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
323153531
label
U.N. Address 9/23/91 [OA 8323] [10]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323153531
contentType
document
title
U.N. Address 9/23/91 [OA 8323] [10]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13771-010
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323153531
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
d9f96c47ff89447b
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
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 Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13771
Folder ID Number:
13771-010
Folder Title:
U.N. Address 9/23/91 [OA 8323][10]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
21
6
3
Room 122
9-12-91
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
Jony-
\
Brents remarks
to Council on
foreign Relations
Nancy Dyke
ENT
Document Originally
Attached to
Following Page
B. scow oft
9-11-91
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
Ungrecedented twice in which we live
Events moving requidly the
Rare moment in world history -
micherited territory
period of transition
Leav period that
dominated our live
internat. + domestic
for over 40 yrs.
containment & its
corollaries was a
masterpiece
a threat was perceived
confrontation of two
widely divergent
views
Confr. ml aggressive mil.
power - expansive
Led us to mil allionces
cdd Was is all we've ever
known r attitude instinctive are
2
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
Now disappeared
look 40 yrs. to "do it" have (contain
but few of us wDd
Left NY at the thoughts,
guessed so brief
forces of Hatera
antic. limensions of
world environment
that Discard lies ahead old policies
arrive at new ones
Don't avoid being prisoners of
coll was mestality
what sort fround ?
New
3
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
New World order
There will be a NWO of
some sort
Dlimpse may 11 have of possibilities been in isulf
anis Hebed complete
/
restration of
US confidence
- Restored conf.
of others in us t
of its proposes
courage
- Brought UNSC into
real world
Had been still born
4
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
since founders founded
it as polit body M
by great power x
adjudicate conflict in
the world
- mob. of grand coalition -
against countries aggression eager to
29 make contribut to
11 setting in order
world usset
by C- the Drage attack"
1st fingse of criss
not tandered to test of
automotically
wills between two blocs
5
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
sov coof. made
possible UNSC role
- Performed fillfully
& this one shot affair 6-
can New generalize ?
good things signs about world
can't tell
figuilation of some of
Jurge of democracy
more
But troubling Resurgence : of nationalism
Living in resuription of history
that was in pr spension
of ince ov I ara
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
6
Mil tech widespead of
can afflict (harm)?
other
/. injurizations
W.Eus areas - nameles questions ?
3 - NATO
- EC
- OSCE
Him ats. & peaceful change
Indomental gues for us & Em =
is us as European power
7. E.Eur
formidable tasks.
Dett Residenting Naw econome materials
finding role in W Eur
fuccess of this
intergrise is not
for or dained
for Un
Problems of ! Eur magnfied
many times
7
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
3 Revolutions in for Un simultaness
/. national
2. Political
3, Economic
1. National - ofserver US only
cld. strain our concepts
of nationality in ?) UN
(ntionhood
2. polit- - we can offer
info t
asst.
Can dem succeed
there ?
How can we promote
but of out preaching
3. Econ - where we can help
the most
70 be undergo mg 3 sevs simult
is mind boggling
acont expect immed.
8
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
outcome
- Estab. regular processes
to work at them
Process of -
system to give
dec. on Baltics
in for an more
permanence
Chira
Different asnost
from for. an.
- Deng tried twice
for Un. charge began top down
China - bottom up
Arozen now in China
De pite problems, this before is most us
promising vista N over 70
yrs.
( He mentioned 1918)
9
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
so some say america come
home "america first"
History suggests be
that would
mistake
New almost clean state
- WWI I is finally over
- Only one superpower
US cannot be world's
-
policeman but only
us can organize L
can't we lead write on slate in
way that incourage
the best of am. values
would still Langerous place
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
Q of A
NATO as .2_ stabilizer in Sur -
Wave never really made
not collectic security
col. sec. work
for un
1. Humanit - yrs we /
lead & spt
2. yes - Econ -
IMFT w Bank
20 make it ro h
has to be in place - an
econ program which
give assurence that
con cost will be used
to enhance econ. reform
The
Herîtage Foundation
Point of View
214 Massachusetts Avenue N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
(202)546-4400
Sept. 12, 1991
Dear Editor,
The easing of Cold War tensions in the Middle East gives
President Bush a "rare opportunity" to help overturn the U.N.'s
"Zionism is Racism" resolution when he addresses the U.N.
General Assembly Sept. 23, says Heritage Foundation U.N.
specialist Christopher Gacek. In the enclosed op-ed essay, Gacek
says the president should announce that America will work to
block U.N. participation in any Middle East peace process unless
the resolution is repealed.
In the second essay, Heritage's Soviet specialist Leon Aron,
a Soviet emigre, offers a clear guide to key terms used to
describe the political, economic and social conditions in the
Soviet Union. Grasping the nature of change in the country is
impossible without "understanding the reality behind the stock
expressions," Aron says.
I hope you find the essays of timely interest.
Sincerly,
Joe Locant
Joe Loconte
Manager of Editorial Services
Note: Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation
or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.
7
would have turned the planet into a series of breadlines. The
New World Economic Order defined equality as an especially
virulent form of envy; it ignored the human striving to create
lasting things; the human thirst for sensible risk and it It soly lif
tried, under cover of lofty rhetoric, to replace the natural
human impulse for production and self-expression with the
corrosive striving to seize wealth from one party and give it to
another.
praceful, presproors and fore,
If we hope to build a future characterized by prosperity and
peace, we must begin by rejecting DEjbil the Newspeak of the old era,
E
and dedicating ourselves to a new era of honest talk, honest
rhetoric and realistic commitment to the goals we have pledged to
uphold.
Let us begin by honoring the charter's pledge "to practice
tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good
neighbors. "
Today J vige too to
Let us agree today to repeal UNGA resolution 3379, the so-
called "Zionism is racism" resolution. This resolution merely
invites the entire world to embrace a form of religious bigotry
take
and to take sides on a dispute that has defied the best efforts
of statesmen for decades.
In repealing this repulsive resolution no one agrees to
submit unequivocally to every decision made by the government of
Israel. The question here has nothing to do with Israeli policy.
Many of us will disagree with particular stands taken by Israel,
just as we do with any member state.
8
But understand: Zionism is not a policy; it expresses the
essence of Israel, a land born out of a gruesome Holocaust; a
land created as a homeland for the Jewish people. To equate
Zionism with the intolerable sin of racism is to reject Israel -
- something this body cannot and should not do.
We stand on the verge of convening an historic peace
conference between Israel and the Arab neighbors who have never
accepted its existence. The United Nations can support this
process by repealing unconditionally Resolution 3379, and in the
process conceding that each nation in this conference deserves a
seat at the table, and deserves the respect accorded every nation
in the U.N. Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
The United Nations played a major role in ringing up the
final curtain on communism. It now has a chance to support a
Middle East peace. Repeal Resolution 3379. Give peace a chance.
We also must understand that in the post-Cold War world, we
face two major challenges: Nationalism and protectionism.
We
have discussed the first. Let us discuss the latter. In the
years to come, the world will divide not on ideological lines so
much as along lines of national self-interest. We must strive to
fend off instincts toward war or imperialism by inviting every
nation to share in the promise of liberty. I can think of no
better way to encourage this new era than by promoting the free
flow of goods and ideas.
9
Many nations represented here have joined the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and you all understand that
protectionist impulses have prevented nations from settling the
greatest free-trade agreement in world history. Also remember:
Protectionism set off the Great Depression. We cannot afford to
destroy the international economy now, not when it offers the
greatest competitive discipline, and the greatest hope of urging
our own industries on to greater heights. I call upon all
members of GATT to redouble their efforts to reach a successful
conclusion for the Uruguay Round -- and then to begin yet another
round of freer and fairer trade.
(homily about African children selling to Soviet trade
companies, which enlist Asian help in marketing a product that
will pay great dividends in the Euro and Americano markets.)
Economic progress promises more than full shop shelves. It
pushes us to explore new ideas and inventions.
Do not forget:
Our world today is smaller than it ever has been. Oceans do not
hold back the tide of new ideas; devices of mass communications
can send news past high walls and into prison cells. In our
lifetimes, technology has overwhelmed tyranny. The age of
information also can become the age of liberation -- if we limit
state power wisely and let our cultures make the best use of new
ideas, new products, new insights.
Finally, let us remember that governance never will be a
science. Human beings are perverse creatures. If you predict
that they will follow one course of action, they will take
10
another of just out of sheer spite. "Scientific" government
never works because the process of democracy in the end boils
down to an expression of something vital and intangible: values.
No nation should ever surrender its sovereignty to an
international body, but every nation ought to understand that it
bears a real responsibility for building a better future in this
Gold
world. The United States has no intention of encouraging or
building a Pax Americana. We encourage a Pax Terra constructed
upon shared responsibilities and aspirations, and we urge the
United Nations General Assembly to address the particularly
touchy and crucial matter of values.
Communism blotted out history, but it also shattered
fundamental social institutions: the family, the community; the
place of worship. We must restore these institutions in our own
quest for a New World Order, and we must give them the freedom to
flourish in our age of "greater freedom," our new era of liberty.
Whenever you considér a resolution, think not of lofty
theories and the urgings of interest groups. Think of your loved
ones. Ask how your resolutions and actions might affect them.
Weigh carefully the ways in which your decisions will influence
future families.
Whenever an old and tangible evil vanishes, people naturally
embrace unrealistic hopes. In our time, many people assume that
we have entered a Brave New World full of prosperity and free of
fear. But that is naive.
11
The things we hold most dear demand the highest price in
blood, sweat, toil, tears and pain. In the present euphoria, we
may be tempted to forget the most important lesson of the age,
which is that no social order can long survive without the
consent of the governed, and that precious liberties demand
constant attention and care.
I would like to think that those of us in this room,
chastened by bloody wars and tense peaces, would protect liberty,
democracy and human rights as zealously as we should. But
history tells us that people tend to drop their guard when they
see no great menaces ahead. They tend to take their own
liberties for granted.
It is my solemn hope and wish that this organization, which
has permitted itself to fall prey to fads over the years, will
become the world's conscience, the last bastion of rigorous
freedom and righteous courage. Know that principled men and
women necessarily will suffer condemnation from peers who seek
easy solutions to tough problems. Understand that national
interests sometimes collide with the demands of human rights and
natural law. But commit yourselves to becoming a special body -
- not one that enforces its views through force, but one that
inspires nations through its commitment to reason and its passion
for the values of love, productivity, and brotherhood.
My nation cannot lead this world to a promising future of
wealth and well-being. No other nation in the world can do it
alone. Each of us has an obligation to follow where our national
12
interests lead. And together, we have a responsibility for
building a common interest around shared principles. We have an
opportunity not merely to spare our sons and daughters the sins
and foibles of the past; we can build the foundations of a future
more satisfying than any our world has ever known.
You can make history here. You can build a decent future
here. You can inaugurate an era of peace and understanding here.
Here, you can define and shape a New World Order.
Take this challenge seriously. Inspire future generations
to praise and venerate you.
Good luck, and may God bless the United Nations, and the
principles upon which it stands.
age of electrons -- technology has outrun tyranny -- china, etc.
; info
revolution, etc.
respect, gatt, common security, clear definition of terms and
goals, eternal vigilance. foundation of principle, values: end
with bushian invocation of all the above.
The
Herîtage Foundation
Point of View
214 Massachusetts Avenue N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
(202)546-4400
NEW U.N. COULD REPEAL
'ZIONISM IS RACISM' RESOLUTION
by Christopher Gacek
When President Bush speaks before the U.N. General Assembly in
New York this month, he will be addressing a profoundly different
United Nations -- one that could serve the interests of peace in the
Middle East.
In 1975, in a time when the United Nations served only as a
battleground for Cold War tensions and Third World hostilities, the
General Assembly passed Resolution 3379, which condemned Zionism as
a "form of racism and racial discrimination." This was in the same
era of General Assembly sessions that gave standing ovations to PLO
terrorist leader Yassir Arafat and to President-for-life Idi Amin,
the butcher of Uganda, after both men denounced the United States
and Israel.
But the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe and the
breakup of the Soviet Union have dramatically altered the climate in
the United Nations. To be sure, much Third World hostility to the
United States and its allies remains, but the Cold War tensions that
exacerbated conflict in Middle East are gone.
As a result, President Bush has a rare opportunity to strike a
mighty blow against institutionalized anti-Zionism by calling for
the repeal of the U.N. 's abominable "Zionism is Racism" resolution.
The former Soviet satellites of central Europe have privately
Note: Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation
or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.
expressed their willingness to support repeal. And last year Soviet
officials indicated privately that their government thought the
resolution was a "terrible mistake."
The sort of anti-Israel bigotry that is the defining feature
of Resolution 3379 cannot be tolerated in an organization that
claims to respect the rights of all sovereign states to peacefully
exist, without interference in their domestic affairs.
