Soviets to deploy a smaller force -- one
less reliant on the tanks, artillery and personnel carriers that
provide the Soviets' offensive striking power. A restructured
Warsaw Pact -- one that cannot threaten a major offensive against
the West -- would make Europe and the world more secure.
The same can be said for a movement toward more openness in
military activities. In recent years, we have invited observers
to each other's military exercises, and expanded the exchange of
information on our military forces and their activities. Two
shies
weeks ago, I proposed an "open sky" initiative, to take the
9
concept of openness one step further: a plan for both sides to
allow territorial overflights that, together with satellite
surveillance, will increase our security against sudden and
threatening military activities. In the same spirit, we want to
see openness extend to Soviet military expenditures as well. I
call on the Soviets to do as we have always done: to publish,
for the first time in Soviet history, an accurate defense budget.
This kind of restructuring and openness in the military
sphere is the kind that can lead to lower tensions and greater
trust between our two nations -- and a safer more secure world.
As we look toward that day, we know now that our defense
strategy will be tested severely in the developing world.
A
growing number of nations are now acquiring advanced and highly
destructive military capabilities -- in some cases, nuclear,
chemical and biological weapons, and the means to deliver them.
And it is an unfortunate fact that the world faces increasing
threats from armed insurgencies, terrorists, and (as you in the
Coast Guard are well aware) narcotics traffickers -- and, in some
regions, an unholy alliance of all three. These emerging
challenges will test our traditional concepts of security as
never before.
Forging a global strategy for defense is made more difficult
by the serious budget constraints that we face. The 12%
reduction in real defense spending over the past five years has
secretary Cheney has already made a receiber of
cut into our capabilities. a More tough choices, lie ahead, but
one is already made. I will not as Commander-in-Chief, preside
and more
10
over a return to the "hollow army" of the 1970s -- a force under-
trained and ill-equipped to perform its missions. You who choose
to serve in America's Armed Forces deserve better. You have my
word: our military will be battle ready. You'll have the tools
and training you need to do your job.
The reviews we are now completing address the full range of
security problems before us. As a global power, it should not
surprise us that our ingenuity will be tested in matching our
security responsibilities with our resources in the years ahead.
But as I go to Europe to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the
Atlantic Alliance, I cannot help but notice how far we've come --
and how bright our future is.
I began today by speaking about the triumph of a
particularly American idea: freedom. I know there will be
people who think there's something presumptuous about that --
people who will think it boastful to talk about that triumph.
But it's not, for one simple reason: America knows her place in
democracy's unfolding drama.
Democracy isn't our creation -- it's our inheritance.
We can't take credit for democracy -- but we can take the
precious gift of freedom, preserve it and pass it on -- as my
generation does to you, and you, too, will do one day.
As I said on the Capitol steps the day I took this office,
"There is but one just use of power, and it is to serve people."
As your Commander in Chief, let me call on today's class to
reaffirm with me that American power will remain always in
11
service to the enduring ideals of democracy and freedom. And
let those who follow be able to say that in resisting the
pressures of the moment, we delivered peace, freedom and
prosperity -- lasting and secure.
# # #
Insert A
This new missle will be able to survive an
attack with only number of warning,
than of takes for answeed ICBM to get from the
forcet Union to the United States
Insert B
40 The START Treaty we are negotiating will leed
to significant reductions m the strateger strategic forces
of both sides, But reductions alone are not
Agreements merely result
enough. agreements that meney result in reduction
bus do not sense reduce the resks of was do not
serve our interests. Indeed, the deeper the cuts,
the more came care we must exercise to ensure that
the remaining Kendury forces constitute a stabelizing, survicable,
and effective determent. and the deeper the cuts,
the more insistent we must be that the agreement
meetademanting standards of verification.
H So asue continue as we contume to work
toward a START agreement, we will
be looking
B. contenued
at the
how best to address problem of vuluerable
sllo- - based missites with multiple warheads.
that
cousepore Fach kimptuy Largets for
Think We Chewse will be struggluy with the
dilema posed by mobile miscles which are, at
me once, both more survable andmuch
hander to dount and verify. And if these mobile
musscles are CORRYOUS camyugmultiple warheads,
the problem -- and the penalty for not catching
any cheating- IS com pounded.