There are ways for President Bush to "give peace a chance" in
the Middle East other than the administration's plan to suspend
housing loan guarantees to Israel. Repeal of the U.N. resolution
would be a simple but significant gesture, because it would assure
Israel that the world political community accepts its right to
exist. And a more secure Israel will be more likely to take bold
steps toward peace.
Thus, when the president addresses the U.N. General Assembly,
he must:
* Announce that the United States will work to block U.N.
participation in any Middle East peace process as long as
Resolution 3379 stays in effect. It is likely that any agreement
between Israel, Syria, or the Palestinians will require U.N.
oversight while it is being implemented and after it is complete.
But Israel rightly maintains that it has no reason to trust an
organization that exhibits such virulent animosity toward the very
idea of a Jewish state.
* Make clear that the United States will lead an effort to
repeal the resolution in the General Assembly and in every
successive session of the General Assembly until repeal is
achieved. This is critical because it puts U.N. members on notice
that voting against the United States on this matter will expose
them to future political pressure, such as the reduction of economic
assistance.
* Announce that the United States will veto the appointment of
any proposed replacement for U.N. Secretary General Javier Perez de
Cuellar who does not support repeal of the resolution. The United
States should only accept a secretary general who is willing to use
his "bully pulpit" and institutional power to help achieve this
goal.
The message that Jewish nationalism, as expressed in the
democratic nation of Israel, is politically legitimate must be
impressed upon the United Nations -- which so easily offers its
imprimatur to nationalistic movements in the Third World and
elsewhere. It is a message that needs a champion -- from Crown
Heights to Eastern Europe to Russia to the Middle East -- and who
better than the president of the United States?
*
*
*
Note: Christopher Gacek, Ph.D., is a U.N. specialist and Jay
Kingham Fellow in International Regulatory Affairs at The Heritage
Foundation, a Washington think tank.
9/12/91
Snow/Grossman
UN.TS
September 20, 1991
Draft One
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY HALL
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1991
11 A.M.
[INTRODUCTORY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS; PERSONAL REMINISCENCES]
Today I plan to deliver a different kind of address than you
ever have heard from a President of the United States. I do not
plan to dwell on a superpower rivalry that led to this
organization's founding and defined international politics for a
half century, although I will discuss it for a moment, because it
provides a foundation for my main topic: The new world that faces
us all.
For half a century, world affairs revolved around a conflict
between the United States and the communist world -- principally,
the Soviet Union. Many wars, many debates, many events reflected
commonism who
the competition between two ideologies: one, that asserted the
rights of governments to direct the movements of their people;
liberal democracy
the other, which declared that governments derive their just
rights from the people they serve.
Cut through the rhetoric, peer into the military and
economic competition, and the conflict between the superpowers in
many ways hinged on a small but poignant question: Do people have
inalienable rights?
Well, I look around this room and I see the answers. Today,
a single delegation represents the people of Germany; two
2
delegations represent Korea; the republics of Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania all send their own delegations. Just one week ago, 159
nations enjoyed membership in the U.N. Today, the number stands
at 166. Seven nations in one week -- in fact, all joined in one
day: That's extraordinary.
In their own ways, each of these changes -- changes that
have occurred within the past year -- illustrate the new
ascendency of individual rights. They hail a new age of liberty.
I look back upon the past year, and I also see the makings
of a new era of peace. You see the old order really began to
yield to the new in this very chamber. Less than a year ago, the
Soviet Union joined the United States and a host of other nations
in defending liberty -- and opposing the treacherous barbarity of
Saddam Hussein. For the very first time, superpower competition
took a back seat to international cooperation.
And, for the very first time, we began to glimpse -- like
mountains emerging at dawn's first light -- a world in which we
could conceive of fulfilling the challenge and the promise of the
United Nations Charter -- and of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights.
For 5 years
Think about it: In the long history of the United Nations,
the delegates here X1 battled against the large and frightening
forces of superpower competition forces that rendered almost
hopeless the charter's determination "to save succeeding
genrations from the scourge of war
to reaffirm faith in
fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human
3
person, in the equal rights of men and women and nations large
and small
to promote social progress and better standards of
life in larger freedom. "
The three key words there are: "in larger freedom. II For
many in this room, and for many of the nations that belong to
this body, "larger freedom" did not exist. Governments cared
less about observing individual rights than in forcing the masses
to conform to some planner's vision of a perfect society.
Individuals were tossed about, murdered and tortured, sent to
Provinces
labor camps or resettled in distant lands -- all for the sake of
theories that never made sense. The communist ideal fell when
people grasped the emptiness of its promises, and saw that
freedom -- true freedom -- works. When they no longer could
ignore the failures of their governments and their economies,
people rose up and shouted defiantly: We are people! Treat us
with dignity! Understand that your power flows from us -- not
the other way around!
Many of us watched gleefully as the Berlin Wall came
tumbling down; as the old Warsaw Pact nations emerged from their
long dark confinement into the bright light and bracing air of
freedom.
But we also have learned in recent months that communism in
many ways froze history: It suspended ancient disputes; it
subordinated ethnic rivalries and nationalist aspirations. In
short, communism blotted out the identities of individuals and of
nationalities.
4
As totalitarian masters relaxed their grip on their victims,
and as individuals began again to taste their rightful freedom,
old animosities raced to the surface; old hatreds reasserted
themselves; and in the tumultuous aftermath of communism's
collapse, people who for years had been denied their past and
askings who are we? what do we want ?
future began searching for their own identities. The struggle
over ideology gave way to the far older struggle for identity.
That struggle has unleashed warfare between Croatians and
Serbians; Armenians and Azerbaijanis; Kurds and Iraqis -- each
battle merely picking up hatreds that have festered for more than
50 years.
Yorcansee it here:
The United Nations has organized only 13 peacekeeping
missions in its history. It mounted five of them in 1988 and
1989; another four during the past year. Think of it this way:
the U.N. organized four peacekeeping missions during the first 43
it has mornted since 1988
years; and nine during the past three. In those three years, our
world has changed so much that no sane person can now envision a
But
World War III. Nevertheless, most sober observers fear the
constant eruption of smaller, deadly wars.
All of us must face this challenge squarely: First, by suing
for the peaceful resolutions of disputes now in progres; second,
and more importantly, by trying to prevent others from erupting.
No one here can promise that today's borders will remain
fixed for all time: They won't. We must do our best to ensure
that people resolve border disputes peacefully, and that any new
5
not join this world in a
nations that might join our community will arrive peacefully, and
hail of bullets and a reign of tarrer
not after years of bloody savagery.
Most nations already give lip service to the one step
necessary for peace. Most nations already argue that they defend
individual rights. But if minorities cannot enjoy the full
fruits of liberty; conflicts will erupt. If people cannot
exercise their own inalienable rights -- if they cannot speak
their minds; if they cannot form political parties freely and
elect governments without coercion; if they cannot practice their
work
religion freely; if they cannot raise their families in peace; if
they cannot enjoy a just return from their labor; if they cannot
live fruitful lives and, at the end of their days, look upon
their achievements and their society's progress with pride -- if
these simple conditions for the good life do not exist, people do
not enjoy true freedom, and their governments have failed in
their primary duty, which is to protect the freedoms that enable
people to live good lives.
In the years to come, we will face the challenge of
reconciling people's yearnings for freedom and identity with the
need to live in a peaceful world, a world in which people and
peoples build ties of common interest. We must nurture feelings
of nationalism without shredding the fabric of international
society and hurling our nations into the kind of bloody
factionalism that led to our first world war -- and ultimately,
perhaps, to the Cold War.
6
But now, we must begin to build the basis for a new world of
peace and prosperity, one that honors the individual's thirst for
freedom; nations' desire for identity; and the world's desire for
a vibrant, prosperous peace.
For the people in this room, the challenge is simple: Honor
the commitments we have made by signing the United Nations
Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
respect, gatt, common security, clear definition of terms
and goals, eternal vigilance. foundation of principle, values: end
with bushian invocation of all the above.
09/19/91 22:16
Directory A:\*.*
Free: 692224
<CURRENT>
<DIR>
.. <PARENT>
<DIR>
MINORITY.TS
6237
09/19/91 10:08
SERI
5076
09/16/91 07:50
SERI
CRD
6181
09/15/91
09:10
UN
TS
9105
09/19/91 20:28
UNNOTE
2819
09/19/91 20:04
WP{WP}
BK1
5531
09/19/91 09:59
The
Herîtage Foundation
Point of View
214 Massachusetts Avenue N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20002
(202)546-4400
BEWARE OF MISLEADING SOVIET TERMS
by Leon Aron
Since Mikhail Gorbachev came to power in the Soviet Union in
April 1985, America's media have been deluged by terms describing a
very complex political, economic, and social situation. Many words
from the Soviet political lexicon -- regurgitated by the media
without explanation and often poorly understood by journalists--
often serve only to confuse.
But no sense can be made of the momentous events now reshaping
the Soviet Union without first understanding the reality behind the
stock expressions.
One of the most repeated errors has been the labeling of last
month's coup- leaders as members of the political "right." In the
Soviet Union, the "right" means those who support communism, reject
free market capitalism and seek to perpetuate government control
over the daily life of the people. In the West, this is the agenda
of the "left."
Other Soviet terms that require better definition are:
Black market - This is the huge sector of the Soviet economy
that operates outside state control as a free market. Western
journalists often use this term derisively. However, black markets
operate according to the laws of supply and demand, and not
arbitrarily according to orders by the state. For decades it has
been the only sector of the Soviet economy that functioned
Note: Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation
or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.
efficiently.
Conservatives - This is the word most commonly used in the
Soviet Union for hard-line communists. While it makes some sense to
view hard-line communists as wanting to conserve the old
totalitarian system, it is incorrect to attribute any philosophical
meaning to the term. Conservatives in the West are anti-communist
and pro-free market -- the exact opposite of "conservative" hard-
line communists in the Soviet Union.
Democrats - These are people who struggle for free and fair
elections, individual liberties, private ownership of property, a
free market, and a sharp reduction in the role of the state in the
economy. In the West this is, of course, the agenda of the right. In
the Soviet Union they sometimes are called "progressive" or,
mistakenly, left-wing. Members of the Soviet left, therefore, much
more resemble American conservatives than American liberals.
Perestroika - This is the attempt by Gorbachev to create a
"socialist market" by giving managers, and not central state
planners, more control over running state enterprises. Gorbachev
also allowed the creation of so-called cooperatives -- small shops,
restaurants, and service organizations owned collectively by the
employees. Because it was only a half-hearted reform program,
perestroika made the economy worse. Under Gorbachev the state
continued to control industry, land, raw materials, prices, and the
distribution of food and other products.
Russian vs. Soviet - These terms often are mistakenly used
interchangeably in the West. The Soviet Union consists of 15
republics. Russia is the largest republic, comprising three-
fourths of the area of the Soviet Union, and by itself would be the
largest country in the world. Although ethnic Russians constitute
roughly half of the Soviet Union's population, they are but one of
more than a hundred nationalities.
Because most of the empire's leaders have been Russian, the
Russian Republic has been the vehicle through which the communist
empire was ruled. But this was not done with the consent of the
Russian people, who lost more lives to Soviet totalitarian
repression than any other people in the Soviet Union.
A final misconstrued term is "stability," a watchword of the
Bush administration's Soviet policy. Bush's preference for
controlled and limited change convinced him to support Mikhail
Gorbachev long after he had become an obstacle to further
democratization. The administration until recently shunned Boris
Yeltsin and other democratic leaders of the republics, including
those in the Baltics. True stability, however, cannot come from the
forcible maintenance of an unwanted imperial structure, but only
from the free self-determination of the republics.
*
Note: Leon Aron, Ph.D., a Soviet emigre, is Salvatori Senior
Policy Analyst in Soviet Affairs at The Heritage Foundation, a
Washington-based public policy research institute.
9/12/91
Envy / tich.
For Tony Snow re: UN Speech / McGroarty, 9/19/91
Tony:
Attached are bits and pieces from Joe D. and his folks at
State IO. Also, note Haass 1-pager on Z=R.
For what they're worth, what follows are a few paragraphs on
the subject of nationalism, playing off General Scowcroft's theme
of the "resurgence of history."
I'm sure the researchers will have more to pass along in the
morning.
Good luck! -- we'll talk tomorrow
{TRANS>>>: Our time -- a time of tremendous hope
}
History has begun again. At long last, dreams and destinies
unite. Nations and peoples throw off their chains, unfurl their
flags, celebrate the cultures they struggled to keep alive -- the
common bonds that gave them strength and courage. The nations of
the world celebrate with them.
But history's new promise also means the reemergence of old
perils. Too often, we see ancient animosities -- frozen in time
by the long years of Cold War -- revived and rekindled. For all
the promise we see, we know that progress is not preordained.
Just as we look with admiration at the peaceful path in the
Baltics, so too we look with sadness at the violence shaking the
Balkans.
The nationalism I warn against is not the healthy sort of
national pride: the distinctive and defining traditions, the
living history and heritage that all nations are duty-bound to
honor and respect. What menaces us is nationalism of a sinister
American Culture and the Roots
of Economic Development
Michael Novak
A theologian, author, and U.S. ambassador, Michael Novak
holds the George Frederick Jewett Chair in Religion and Public
Policy at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, where he
also serves as director of social and political studies.
In March 1986, with the rank of ambassador, Mr. Novak headed
the U.S. delegation to the Expert Meeting on Human Contacts at the
Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, the continuation
of the Helsinki Accord negotiations. He has served the United States
in three administrations.
Michael Novak has written over twenty tnfluential books in the
areas of philosophy, theology, politics, economics, and culture. He
serves on the editorial boards of several publications. He was a co-:
founder of both This World and Crisis.
Mr. Novak has received numerous awards, including the Free-
dom Award from the Coalition for a Democratic Majority, the George
Washington Honor Medal from the Freedoms Foundation, and
many others.
12
alon
L
et me start with a story that will be difficult to believe. Once
when I was teaching at Stanford some years ago,2 I took
advantage of one of the unique aspects of California education;
namely, the class and I met near the swimming pool. It was a little
study group, and as we were talking. one of the young women in
the class, twirling her nose plug, saw it slip out of her hand and
plop into the water.
Three of the young men made as if to dive in and retrieve it for
her. She said, "No, I want Professor Novak to get it." That is what
may seem unbelievable to you and impressed me a great deal at the
time. I said, "Why me?" And she said, "Because nobody I know"-
looking at me with those steely eyes that only a woman has-
"nobody I know can dive down deeper, stay down longer, and come
up drier."
4 INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM FOUNDATION
U.S. Aid and Trade Roundtable 5
It is my obligation this morning to ask you, even at this hour,
hold these truths to be self-evident," they had declared eleven
to go down deeper in thinking about the U.S. role in the world than
years earlier. They had fought a revolution in defense of those
we normally do, to think about its philosophical bases. We are not
principles. They had won-and then they were proving to be
very good at that. We are very practical people, hardly at all
incapable of governing themselves. There was riot and rebellion
metaphysical, and SO we explain ourselves very badly, not only to
in Massachusetts, disorder in North Carolina, the threat of
others but often to ourselves.
secession in New Jersey.
Our framers, who were much more philosophical than we, at
They feared that they were becoming the laughingstock of the
the same time as being eminently practical, had a much clearer
whole world, having overthrown the rule of George III, who was, in
idea of what they were doing and of its originality.
the annals of history, not one of the worst of tyrants by far, who
Before I come to that, though, I want to pause just for a moment
ruled, it was once said, by benign neglect. Having thrown off a mild
to remind you of what the poet said about the year 1789, that it was
form of tyranny, they were experiencing a government worse than
very bliss to be alive at that time. And if you ever wanted to say to
they had suffered under.
students that they were living in a period, in a year-like 1776,
They really feared that the whole idea of republican govern-
1787, or 1789, or 1848-1989 was such a year, an incredible year
ment, which was the name much preferred to democracy (because
in the history of liberty, and it is extraordinary to have lived
democracy always involved crowd tyranny, in that time and in our
through it. Some day I think we will look back on these days with
time), had fallen into disrepute among the philosophers and the.
great admiration and great wonder.
historians, because no republic had survived very long; all, within
But they would not have surprised the framers of the institu-
a generation or two, had dissolved. almost always under the acids
tions under which we in the United States are blessed to live.
of envy, the envy of one class or one group for another.
George Washington said it in his farewell address, expressing the
Thus they had a problem, as expressed by Madison "to rescue
hope that one day the nations of the world would repair to the
from opprobrium the idea of the republic." The problem was that
example, the ideals established by this nation.
all republics had lasted for a generation; that is not good enough.
James Madison, until he died, was proudest of one thing,
Their task was to design a republic that would last for the ages, not.
namely the originality of the American conception of a system, of
just for a generation and to study what went wrong in all previous
an order. No one will deny, he wrote in Federalist 14-1 am
republics, to see how you make a republic work. They were very
paraphrasing-that we have consulted with due respect the
practical philosophers. They were not satisfied with writing down
lessons of antiquity and of our ancestors. But nobody can deny,
a beautiful idea.
either, that we have not lacked for originality, that we have reared
"If men were angels," Madison wrote, "government would not
a government with no model on the face of the Earth and no
be necessary." We don't need ideals in that sense. What we need
example by which to guide ourselves.
is a republic that will work. That meant defeating envy. It meant
Madison, in particular, was acutely aware of how different
checking the impulses in every human breast, that impel human
from any other republic in history was the Constitution of this
beings. sooner or later-sometimes but not always-to evil, to self-
republic. Let me refresh you on what the problem was, because
aggrandizement, to disproportionate power, to taking unfair ad-
it is exactly the problem that many nations in Eastern Europe,
vantage. What is history, the framers asked, except a melancholy
Central America, East Asia, Africa, and many other parts of the
report of this wickedness in the human breast?
world face today.
How do you construct institutions that defeat envy and that
The Necessity of Republican, Limited Government
keep the power of the human spirit while checking its most evil
tendencies? The framers recognized that it is not enough to
In 1787, in that hot summer, the people of the United States,
declare rights; one must also establish a government to secure
led by a few, had declared the principles on which they stood. "We
those rights. It is quite wrong to think that they were anti-
6 INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM FOUNDATION
U.S. Aid and Trade Roundtable 7
government in that respect. To secure the four great principles of
Almost all other revolutionaries since have come to be despised by
the Declaration of Independence, they had to constitute a govern-
their own people as having betrayed them.
ment.
They were aware that the trick was to build a system over this
motto, "The New Order." They were aware that this new order was
The Founding Fathers are the only
original, the new order, never seen before in history, and they
revolutionaries in history who went to
predicted that one day all the nations of the world would repair to
this design.
their deathbeds fifty years later
Above this inscription, Novus ordo seclorum, they put a picture
peacefully, still beloved by their people.
of a building, a deliberately uncompleted pyramid, which can only
come from one country in the world, Egypt. They wanted to evoke
They had also noted, however, that most of the abuses of
the image of the ancient people of Israel, who wandered out from
human history had come through government, through the fact
the fleshpots of Egypt. across the desert, seeking the new Zion, the
that every human being sometimes sins. Not always-most of the
city on the hill. This was their founding metaphor, since most of
time, people are good, decent, generous, creative, cooperative, and
the peoples of what is now the United States and of the Americas
that fact gives grounds for hope in republican government. Gov-
came from all the other continents on Earth, this one being
ernment of the people has a chance, because people are basically
virtually empty at the time, They had in their minds an image of
pretty good.
going out across the oceans as the people of Israel had gone across
the desert to a new: Eden, a new beginning for the human race.
On the other hand, no one is good all the time, and therefore,
Reflection and Choice: Universal Human Attributes
restraints on government are forever necessary: checks and bal-
ances. Thus they wanted a limited government. They would give
The burden on them was to decide, perhaps for all time, as the
to government only those powers that could be written down, and
first paragraph of The Federalist says, whether government can be
they would make the document very short, under 4,000 words. As
built from reflection and choice or must forever be built through
I understand it, the new constitution of Brazil is 257 pages long.
coercion or chance. Reflection and choice are the two capacities
It is not going to work. Any constitution that talks that much is
that make human beings most like God, as Jews and Christians
giving government too much. I say that without even having read
believe. Because these are the two names of God, Light and Love,
it. The framers wanted limited government.
intellect and will, these two names give grounding to Jefferson's
Interpreting the Great Seal
sentence, repeated by that brewery worker just outside of Prague
last November. He stood up and said before his fellow workers,
The framers also designed the seal of the United States as the
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
emblem of this government, which is now on the back of the dollar
equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
bill. The inscription along the bottom of the reverse side of the seal
rights."
was inserted during the seventh draft, Novus ordo seclorum, which
Catholics used to be able to translate rather easily as "the new
Thus, the message sent by the framers as the first of the new
order of the ages." Remember, the idea was to make a republic that
order was in fact picked up in Prague and earlier in China in the
would last more than through their own generation.
symbol of the Statue of Liberty as chosen by the students as the
emblem of their desire, exactly as our framers had expected. They
Incidentally. these men are the only revolutionaries in the
declared no rights to be American rights. All the rights they talked
history of the world so far who went to their deathbeds fifty years
about were human rights. They belonged to all people everywhere,
later peacefully and still beloved by their people, setting off
and they were rooted in the capacity of every woman and every man
fireworks demonstrations in their honor all over the country.
to reflect and to choose.
8 INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM FOUNDATION
U.S. Aid and Trade Roundtable 9
The trick for them was to design a system which would
free economy, freer than any before in human history, outside the
maximize, for the first time in human history, the number of areas
control of government, on an equal level with government, not
and moments of life in which citizens could act from their own
under government but on an equal level.
reflections and choice. That is the whole point, how to maximize
reflection and choice in every moment and event of human life, for
There were more private business corporations in the year
everybody. In that respect, all men are created equal in their
1800 in the infant United States, just four million citizens strong,
capacity for reflection and choice. And in that capacity is grounded
than in all of England, all of France, all of Germany-indeed, more
their right to be respected. It is unlike anything else in this
than the entire world put together. And, of course, there were so
universe. Only human beings reflect and choose.
many fewer lawyers. Nobody knew what you couldn't do. If you
wanted to start a business, you just started it.
As a friend of mine said about animal rights, the difficulty is
Government did not create corporations; people did. This was
going to be getting animals to respect them. Human rights are of
the first society in which that was the universal practice. It was
a different order. They are based on the capacity of human beings
also the first society in which it was recognized that the cause of
to reflect and to choose and therefore to respect other agents'
the wealth of nations is intellect. The cause of the wealth of nations
reflection and choice as being made in the image of God, as Jews
is not natural resources. If it were natural resources, Brazil would
and Christians put it.
be the richest country on Earth, and Japan would be the poorest,
You do not have to be Jewish or Christian to understand the
Brazil having most and Japan least.
rights, but using Jewish and Christian language is the best route
Quite demonstrably, the cause of wealth is not resources. The
to understanding why the framers thought as they thought and
cause of wealth is the capacity of humans to reflect and to choose,
why something was self-evident to them that was not then self-
to reflect acutely and practically and to choose to execute their
evident to most of the human race, but is through hard experience
ideas in the best possible way. Those who do that will become
now evident practically to everybody.
wealthy, even if all they start out with, like the Swiss, are
The best way to defend human rights and to secure those
mountains. If Switzerland were Peru, everybody would use the
rights is through building a republican government. a government
mountains as a reason why they are poor. The Swiss found a way
of the people, which respects the right of each citizen to reflect and
to make chocolate and banks and have the highest standard of
to choose, and through designing into the structure of that system
living on Earth in mean conditions, where even the cows have
those checks and balances which would prevent the worst evils
different-sized legs on left and right.
from occurring, without stifling the will to power and the capacity
Finally, at the peak of the pyramid is the symbol of light, the
for creative invention and bold decision.
human eye, also probably the symbol of conscience or honesty or
The New Order and the Free Economy
candor, or even more probably of Providence, the Jewish and
Christian name for God, because the Jewish and Christian God is
Just above that motto of the United States, Novus ordo
different from the rationalist's. The Jewish and Christian God
seclorum-the new order of the ages-the framers put a pictorial
cares about particulars-a particular people, a particular event, a
representation of the system. What is the new order? The pyramid
provides a picture of it; It is a three-sided order. Across the bottom
particular land-at the same time as He speaks universally;
Creator of all, he is concerned about particulars. That is the
out). they wrote "1776" (in Latin, so you may have to work to figure It
meaning of the word Providence.
And above the symbol of the system is Annuit coeptis ("He
Imagine one corner of the pyramid as the government, de-
smiled on our beginnings"). This God of all smiled on the
signed to secure rights. a government with more limits, more
beginnings of our country. That is a particular God, a particular
checks and balances. than any before in history. Imagine the other
conception of God. It is the same God who knows the name and
corner as a firm foundation, an instrument for defeating envy: a
10 INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM FOUNDATION
U.S. Aid and Trade Roundtable 11
identity of every single individual ever made, knows every lily of the
transcendent judgment, of always being self-critical, is part of our
field, and so forth. It is a unique conception.
heritage.
They designed the building uncompleted because they be-
Americans are never so happy as in saying how bad things are.
lieved that a system whose basic reflection and choice will always
Any taxi driver in New York can tell you, between downtown and
LaGuardia, everything that is wrong with the country.
There is no example of a democracy or a
That is why we say "One nation under God." I should pause
republic that genuinely respects
to add, we are the only country in the world, I believe, that pledges
individual rights or minority rights that
allegiance to a republic: that is, to a form of government. The
Germans pledge to a people; the French, if I understand correctly,
does not have a capitalist economy.
to a language; the British, to a history: others, to a piece of land.
Not the people of the United States. We don't have all those things
have more work to do in every generation. Every generation will
in common. What we have in common is a form of government. "I
have to have its revolution. Even the Reagan revolution picked up
pledge allegiance to the flag and to the republic for which it
on that theme. The most conservative thing you can do is to have
stands." Take away the republic, in other words, and the deal is
a revolution. A revolution means, in Latin, revolvere, "to revolve,"
off. That is what holds us together.
that is, to turn back to first principles.
In my judgment, that is why burning the flag, burning the
That is the understanding the framers had of revolution. A
republic, is a symbol of self-destruction. If you burn the flag, you
revolution is not to break with the past; on the contrary, it is to join
burn the republic, you burn the very thing that secures your rights
the past and bring up the life that was there at the beginning and
and everybody else's, and that is why, I think, people find it such
make it fresh again, because the trouble with human things is
a deep affront. It is not burning the symbol of a piece of land; it is
entropy. You are always wearing out and slipping backwards. If
burning what secures our rights.
you are committed to liberty and Justice for all, you have got to go
It is important to see the idea of order, of a system, of a republic,
twice as fast because you slip back with every step. It is not as if
as the key ideas. That is what is happening around the world. The
liberties maintain themselves once achieved; on the contrary, we
people of Czechoslovakia, and other parts of the world, are trying
have to work at it. So the building is incomplete, as ever it will be
now to do more than just to have their land or have their language
in history.
or maintain their culture, but to develop a system that will protect
"One Nation Under God"
and secure their rights.
Above all, the whole system is under the eye of that creator
Republicanism Depends on Capitalism
from whom our inalienable rights come, or, if you are not a
They have also come to recognize that a necessary precondi-
believer, under the eye of conscience or human scrutiny or human
tion of a republican form of government is a capitalist economy.
judgment. It is not necessary to be a believer to get the basic idea.
Let me put it the other way. Let me voice It as an empirical
Thus we properly say, when we pledge allegiance to the flag,
proposition, because that is what it is. There is no example of a
"One nation under God." That is the way the framers showed it:
democracy or a republic that genuinely respects individual rights
a vital, limited government and a vital, free economy under a moral
or minority rights that does not have a capitalist economy. And it
and cultural system, under the dynamism, as John Adams put it,
makes sense. If you do not have economic rights, free rights of
of the scouring eye of the God of Israel, who over the desert was
what Pope John Paul II calls the right to personal economic
never satisfied. No matter how rich or powerful the people of Israel
initiative, what good are rights to personal political initiatives? If
would be, they would never meet his tests, and that sense of
you don't have the wherewithal to do things in the world. that is,
12 INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM FOUNDATION
U.S. Aid and Trade Roundtable 13
If you don't have the economic wherewithal, political rights are
empty.
U.S. Constitution), is the first piece of capitalist legislation in the
history of the world, because it recognizes the most fundamental
It must be stressed that the meaning of "capitalism" is not
of all kinds of property, property in ideas. All wealth in the modern
understood in the world, and most Americans cannot explain it.
world comes from ideas.
Our dictionaries don't explain it. I recently had my research
assistant go through seven dictionaries, Webster's and American
In the ancient and medieval worlds, wealth came from taking.
Heritage and all the others, and all of them defined capitalism in
How did Rome become rich? They went out and conquered the
Marxist terms. They all described capitalism the way Marx did.
barbarians and brought the booty. home. Why did people live in
They give It three notes. The language shifts from dictionary to
castles surrounded by moats? Because when there were no
dictionary, but the notes are always the same. Capitalism is a
markets and very little travel, there was only local produce
system based on free exchange or markets, on private ownership
available. The only way you got jewelry and precious stones and
of the means of production-a perfectly Marxian phrase, since
other things which were not available locally was to go out and take
nobody ever used it before Marx-and accumulation or profit.
them. Since there were very few markets and very poor roads,
when you grew great crops, what could you do with them? Nothing
These phrases may define capitalism in Marxist fantasies and
except feed an army. Therefore, for most of human history, the
led Marx himself to fantasize about a system that would not have
acquisition of wealth meant war, plunder, and rapine.
these things-no markets, no private property, and no accumula-
tion. That means stagnation or decline. If you do not have
It was from that sort of system that capitalism-you can read
accumulation, you are either stagnating or going downhill, which
this plainly in the writings of David Hume, Adam Ferguson, and
is exactly what tends to happen.
then Adam Smith, before there was capitalism-it was from such
a system that capitalism was designed to lift up the moral
Such a society would be based on a fantasy of what capitalism
standards of the human race, make war obsolete, afford universal
is and what it has been historically. After all, Jerusalem in the
plenty, and end universal poverty, and to make it possible for
Bible, even 3,000 years ago, let alone 2,000, had private property
human beings to acquire wealth without taking from others, by
and markets and profit. Jerusalem was nothing but a market. It
inventing new things, new goods, and new services.
had no natural resources. It stood between three continents, and
it was a marketplace, and there was private property, as every
Liberty, Prosperity, and Baseball
story in the Bible will show you, and the good Lord himself twice
A friend of mine in South Korea explained to me the secret of
forbade covetousness; that is, coveting the goods of others. In
development. I said, "How did South Korea develop so quickly?"
other words, without private property, a law against coveting
I remember seeing pictures in 1956, not long after the war, of one
things makes no sense. If it is all held in common, there is nothing
of the most bleak and poverty-stricken nations on Earth-Korea,
wrong with covetousness. You don't own anything; neither does
which had suffered terribly under the Japanese, and had had a
anybody else. It is all yours. It only makes sense in a regime of
rather mean history before that. How had South Korea developed
private property.
SO quickly, with all these mini-vans on the roads and high-rises
Marx's Fantasy and the Concreteness of Ideas
and great citles and SO much else that really surprised me on my
first visit there?
Marx completely overlooked what was different about capital-
ism. He ignored the answer to Adam Smith's question, What is the
My friend answered, "It is easy. We studied what the Japanese
nature and the cause of the wealth of nations? In a simple word,
did, and we figured out the secret of wealth is that you have to do
it is wit, invention, discovery, caput. The heart of capitalism is the
two things: use chopsticks or calligraphy and play baseball. So
word "caput," head, invention, discovery, or enterprise, or, in
we had always used chopsticks and calligraphy, but we didn't play
Adam Smith's favorite string of words, skill, dexterity, and judg-
baseball. So we brought in baseball, and immediately develop-
ment. The Patent and Copyright Clause (Article I, Section 8 of the
ment happened."
14' INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM FOUNDATION
U.S. Aid and Trade Roundtable 15
I said, "What do you mean? You're kidding." He said, "No.
Look at Mainland China. They use chopsticks, but they don't play
Order and Development
baseball. There is no development." Then he added, "Look at
So far I have discussed the American order. I have discussed
Cuba. They play baseball but they don't use chopsticks. There is
the distinctive idea of development, of capitalism, of intellect, of
no development."
discovery, of innovation as the cause of wealth. Finally, I want to
discuss what this means in terms of development worldwide.
You can tell whether a country is
In Eastern Europe, in Central America and most of Asia, and
capitalist by what happens to the
all over Africa, it is almost impossible for individuals to start a
corporation of their own. The procedures in law are vague or
poorest people. Is it easy, cheap, and
antithetical, the expenses are prohibitive, and the bureaucracy for
quick to incorporate?
establishing a corporation is forbidding.
In Peru, for instance, it takes an average of 252 days of full-
He went on: "Look, seriously, what I mean is this. Chopsticks
time work to incorporate a small business, plus about $7,000 in
and calligraphy have this great advantage because they relate the
bribes, in a country where the average income of a person is about
brain to the hand." In a manufacturing age, the hand-Adam
$700. In Hong Kong, It costs $30 to incorporate. It takes a
Smith's skill and dexterity-are crucial. The source of wealth is the
maximum of sixteen days, and it is done through the mail. All you
brain, and those who use the hand together with the brain are
do is register it. The government does not create the corporation;
going to be superior.
the government, for the sake of good order, registers the corpora-
tion as a legal person.
He further explained, "One other thing we did not have, but
baseball taught us. Namely, baseball taught us how you have a
This virtual rock with no natural resources is one of the
system-in this case just a game-which respects the individual
wealthiest places on Earth, totally disproving the notion that
but is played as an association." You have to have the collective.
overpopulation is the cause of poverty. Looking at the world, you
No baseball team can win with one player, not even one great
really have to notice that all the most crowded places on this planet
are the richest: Japan, the Netherlands, Hong Kong. People do not
superstar. You have to have strong players at every position. On
the other hand, everybody has to come to the plate one at a time,
cause poverty; people cause wealth. If the cause of wealth is the
human intellect, every new child is a potential creator. To create
and the ball singles out the fielders one at a time. It is the supreme
more wealth than he or she consumes in a lifetime is the entire
game of the individual, but, above all, it teaches the individual how
to operate in society. "We had the idea of society," he said. "We
principle of progress. If that were not true, economic progress
did not have the idea of the individual, and baseball freed us."
would not be possible. But it is true.
Readers may call this explanation fanciful, but it is not a bad
Development begins at the bottom up. The way wealth is
created in a capitalist country and the way you can tell whether a
expression of why baseball is the game you have to understand if
country is capitalist or not is to see what happens to the poorest
you want to understand America. You cannot understand Amer-
ica if you do not understand baseball, and I don't think you can
people. The first question to explore is, Can they start their own
corporations? Is it easy, cheap, and quick to incorporate? If so,
understand what has happened to the world today unless you see
the emergence of baseball in universal consciousness.
you have the beginnings of a capitalist economy; if not, a capitalist
economy is impossible, because until there is wealth at the
Nothing happens in baseball until the voice of the law says It
bottom, you have no markets for selling things to.
relationship of the individual with the community that we have in
has happened. It is liberty under law, and it is the most interesting
In Latin America, you have a very narrow market. You have
any of our games worldwide.
about 10 percent of the population economically active and well off
and 90 percent living in various stages of poverty and destitution,
unable to purchase anything.
16 INTERNATIONAL FREEDOM FOUNDATION
Second, a capitalist economy depends on the ability of patent-
ing and copyrighting new ideas. Try to think of a product that you
use or own in your home invented in Latin America. I think there
are none. I know of only one, actually. We don't use It in our home,
but it is the short-range airplane. There is a short-range aircraft
made in Brazil, the best short-distance aircraft that there is. But
there is very little else. Patent and copyright laws are so crucial.
Abraham Lincoln called them one of the four great gifts to the
history of liberty. Yet they do not exist in most of the world.
The third prerequisite for a capitalist economy is institutions
of credit. You need incorporation, patent and copyright laws, and
Part II:
you need institutions of credit which specialize in helping poor
people, which both lend money and give advice, which help people
to start businesses and give advice because the lending institu-
tions want their money back; they want the small businesses to
succeed.
Where you have that, you have lots of people, independent of
The Institutional Role in
government, creating new wealth inventively, and you have perco-
lation from the bottom up, which is how the U.S. economy grew
Aid and Trade
and how every economy grows that is a developed economy.
These concepts are interrelated. The most important form of
wealth and the most important form of collateral is an idea. For
Policy Implementation
example, a fellow came from a village in the mountains of Panama
to Archbishop Marcos McGrath four years ago and said, "IfI could
only borrow money for a truck, I could bring the produce of our
village to the city, and I could earn enough to pay back the truck."
An Idea like that is collateral.
These three things almost everybody overlooks: ease of
incorporation; the role of invention, and therefore patent and
copyrights of ideas: and the crucial role of credit. It is hard to start
a small business under the condition that before you have
anything to sell, you already have to assemble raw materials and
pay people to assemble them. You have to pay out before you can
sell and earn back, and for that you need credit. Credit is the
mother's milk of business, and if poor people have no access to
credit-and they do not in most parts of the world-there can be
no explosion of energies from the bottom up.
JUNE 22ND 1991
The
Economist
The world order changeth
W
E SEEK, said George Bush, "new ways
five-America, Britain, France, China and the
of working with other nations to deter
Soviet Union-in effect determine the deci-
aggression, and to achieve stability, prosperity
sions of the Security Council, which in turn
and, above all, peace." He was talking of the
steers the UN as a whole.
New World Order-an epic made possible by
This landscape is an ideal one on which to
Mikhail Gorbachev, realised by Saddam Hus-
build a system of more collective leadership,
sein, starring the United States and shortly to
one that would lock in those winning values.
be showing in a conflict near you.
To get that system, however, America must
There has always been a touch of show in
want it. Mr Bush can fairly claim that those val-
the idea. Americans prefer to go to war to fight
ues "have their clearest expression in the US".
for a great good, rather than just against a thug.
He can also point to America's military prow-
So President Bush, not much given to the "vi-
ess, rediscovered in the Gulf. America now
sion thing", offered America's Gulf-bound soldiers an ideal be-
knows that its international options are shaped more by self-
yond curbing Iraq's nastiness. There is, however, much more to
restraint than by external threat. But, having been financed in
the new-order phrase than a warm feeling. The world has been
the Gulf war to the tune of $37 billion by friendly Arabs and $17
shaken up momentously by the collapse of communism, and
billion by Germany and Japan, it also knows that it no longer
its politics have yet to set into their next mould. A New World
has the economic clout to run a hegemony.
Order of some sort will come, willy nilly. Should it, can it, be
Conceivably, America could now stand aloof from its
Mr Bush's version?
friends and play a Palmerstonian balance-of-power game, pur-
The new topography of world power supports him. It is
suing its own interests independently, as Britain did in the 19th
dominated by one peak, where only a short while ago it fea-
century. But, in peace as in war, America has always needed a
tured two: around one were gathered countries that had es-
loftier view of its world mission: it wants the outward expres-
poused democracy and the market economy; around the other
sion of a nationhood founded on shared values rather than on
the communist command societies. Between them lay the val-
more visceral'sorts of kinship. John Kennedy's blank cheque to
ley of the non-aligned, which lived by playing the peaks off
"pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support
against each other.
any friend, oppose any foe, in order to secure the survival and
The summit that remains is called the G7, the Group of
success of liberty" is no longer on offer. Instead, there is a new
Seven rich pluralist countries. It is surrounded by countries
readiness to share responsibility in world leadership. Hence
that share the same values and broadly the same approach to
the Bush administration's recent invitation to Europeans to get
running their economies. Of rival peaks they see no sign. The
involved in the search for Arab-Israeli peace; hence, even more,
landscape drops away from them past newly industrialised
its desire to keep the leaders of the crumbling Soviet Union
and developing countries to those that are still dirt-poor. The
feeling involved rather than abandoned.
Soviet Union is down on the slopes now-though Mr Gorba-
chev is loth to admit it and craves a place on the mountain-top.
Send a cargo-boat
On the foot-hills many governments are unhappy, for the
The threats to this Olympian landscape are great. One is that
game of playing-off has all but ended. Now they have just one
the mountain-top gods will fall out, as gods tend to. Some pun-
mountain to climb. Success is measured by the same yardsticks
dits will predict-in words of grave realism tinged with
everywhere-democracy, freedom of economic choice, pros-
glee-that the passing of the cold war will allow the irrepress-
perity and an unspoilt environment. The odd Burma or North
ible nation-state to return to its natural game of jockeying for
Korea still holds out against these criteria, but each will crack in
national advantage. They will also predict that success in this
time, Albania-style, and join the mountaineers. Even in China,
game will now be measured in market share rather than in ter-
capitalist shoots poke up through the permafrost. For a blessed
ritory, that trading blocks will replace alliances, that commerce
moment, world politics is driven by the power of shared values
will be the continuation of warfare by other means.
rather than by geopolitical manoeuvring.
The fraught, fear-dependency relationship between Amer-
In this landscape, the G7 get-together has replaced the su-
ica and Japan certainly points that way. Books claiming that
perpower summit as the most influential meeting-place in the
the Japanese are plotting to conquer the world still sell well in
world-though it has scarcely learnt to use its power. Another
America. The French like them too, so the European Commu-
gathering, too, has a much-enhanced role: the five permanent
nity is split between those who want to exclude the Japanese
members of the Security Council of the United Nations. This is
and those who want to benefit from their skills. The rift be-
where the haves work to carry the have-littles and have-nots
tween Europe and America on farm trade could yet widen nas-
along with them in dealing with international wrongs. The
tily. If these triangular tensions get worse, Europe and the
THE ECONOMIST JUNE 22ND 1991
13
LEADERS
emerging North American Free-Trade Area will turn inward.
building of the Soviet empire. It is odd but instructive that
Japan might even overcome Asia's post-second-world-war ta-
some of the proud countries breaking loose from the Soviet sys-
boos and champion an Asian block.
tem are queueing up to join the tyranny of Jacques Delors in
So the first big essential for Mr Bush's order lies in the
Brussels. Two principles must apply: such groupings should be
ungripping matter of the GATT-not just its Uruguay round
freely entered into, and open to trade from outside.
and the improvements in mutual openness this will bring, but
Beyond ethnic tension, there is the world's undiminished
commitment by the G7 governments to obey the GATT'S rules
supply of nastiness, terrorism, weaponry and tyranny. Mr Hus-
and adjudication. They will balk at this. But they have no logi-
sein's recent reminder of that showed up the new potential of
cal excuse for making only selective curtsies to the GATT. Un-
the UN to help here. Russia, China and most developing coun-
like the UN, the GATT cannot undermine the values that the G7
tries held their peace as the UN sanctioned an American-led
champions; in commerce it surely enshrines them. And what is
alliance to eject him from Kuwait and later restrain him from
at stake is not just an economic good-though that is huge-but
maltreating Iraqi Kurds. After the Saddam experience, would-
the prevention of the most obvious, petty bust-up that could
be wrong-doers will think twice before they defy the UN.
divide the leaders of the post-cold-war world.
Would-be right-doers will be more inclined to seek its blessing.
Gradually, case by case, the UN will reach into the affairs of
G7 without oxygen
particularly odious governments-if all goes well.
The GATT helps the New World Order in another way, too. The
There should, however, be no illusion that a global police-
harder the world's one mountain is to climb, the greater the risk
force run by a global democracy is feasible. Those who have
that militant Islam will appeal as a rival set of values and split
carried the winning ideas to the top of the mountain, and now
off as a volcanic peak of its own. And the greater will be the
wish to spread them, will not allow this process to be vetoed by
already daunting prospect of economic migration, bringing
the semi-converted or by plain toughs. America would do well
the developing world into direct conflict with the rich one.
to pay more respect to the International Court of Justice, which
Open trade is, and always was, the best answer-not just so
has never asked it to ditch its own principles. But, for the time
that poor countries can sell to rich ones, but also to allow the
being, the UN part of the New World Order will remain a lop-
rich to help the poor through direct involvement in their econ-
sided affair in which the three western permanent members of
omies. The multilateral providers of economic aid-the World
the Security Council have to persuade the new Soviet Union to
Bank, the IMF, the UN agencies-have much to contribute.
back them in the righting of some wrong, and hope that China
They and their sponsors have yet to adjust to the post-cold-war
then opts against isolation. Perhaps Germany, Japan and India
era. They no longer need to give aid on the wrong terms to keep
should broaden this forum. Yet opening the Security Council
feckless regimes "in the western camp". Equally, they can offer
too wide risks reducing the UN'S effectiveness. The less power-
more aid, on the right tough conditions, to countries previ-
ful must have their say but, if the UN is to work, the great pow-
ously considered untouchable menaces. Multilateral aid
ers, especially America and its allies, must not be alienated.
should now have a new and more constructive lease of life.
They must pursue the principles enshrined in its charter with
So much for economics. In politics there will be no shortage
as much international agreement as possible.
of threats for any New World Order to cope with. The scope for
local conflicts is, if anything, greater in the one-peak world
It cuts both ways
than before. As the communist sphere of influence dwindles,
Next month, in London, the heads of the G7 meet for the first
mismatches between nations and frontiers on the world map
time since the Gulf war showed what was possible in a changed
are being violently revealed, often in ways that disturb their
world. They must start to pin those possibilities down. The
neighbours. Local democracy has little truck with cartogra-
quest is not for some collective order for its own warm-sound-
phers. The cracking-up of the Soviet Union and of Yugoslavia
ing sake; it is for the best way to prevent the return of petty
are European examples. Africa, India and the Middle East all
nationalism among the rich and to establish their values
suffer from their share of frontier-chafing.
worldwide. The day of American hegemony has gone. That of
In richer parts of the world, groupings of states can provide
global democracy has not remotely come. In looking for a mid-
an answer of sorts. They give small, released nations-such as
dle way, the G7 should remember three imperatives. First,
the Baltic states will soon be-security, a voice in the world and
spread wealth through open trade and conditional aid. Sec-
a framework in which to pay their way. They give small trapped
ond, bow to international disciplines that embrace the right
nations, or minorities trapped within larger ones, a court of
values. Third, seek to achieve consensus among nations, but do
appeal beyond the unsympathetic capital. Europe has a variety
not feel bound by the process.
of such clubs, with differing and overlapping memberships
If that sounds painless, it is not. The mountain-top is thick
and purposes. Many of them are still coming to terms with
with those who would rather not see trade that is too liberal, aid
their new job in the one-peak world. The European Commu-
that is too principled, or arms control that is too self-denying.
nity grudgingly wonders how to adjust its 30-year dream to
And America itself needs to remember that a willingness to in-
welcome in the rest of Western Europe, let alone Eastern Eu-
volve others is not enough to make a collective world order
rope. NATO wonders how best to embrace or reassure some of
work. There must also be readiness to submit to it. If America
the very countries it was set up to fend off. The Conference on
really wants such an order, it will have to be ready to take its
Security and Co-operation in Europe, which once tried to reas-
complaints to the GATT, finance the multilateral aid agencies,
sure the Soviet Union that the West had no designs upon its
submit itself to the International Court, bow to some system to
empire, is now there mainly to bind it to the West.
monitor arms exports, and make a habit of consulting the UN.
Pace Margaret Thatcher, who considers all clubs that in-
Is it ready to do so? If not, its quest for "new ways of working
fringe the sovereignty of nations unnatural and doomed to fail,
with other nations" will sound like old-fashioned humbug.
the creation of such groups does not have to be a repeat of the
14
THE ECONOMIST JUNE 22ND 1991
as much press.
shanty- e
animals - or, at least, until they get
Mr. Moi's
Essay
until the people are as free as the
Kenya, we
WILLIAM SAFIRE
cans will decide not to travel there
image. And we hope, too, that Ameri-
suppress
age to counterbalance Kenya's gauzy
ment offi-
We hope to see greater press cover-
spoke of
Bush at the U.N.
tied to progress in human rights.
trust even
we believe that such aid should be
Newspaper
ports. After what we have witnessed,
eeting with
WASHINGTON
time. That was last month. This is
visit on safari, the one U.S. aid sup-
quietly told
The "moment has come for the
now; time to abandon the old New
the one American tourists eagerly
fficials had
President of the United States to step
World Order based on a Gemini he-
books and films as "Out of Africa,
er the free
up to his obligation to form and artic-
gemony and to set forward the new
the country romanticized in such
'ninc
ulate American foreign policy in the
New World Order based on a high-
and brutal place. It is a far cry from
that of his
wake of the death of Communism and
flying eagle and a multipolar bear.
The Kenya we visited was a grim
assport has
the breakup of the Soviet Union. The
Can President Bush come up with a
08
Govern 100
forum is the U.N. session opening this
conceptual framework in the short
lings - 10 U.S. dollars - they let us
ut of deten-
week in New York.
time remaining? Yes, if he stops his
when, for a bribe of 300 Kenyan shil-
d with sedi-
The need for a substantive speech,
frenetic travel and lectern-pounding
about to be taken inside and detained
has been ar-
now scheduled for Monday Sept. 23, is
to focus on his U.N. speech.
waved a U.S. passport. Still we were
Law Valirbi
all the more pressing because his last
For openers, quote President Ben-
Iman
We tried to explain who we were. We
attempt, - his dismaying "Chicken
jamin Harrison, who said in 1888:
ou offered
Nevertheless, there were the guns.
Kiev" speech in Ukraine on Aug. 1 -
"We have no commission from God to
withe 0
against driving by his house.
betrayed a misconceptual frame-
police the world." Propose to inter-
we later verified, there is no law
work. That was the first address by a
vene only to protect vital interests, as
U.S. President that had to be followed
miserable slum we meant to visit. As
when an aggressor builds or buys
which is a stone's throw from the
by an op-ed article by his national
nuclear weaponry. Invite world par-
in front of President Moi's home,
security adviser to explain that what
he said was not what he meant.
Though we didn't know it, we were
guards, one of whom cocked his rifle.
out
It came with ill grace for Mr. Bush
to implicitly derogate his Presidential
ourselves face to face with uniformed
Moment
eve
predecessors from Truman to Rea-
turned down a shady road and found
gan, who waged and won the cold war,
town on the outskirts of Nairobi, we
for his
for having engaged Soviet leaders "in
duels of eloquent bluff and bravado."
Worse was his dire warning to the
big speech.
peoples of Ukraine, the Baltics and
other republics seeking independence
from central Moscow rule that
"Americans will not support those
ticipation in our space shield to safe-
who seek independence in order to
guard everyone from nuclear black-
replace a far-off tyranny with a local
mail or accidental missile launch.
despotism. They will not aid those
State our intent to increase the
has what it takes.
poog ou had I
who promote a suicidal nationalism
momentum for freedom around the
ings should fairly explore whether he
st Kuwait in
based upon ethnic hatred."
world, helping those who root out the
dress these new questions? The hear-
elligerent and
That was to shore up the Gorba-
Communists still lying in the weeds,
the intelligence community to ad
Idam Hussein
chev Communist centralizers against
creating financial magnets and laws
and independence needed to revamp
ic activities.
the likes of the Yeltsin separatists.
to attract free-enterprise invest-
Does Robert Gates have the vision
I be well in-
Though Brent Scowcroft later insist-
ments. Promise to use our economic
support democratic change lie ahead.
ittle to insure
ed no pro-union purpose was intend-
retaliatory power to break tariff bar-
our security and new opportunities to
Nevertheless,
ed, the plain truth was emphasized in
riers and crush cartels.
war but more diverse challenges to
and nuclear
another line: "America's first sys-
Show how we will provide humani-
the cold war and the Persian Gulf
intensified its
tem of government - the Continental
tarian aid in the spirit of our past
by the unexpectedly early endings of
ry advantage
Congréss failed because the states
generosity, expecting our prosperous
We have been pleasantly surprised
188, Iraq clear-
were too suspicious of one another
trading partners to do the same, re-
fitness to serve.
wing its unex-
and the central government too weak
membering that help toward self-help
to upholding the law and therefore his
nd weapons of
to protect commerce and individual,
is the best help - no Marshall Plans
question his candor and commitment
1 Iraq, includ-
rights."
or grandiose designs, especially when
rized under the law, I would seriously
the rapidly
Came the putsch and its counter-
assets are wasted on standing armies
rom focusing
activities in this regard were autho-
coup, and the restive republics
and legions of spies.
tept the intelli-
itor or maintain. Indeed, unless all his
scrapped the centralism to create just
A week is plenty of time to create
of the Soviet
the sort of loose articles of confedera-
the "Bush Doctrine." No State De-
the responsibility of the C.I.A. to mon-
tion Mr. Bush had instructed them
partment Pablum; no 15-minute
ments but also connections that were
ical and mili-
official relationships between govern-
were such a failure in our experience.
package claiming leadership without
OM] Serving (s.(
These ties include not just direct,
Small wonder Secretary of State
being leaderly; no historic mistakes
ided to policy-
Baker received such a lukewarm re-
that call for op-ed clarification.
also needs to be examined critically.
nce estimates
ception'in the Baltic republics the oth-
Take yellow pad in hand, Mr. Presi-
ment in U.S. ties with Iraq since 1985
et Union were
er day: (The U.S., shamefully, was 39th
dent, and show how America intends
the Iran-contra scandal, his involve-
alarmist mes-
to recognize their freedom, just after
to participate in, rather than continue
In addition to Mr. Gates's role
ve been better
guidance.
Mongolia.) The people knew their in-
to observe, the sweep of history in the
dependence came despite the Bush
run-up to the millennium. By rising to
not a reliable substitute for as
Administration's historically wrong-
this intellectual challenge, you will
terrent. Enemy stupidity, howev
headed support of Moscow central.
earn the world's attention at your next
an effective chemical or nucle
prematurely, before he had ac
ted?
O.K., so the Bush foreign policy
great forum, in Hawaii three months
zigged while the world zagged, and
from now: aboard the battleship Mis-
dam Hussein had provoked th
catastrophic, but only becaus
threat
the U.S. found itself sadly misposi-
souri on the 50th anniversary of the
tioned on the central issue of our
attack on Pearl Harbor.
this failure of intelligence W
was
ances of Arab officials
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE
UNGA:
The glong ; challenge of nations lism
Age of Prace. Prosperity: cibsity as Linchpin
M
Age of Liberation
The Challenge of PEACE
divisity N informity
Ideology has given way to striving for Identity
Pax Americano no; Pax Turra yes
impuriation cast aside for nationalism
herrors of past agas impariatism conquet, 'tc.
reglaced by the lass sitere diverse strivings
The Challenge of Prosperity
etc. - lotsa quotes
Example not Gra-gravail
The Necessity of Liberty
power 10/prople
Entirly new = world
NW/Gov.orgs.
defined
N MONEY: engostment -
GAIT
promoted secured by VN - Scold for pst/
=
N bigitry - reconciliation - Zionism
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE
1
stupid VN debates, resolutions- JOE
Topics
1
Day Hammer skidd - Sinnifer
Tymrism
SDI ; common defense
3
Bob: world growth stats:
Heal the 10PM institutions: family, religion
COMECON VS U.S., 4C,
role of values
"Tigers
4
Janiler WN missions -
F1, X your
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE
ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE
&) what to do?
Slunner Dalores Hope
(1) GATT
(2) values atc - Zionism
(3) ind AS unit
V)
Dar call Chris Dre
death of Newspeak
and of Apocalypse
ORINELL,
Politics caroes the English Language
157
156
4 Collection of Essays
language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our
divided. The older men said I was right, the younger
thoughts are foolish, but the sloventiness of our lan-
men said was it damn shame EXP shoot am elephant For
guage makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts.
killing D cooks, because an elephant was worth more
The point is that the process is reversible. Modern
than any daose Coringhee coolie. And afterwards I was
English, especially written English is full of bad habits
glad that the coolic had been killed: it put me la
which spread by imitation and which can be avoided if
gally in/mo right and it gave ne at sufficient pretext for
one is willing to take the necessary trouble. If one gets
shooting the elephant. X often wondered whether any of
rid of these habits one can think more clearly, and to
the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid
think clearly is a necessary first step towards political
looking a food.
regeneration: 30 that the fight against bad English is not
[1936]
frivolous and is not the exclusive concern of profes-
sional writers. 1 will come back to this presently, and I
hope that by that time the meaning of what I have said
here will have become clearer. Meanwhile, here are five
specimens of the English language as it in now habitu-
ally written.
These five passages have not been picked out because
Politics and the English Language
they are especially bad-I could have quoted far worse
if I had chosen-but because they illustrate various of
the mental vices from which THE now suffer. They are &
MOST people who bother with the matter at all would
little below the average, but are fairly representative
adout that the English language is in a bad way, but it
samples, 1 number them to that 1 can refer back to
in generally assumed that TO cannot by conscious action
them when necessary:
do anything about it Our civilization in decadent and
our language-so the argument runs-must inevitably
(1) 1 am not, indeed, sure whether it is not true to say
share in the general collapee. It follows that any strug-
that the Milton who once seemed not unlike a seventeenth-
gle against the abuse of language in a sentimental ar-
century Shelley had not become, out of an experience ever
more bitter in each year, more alien [sic] to the founder of
chaism, like preferring candles to electric light or han-
61349 16 THH
that Jesuit sect which nothing could induce him to tolerate.
som cabs to aeroplanes. Underneath this lice the
Professor Harold Laski
half-conscious belief that language is a natural growth
(Essay in Freedom of Expression).
and not as instrument which WG shape for our own pur-
(2) Above all, we cannot play ducks and drakes with B.
poses.
native battery of idioms which prescribes such egregious col-
Now, It is clear that the decline of a Language must
locations of vocables as the Basic put up with for rolerate
ultimately have political and economic causes: it is not
or put of # loss for bewilder.
due simply to
influence of this or that individual
Professor Laucelot Hogber (Interglossa).
writer. But BEE can become # cause, reinforcing
the original CRISSO and producing the same effect in THE
(3) On the one side we have the free personality: by
definition it is not neurotic, for it has neither conflict nor
intensified form, and to 01 indefinitely. A man may take
dream. Its desires, such as they are, are transparent, for they
to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and
are just what institutional approval keeps in the forefront of
then fail all the more completely because he drinks. II is
consciousness; another institutional pattern would alter their
rather the same thing that is happening to the English
Photocopy-Preservation
158
A Collection of Essays
Politics and the English Language
159
munder and intensity; there in little in them that In notural,
This mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence is
irreducible, OF culturally dangerous. But on the other side,
the most marked characteristic of modern English
the social bond itself is nothing that the munual reflection of
prose, and especially of any kind of political writing. As
These self-secure integrities. Recoll the definition of love. Im
soon as certain topics are raised, the concrete melts into
WHITE HOUSE COMMCEN
and this 42ve very picture of B. small academic? Where is there
the abstract and no one secons able to think of turns of
# plice the this drall of minrore for either personality or
speech that are not hackneyed: prose consists less and
fraternity
less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and
Earay OKS psychology in Politics (New York).
more and more of phrases tacked together like the sec-
(4) All the "best people" from the gentlemen's cluba, and
tions of a prefabricated hen-house. I list below, with
all the frantic fanclet captains, united in common hatred of
notes and examples, various of the tricks by means of
Socialism and beating bottor of the rising dde of the ILLOTE
which the work of prose-coastruction is habitually
revolutionscy movement, have turned to nets of provocation,
dodged:
to food ducendiarians, ID and ingends of polaced wells,
DYING METAPHORE. A newly invented metaphor assists
to legalize their qualified destruction of prolotarian organiza-
thought by evoking a visual image, while on the other
the made TOTAL the agitated petty-bourgeciale to chaurvinistic
band all metapher which in technically "dead" (e.g. tran
for or 00 bebalf of the fight against the revolutionary way
resolution) has in effect reverted to being an ordinary
out of the crists.
word and can generally be uned without loss of vivid-
Communist pemplient.
ness. But in between these two classes there is a huge
(5) If M new spirit is to be Inford into this old country,
dump of worn-out metaphora which have lost all evoca-
there in 030 thorny such contentions reforms which must be
tive power and are merely used because they sare peo-
tackled, ned that to the humanization and gulvanization of
p&s the trouble of inventing phrases for themselves,
the B.D.C. Timiddity have will bespeak canker and atrophy of
Examples are: Ring the changes on, take up the cudgels
the mail. The heart of Brieles may be and and of strong
for, the the line, ride roughshod over, stand shoulder to
beat. for instance, but the Brith lion's TOGE at present la
shoulder with, play lato the hands of, no are to grind,
No that of Botton in Shakespeare's Midiummer Nights
grist to the stails, fishing in troubled waters, on the order
Dream-as geatle Mail any sucking dora A virite SHOW Britain
of the day, Achilles heel, STATE song, hotbed. Many of
common continuo indeflately & be the the engreen, or
these are used without knowledge of their meaning
rether of the world by the effete languora of Langham
(what in a "rift," for instance?), and incompatible meta-
FRI 20 SEP 91 13:51
Place, beauenly masquerading BS "standard English." When
phore are frequently mixed, AL sure sign that the writer is
the Voice of Britain in heard at mine o'clock, better far and
not interested in what be in saying. Some metaphors
infinitely less Indicrous to hear aftches honestly dropped
than the present prigglab. inflated, Inhibited, school-ma'amish
now current have been twisted out of their original
arch traying of blameless bushful mewing maidenal
meaning without those who UND them even being aware
Letter An Tribune
of the fact. For example, too the line is sometimes writ-
ten tow the line. Another example is the hammer and
Each of these passages has famile of its own, but,
the anvil, now always used with the implication that the
quite apart from avoidable ugliness, two qualities are
anvil gets the worst of it. In real life it in always the
common to all of them. The first is staleness of im-
anvil that breaks the hammer, never the other way
agery: the other is lack of precision. The writer either
about: a writer who stopped to think what be was say-
has a meaning and cannot express it, or be
ing would be aware of this, and would avoid perverting
PG.03
inadvertently says something clse, or he is almost indif-
the original phrase.
forent as to whether his words mean anything or not
Photocopy-Preservation
160
4 Collection of Essays
Politics and the English Language
161
OPERATORS or VERBAL FALSE LIMBS. These save the trou-
realm, throne, charlot, mailed fist, trident, sword, shield,
ble of picking out appropriate verbs and nouns, and at
buckler, banner, jackboot, clarion. Foreign words and
the same time pad each sentence with extra syllables
expressions such as end de sac, ancien régime, deus ex
which give it an appearance of symmetry. Characteria-
machina, mutatis mutandis, status quo, gleichschaltung,
tic phrases are render inoperative, militate against,
weltanschaung, are used to give an air of culture and
make contact with, be subjected to, give rise to, give
elegance. Except for the useful abbreviations i.e., e.g.,
grounds for, have the effect of, play a leading part
and etc., there is 00 real need for any of the hundreds
(role) in, make itself fell, take effect, exhibit 4 tendency
of foreign phrases now current in English. Bad writers,
to, serve the purpose of, etc., etc. The keynote is the
and especially scientific, political and sociological wri-
elimination of simple verbs. Instead of being a single
ters, are nearly always haunted by the notion that Latin
word, such as break, stop, spoil, mend, HILL, a verb be-
or Greek words are grander than Sexon ones, and un-
cornes a phrase, made up of a noun or adjective tacked
necessary words Like expedite, ameliorate, predict, ex-
on to some general-purposes verb such as prove, serve,
trancous, deracinated, clandestine, subaqueous and hun-
form, play, render. In addition, the passive voice 1a
dreds of others constantly gain ground from their
wherever possible used in preference to the active, and
Angle-Saxon opposite numbers.1 The jargon peculiar to
nom constructions are used instead of gerunds (by ex-
Marxist writing (hyena, hangman, cannibal, petty bour-
andmation of instead of by examining). The range of
geois, these gentry. lacquey, flunkey, mad dog, White
Terhs in further cut down by means of the to and de
Guard, etc.) consists Inrgely of words and phrases trans-
formation, and the banal statements are given an ap-
lated from Russian, German or French; but the normal
performed of profundity by means of the mod are-
way of coining a new word is to use a Latin or Greek
formation. Simple conjunctions and prepositions are re-
root with the appropriate affix and, where necessary,
placed by such phrases m with respect to, having regard
the -Ize formation. It in often easier to make up words
to, the fact by dint of, in view of, in the interests
of this kind (deregionalize, Impermissible, extramarital,
of, OF the hypothesis that; and the ende of sentences are
non-fragmentary and 00 forth) than to think up the
English words that will cover one's meaning. The result,
saved from anticlimax by such resounding common-
la general, is an increase in slovenliness and vagueners.
places the greatly to be desired, cannot be left out of ac-
MEANINGLESS WORDS. In certain kinds of writing, partic-
El development to be expected In the near future,
ularly in art criticism and literary criticism, it is normal
deserving of serious consideration, brought to a antisfac-
to come across long passages which are almost com-
tory conclusion, and 10 on and $0 forth.
pletely lacking in meaning.³ Words like romantic, plan-
PRETENTIOUS DICTION. Words like phenomenon, els-
ment, Individual (no noun), abjective, categorical, effec-
1. An Interesting Illustration of this is the way in which the
the, wirenal, busic. promote, constitute, are
English flower names which were in use till very recently
AND, exploit, utilize, eliminate, liquidate are used to
are being ounted by Greek onea, snapdragon becoming antir-
rhinum, forget-me-not becoming myosofis, etc. It is hard to
dream up sinaple statement and give air of scientific
*** any practical season for this change of fashion: it is
impartiality to blased judgements. Adjectives like epoch-
probably due to an instinctive turning-away from the more
making, epic. historic, unforgettable, triumphant,
homely word and 101 vague fealing that the Greek word is
age-old, Inveltable, inexorable, veritable, are used to
scientific.
dignify the mordid processes of international politics,
"Example: "Comfort's catholicity of perception and image,
while writing that aims at glorifying war usually takes
strangely Whitmanesque in range, almost the exact opposite
on an archaic color, its characteristic words being:
Photocopy-Preservation
162
A Collection of Essays
Politics and the English Language
163
tic, values, human, dead, sentimental, natural, vitality,
Now that I have made this catalogue of swindles and
as used in art criticism, are strictly meaningless, in the
perversions, let me give another example of the kind of
sense that they not only do not point to any discovera-
writing that they lead to. This time it must of its nature
ble object, but are hardly ever expected to do so by the
be an imaginary one. I am going to translate a passage
reader. When one critic writes, "The outstanding fea-
of good English into modern English of the worst sert,
ture of Mr. X's work is its living quality," while another
Here is a well-known verse from Ecclesiastes:
writes, "The immediately striking thing about Mr. X's
I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to
work is its peculiar deadness," the reader accepts this as
a simple difference of opinion. If words like black and
the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to
the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding. nor yet
white were involved, instead of the jargon words dead
favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to
and living, he would see at once that language was
them all.
being used in an improper way. Many political words
are similarly abused. The word Fascism has now no
Here it is in modern English:
meaning except in so far as it signifies "something not
Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena com-
desirable." The words democracy, socialism, freedom,
pels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive
patriotic, realistic, justice, have each of them several
activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with in-
different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one
nate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpre-
another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only
dicable must invariably be taken into account.
is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make
one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt
This is a parody, but not a very gross one. Exhibit
that when we call a country democratic we are praising
(3), above, for instance, contains several patches of the
it: consequently the defenders of every kind of régime
same kind of English. It will be seen that I have not
claim that il is a democracy, and fear that they might
made a full translation. The beginning and ending of
have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any
the sentence follow the original meaning fairly closely,
one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a
but in the middle the concrete illustrations-race, bat-
consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses
the, bread-dissolve into the vague phrase "success or
them has his own private definition, but allows his
failure in competitive activities." This had to be so, be-
hearer to think be means something quite different.
cause no modern writer of the kind I am discussing-no
Statements like Marshal Pétain was G true patriot, The
one capable of using phrases like "objective considera-
tion of contemporary phenomena"-would ever tabu-
Soviet Press LT the freest in the world, The Catholic
Church is opposed to persecution, are almost always
late his thoughts in that precise and detailed way. The
made with intent to deceive. Other words used in varia-
whole tendency of modern prose is away from con-
creteness. Now analyse these two sentences a little more
ble meanings. in most cases more or less dishonestly,
closely. The first contains forty-nine words but only
are: class, totalitarian, science, progressive, reactionary,
sixty syllables, and all its words are those of everyday
bourgeois, equality.
life. The second contains thirty-eight words of ninety
in aesthetic compulsion, continues to evoke that trembling
syllables: eighteen of its words are from Latin roots,
atmospheric accumulative hinting at a cruel, an inexorably
and one from Greck. The first sentence contains six
serene timelessness.
Wrey Gardiner scores by aiming
vivid images, and only one phrase ("time and chance")
at simple bull's-eyes with precision. Only they are not so
that could be called vague. The second contains not a
simple, and through this contented sadness runs more than
single fresh, arresting plarase, and in spite of its ninety
the surface bitter-sweet of resignation." (Poetry Quarterly.)
Photocopy-Preservation
164
A Collection of Essays
Politics and the English Language
165
syllables it gives only a shortened version of the mean-
thinking. Look again at the examples I gave at the be-
ing contained in the first, Yet without a doubt it is the
ginning of this essay. Professor Laski (1) uses five
second kind of sentence that is gaining ground in mod-
negatives in fifty-three words. One of these is super-
ern English. I do not want to exaggerate. This kind of
fluous, making nonsense of the whole passage, and in ad-
writing is not yet universal, and outerops of simplicity
dition there is the slip allen for akin, making further
will occur here and there in the worst-written page-
nonsense, and several avoidable pieces of clumsiness
Still, if you or 1 were told to write a few lines on the
which increase the general vagueness. Professor Hogben
uncertainty of human fortunes, we should probably
(2) plays ducks and drakes with a battery which is able
come much nearer to my imaginary sentence than to
to write prescriptions, and, while disapproving of the
the one from Ecclesiastes.
everyday phrase put up with. is unwilling to look egre-
As I have tried to show, modern writing at its worst
glous up in the dictionary and see what it means; (3), if
does not consist in picking out words for the sake of
one takes an uncharitable attitude towards it, is simply
their meaning and inventing images in order to make
meaningless: probably one could work out its intended
the meaning clearer. It consists in gumming together
meaning by reading the whole of the article in which it
long strips of words which have already been set in
occurs. In (4), the writer knows more or less what he
order by someone else, and making the results presenta-
wants to say, but an accumulation of stale phrases
ble by sheer humbug. The attraction of this way of
chokes him like tea leaves blocking a sink. In (5), words
writing is that it is easy. It is easier-even quicker, once
and meaning have almost parted company. People who
you have the habit-to say In my opinion it is not an
write in this manner usually have a general emotional
unjustifiable assumption that than to say I think. If you
meaning-they dislike one thing and want to express
use readymade phrases, you not only don't have to hunt
solidarity with another-but they are not interested in
about for words; you also don't have to bother with the
the detail of what they are saying. A scrupulous writer,
rhythms of your sentences, since these phrases are gen-
in every sentence that he writes, will ask himself at least
erally so arranged as to be more or less euphonious.
four questions, thus: What am 1 trying to say? What
When you are composing in a hurry-when you are
words will express it? What image or idiom will make it
dictating to a stenographer, for instance, or making a
clearer? Is this image fresh enough to have an effect?
public speech-it is natural to fall into a pretentious,
And he will probably ask himself two more: Could 1 put
Latinized style. Tags like a consideration which we
it more shortly? Have I said anything that is avoidably
should do well to bear in mind or a conclusion to which
ugly? But you are not obliged to go to all this trouble.
all of us would readily assent will save many a sentence
You can shirk it by simply throwing your mind open
from coming down with a bump. By using stale meta-
and letting the ready-made phrases come crowding in.
phors, similes and Idioms, you save much mental effort,
They will construct your sentences for you-even think
at the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for
your thoughts for you, to a certain extent-and at need
your reader but for yourself. This is the significance of
they will perform the important service of partially con-
mixed metaphors. The sole aim of a metaphor is to call
cealing your meaning even from yourself. It is at this
up a visual image. When these images clash-as in The
point that the special connection between politics and
Fascist octupus has sung is swan song, the jackboot is
the debasement of language becomes clear.
thrown into the melting pot-it can be taken as certain
In our time it is broadly true that political writing is
that the writer is not seeing a mental image of the
bad writing. Where it is not true, it will generally be
objects he is naming; in other words he is not really
found that the writer is some kind of rebel, expressing
Photocopy-Preservation
166
A Collection of Essays
Politics and the English Language
167
his private opinions and not a "party line." Orthodoxy,
are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the
of whatever color, seems to demand a lifeless, imitative
roads with no more than they can carry: this is called
style. The political dialects to be found in pamphlets,
transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. Peo-
ple are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the
WHITE HOUSE COMMCEN
leading articles, manifestos, White Papers and the
speeches of under-secretaries do. of course, vary from
back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lum-
party to party, but they are all alike in that one almost
ber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable ele-
never finds in them a fresh, vivid, home-made turn of
ments. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name
speech. When one watches some tired back on the plat-
things without calling up mental pictures of them. Con-
form mechanically repeating the familiar phrases--bes-
sider for instance some comfortable English professor
tial atrocities, fron heel, bloodstained tyranny, free
defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say out-
peoples of the world, stand shoulder to shoulder-one
right, "I believe in killing off your opponents when you
often has 4 curious feeling that one is not watching a
can get good results by doing so." Probably, therefore,
live human being but some kind of dummy: a feeling
he will say something like this:
which suddenly becomes stronger at moments when the
While freely conceding that the Soviet régime exhibits
light catches the speaker's spectacles and turns them
certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to
into blank discs which seem to have no eyes behind
deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment
them. And this is not altogether fanciful. A speaker
of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable con-
who uses that kind of phraseology has gone some dis-
comitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which
tance towards turning himself into a machine. The ap-
the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have
been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement.
propriate noises are coming out of his larynx, but his
brain is not involved as it would be if he were choosing
The inflated style is itself a kind of euphemism. A
bis words for himself. If the speech he is making is one
mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow,
that he is accustomed to make over and over again, he
blurring the outlines and covering up all the details. The
may be almost unconscious of what he is saying, as one
great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there
is when one utters the responses in church. And this ro-
is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one
duced state of consciousness, if not indispensable, is at
turns as it were instinctively to long words and ex-
any rate favorable to political conformity.
bausted idioms, like a cuttlefish squirting out ink. In our
FRI 20 SEP 91 14:06
In our time, political speech and writing are largely
age there is no such thing as "keeping out of politics."
All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass
the defence of the indefensible. Things like the contin-
nance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and
of lies, evasions, folly. batred and schizophrenia. When
the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I
deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on
should expect to find-this is a guess which I have not
Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments
sufficient knowledge to verify-that the German, Rus-
which are too brutal for most people to face, and which
sian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the
do not square with the professed aims of political par-
last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship.
ties. Thus political language has to consist largely of etr-
But if thought corrupts language, language can also
phemism, question-beggiog and sheer cloudy vagueness.
corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition
Defenecless villages are bombarded from the air, the in-
and imitation, even among people. who should and do
PG.03
habitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle
know better. The debased language that 1 have been
machine-guoned, the buts set on fire with incendiary
discussing is in some ways very convenient. Phrases like
bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants
Photocopy-Preservation
168
A Collection of Essays
a not unjustifiable assumption, leaves much D be de-
Politics and the English Language
169
stred, would serve no good purpose, a consderation
ble to laugh the not un- formation out of existence, to
which we should do well so hear in mind, are acontinu-
reduce the amount of Latin and Greek in the average
ous temptation, a packet of aspirios always at one's
sentence, to drive out foreign phrases and strayed scien-
elbow. Look back through this essay, and fo certain
tific words, and, in general, to make pretentiousness un-
you will find that I have again and again comnitted the
fashionable. But all these are minor points. The defence
very faults 1 am protesting against. By this norning's
of the English language implies more than this, and per-
post I have received a pamphlet dealing with conditions
haps it is best to start by saying what it does not imply.
in Germany. The author tells me that he "felt mpelled"
To begin with it has nothing to do with archaism,
to write it. III open it at random, and here is amost the
with the salvaging of obsolete words and turns of
first sentence that I see: "[The Allies] have anopportu-
speech, or with the setting up of a "standard English"
nity not only of achieving a radical transformation of
which must never be departed from. On the contrary, it
Germany's social and political structure in such a way
is especially concerned with the scrapping of every
as to avoid a nationalistic reaction in Germany itself,
word or idiom which has outworn its usefulness. It has
but at the same time of laying the foundation: of a co-
nothing to do with correct grammar and syntax, which
operative and unified Europe." You sec, le "feels
are of no importance so long as one makes one's mean-
impelled" to write-feels, presumably, that he has
ing clear, or with the avoidance of Americanisms, or
something new to say-and yet his words, like cavalry
with having what is called a "good prose style." On the
horses answering the bugle, group themselves automati-
other hand it is not concerned with fake simplicity and
cally into-the familiar dreary pattern. This invasion of
the attempt to make written English colloquial. Nor
one's mind by ready-made phrases (lay the foundations,
does it even imply in every case preferring the Saxon
achieve a radical transformation) can only be prevented
word to the Latin one, though it does imply using the
if one is constantly on guard against them, and every
fewest and shortest words that will cover one's mean-
such phrase anaesthetizes a portion of one's bnio.
ing. What is above all needed is to let the meaning
I said earlier that the decadence of our language is
choose the word, and not the other way about. In prose,
probably curable. Those who deny this wouk argue, if
the worst thing one can do with words is to surrender to
they produced an argument at all, that language merely
them. When you think of a concrete object, you think
reflects existing social conditions, and that we cannot in-
wordlessly, and then, if you want to describe the thing
fluence its development by any direct tinkering with
you have been visualizing you probably hunt about till
words and constructions. So far as the generd tone or
you find the exact words that seem to fit it. When you
spirit of a language goes, this may be true, but it is not
think of something abstract you are more inclined to
true in detail. Silly words and expressions Eave often
use words from the start, and unless you make a con-
disappeared, not through any evolutionary process but
scious effort to prevent it, the existing dialect will come
owing to the conscious action of a minority. Two recent
rushing in and do the job for you, at the expense of
examples were explore every avenue and leave no stone
blurring or even changing your meaning. Probably it is
unturned, which were killed by the jeers of afew jour-
better to put off using words as long as possible and get
nalists. There is a long list of flyblown metaplors which
one's meaning as clear as one can through pictures or
could similarly be got rid of if enough peoplewould in-
'One can cure oneself of the not un- formation by memo-
terest themselves in the job: and it should also be possi-
tizing this sentence: A not unblack dog THE chasing a not
unsmall rabbit across a not angreen field.
Photocopy-Preservation
Reflections on Gandhi
171
170
A Collection of Essays
follies of orthodoxy. You cannot speak any of the nec-
sensations. Afterwards one can choose-not simply ac-
essary dialects, and when you make a stupid remark its
cept-the phrases that will best cover the meaning, and
stupidity will be obvious, even to yourself. Politica. lan-
then switch round and decide what impression one's
guage-and with variations this is true of all political
words are likely to make on another person. This last
effort of the mind cuts out all state or mixed images, all
parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists-is designed
to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable and
prefabricated phrases, needless repetitions, and humbug
to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind. One can-
and vagueness generally. But one can often be in doubt
not change this all in a moment, but one can at least
about the effect of a word or a phrase, and one needs
change one's own habits, and from time to time one- can
rules that one can rely on when instinct fails. 1 think the
even, if one jeers loudly enough, send some worm-out
following rules will cover most cases:
and useless phrase-some jackboot, Achilles' heel, hot-
(i) Never use R metaphor, simile or other figure of
bed, melting por, acid test, veritable inferno or other
speech which you are used to seeing in print.
lump of verbal refuse-into the dustbin where it belongs.
(ii) Never use a long word where a short one will do.
[t946]
(iii) If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out,
(iv) Never use the passive where you can use the active.
(v) Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word or a
jargon word if you can think of an everyday Eng-
Reflections on Gandhi
lish equivalent.
(vi) Break any of these rules sooner than say anything
outright barbarous.
SAINTS should always be judged guilty until they are
These rules sound elementary, and so they are, but they
proved innocent, but the tests that have to be applied to
demand a deep change in attitude in anyone who has
them are not, of course, the same in all cases. In Gan-
grown used to writing in the style now fashionable. One
dhi's case the questions one feels inclined to ask are: to
could keep all of them and still write bad English, but
what extent was Gandhi moved by vanity-by the c-on-
one could not write the kind of stuff that I quoted in
sciousness of himself as a humble, naked old man, sit-
those five specimens at the beginning of this article.
ting on a praying mat and shaking empires by steer
I have not here been considering the literary use of
spiritual power-and to what extent did he compromise
Janguage, but merely language as an instrument for ex-
his own principles by entering politics, which of their
pressing and not for concealing or preventing thought.
nature are inseparable from coercion and fraud? To
Stuart Chase and others have come near to claiming
give a definite answer one would have to study Gandhi's
that all abstract words are meaningless, and have used
acts and writings in immense detail, for his whole life
this as a pretext for advocating a kind of political quiet-
was a sort of pilgrimage in which every act was sigr_ifi-
ism. Since you don't know what Fascism is, how can
cant. But this partial autobiography,1 which ends in the
you struggle against Fascism? One need not swallow
ninetcen-twenties, is strong evidence in his favor, all the
such absurdities as this, but one ought to recognize that
more because it covers what he would have called the
the present political chaos is connected with the decay
unregenerate part of his life and reminds one that inside
of language, and that one can probably bring about
The Story of My Experiments with Truth. By M. K. Gandhi.
some improvement by starting at the verbal end. If you
Translated from the Gujarati by Mahadev Desai. Public
Affairs Press.
simplify your English, you are freed from the worst
Photocopy-Preservation
Snow, McGroarty, Duggan
Grossman, Simon, Bunton
UN.TS
September 20, 1991
Draft One
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY HALL
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1991
11 A.M.
[Introductory acknowledgments: incoming president: Mr.
Shihabi; outgoing president, Mr. de Marco; Secretary General
Perez de Cuellar. PERSONAL REMINISCENCES]
Today I plan to deliver a different kind of address than you
have heard from a President of the United States. I do not plan
to dwell on a superpower rivalry that defined international
politics for a half century, although I will discuss it for a
moment, because it provides a foundation for my main topic: The
new world that faces us all.
For nearly 50 years, world affairs revolved around a
conflict between the free world -- the United States and other
democracies -- and the communist world -- principally, the Soviet
Union. Many wars, many debates, many events reflected the
competition between two ideologies: communism, which asserted the
primacy of governments over individuals; and democratic
capitalism, which declared that governments derive their just
rights from the people they serve.
At its core, the competition between ideologies hinged upon
one crucial question: Do people have inalienable rights? Can
higher principles establish limits upon state power?
2
Well, I look around this room and I see the answers. Today,
a single delegation represents the people of Germany; two
delegations represent Korea; the republics of Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania all send their own delegations. Just one week ago, 159
nations enjoyed membership in the U.N. Today, the number stands
at 166. Seven nations in one week -- in fact, all joined in one
day: That's extraordinary. This burst in membership illustrates
the determination of people around the world to enjoy the rights
due them simply because they are human beings.
We have entered a new era of individual rights. The changes
around the world hail a new age of liberty.
I look back upon the past year, and I also see the makings
of a new era of peace. Less than a year ago, the Soviet Union
joined the United States and a host of other nations in defending
a tiny country against aggression -- and opposing Saddam Hussein.
For the very first time, superpower competition took a back seat
to international cooperation.
At that moment, the Cold War truly drew to an end. The
United Nations, in one of its finest moments, constructed a
measured, principled, deliberate and courageous response to
Saddam Hussein. This body stood up to an outlaw who threatened
not just Kuwait, but many states within the region. In so doing,
the United Nations itself may have thrown off the shackles of the
Cold War.
Now, for the very first time, a world of promise has begun
to take shape -- like mountains emerging at dawn's first light.
3
In this world, nations take seriously the United Nations Charter
and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These documents,
signed in moments of high hope, once again can united and inspire
people of all nations, faiths and creeds.
Think about it: In the long history of the United Nations,
superpower competition rendered hopeless the charter's
determination "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of
war
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the
dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men
and women and nations large and small
to promote social
progress and better standards of life in larger freedom."
For many in this room, and for many of the nations that
belong to this body, "larger freedom" did not exist during the
Cold War. Totalitarian regimes cared less about observing
individual rights than about forcing the masses to conform to a
planner's vision of a perfect society. The totalitarian state
tossed individuals about, murdered and tortured doubters, hurled
troublemakers into labor camps or sent them away to distant
settlements -- all to silence men and women who tried to point
out that the theory of communism made no sense. It enforced
ignorance and want upon people. It smothered their talents and
virtues. It imprisoned whole nations.
It survived as long as it did because it promised the
impossible. As Jeane Kirkpatrick, a former ambassador to the
United Nations, notes: Communism offered up a world view that was
4
universal, teleological, final, comprehensive, moral -- and
unifying: It promised an end to alienation.
It promised everything, and for years people reached out in
the vain hope that it could deliver everything for everyone.
The communist ideal fell when people saw that freedom --
true freedom; an uncertain, risky, responsibility fraught freedom
-- works. When they no longer could ignore the failures of their
governments and their economies, they rose up and shouted
defiantly: We are people! Treat us with dignity! Understand
that your power flows from us! In one of history's rich ironies,
so-called Peoples' republics fell victim to the people.
Many of us watched in amazement as the Berlin Wall came
tumbling down; as the old Warsaw Pact nations emerged from their
long dark confinement into the bright light and bracing air of
freedom. Some of us also wept with joy as kinsmen threw off
their chains, unfurled their flags, celebrated the cultures that
they had struggled so long -- and at such great personal peril -
- to keep alive, and preserved the common bonds that gave them
strength, courage, and hope that the forces of freedom eventually
would prevail over the minions of tyranny. The whole world
celebrated as the sudden release of nations that for so many
years had been held captive.
But communism also made a captive of history. It suspended
ancient disputes; it subordinated ethnic rivalries and
nationalist aspirations.
5
As totalitarian masters relaxed their grip on their victims,
and as individuals began again to taste their rightful freedom,
old animosities raced to the surface; old hatreds reasserted
themselves; and in the tumultuous aftermath of communism's
collapse, people who for years had been denied their past and
future began searching for their own identities.
That struggle has unleashed warfare between Croatians and
Serbians; Armenians and Azerbaijanis; Kurds and Iraqis -- each
battle merely picking up hatreds that have festered for
generations.
You see signs of this tumult everywhere, including here.
The United Nations has organized but four peacekeeping missions
during its first 43 years; it has mounted nine missions in the
past 36 months. Although we now seem mercifully liberated from
the fear of nuclear holocaust, we face new threats in the form of
smaller, but nonetheless virulent conflicts.
Communism also shattered fundamental social institutions:
the family, the community; the place of worship. We must restore
these institutions in our own quest for a New World Order -- and
order characterized by the rule of law, rather than the resort to
force; the cooperative settlement of disputes, rather than the
anarchic warfare.
We must face this challenge squarely: First, by suing for
the peaceful resolutions of disputes now in progress; second, and
more importantly, by trying to prevent others from erupting.
6
No one here can promise that today's borders will remain
fixed for all time: They won't. We must strive instead to ensure
that people resolve border disputes peacefully, and that any new
nations that might join our community will arrive peacefully, and
not after years of bloody savagery.
We can start preventing new hostilities by defending the
inalienable rights outlined in the UN's founding documents:
individual liberties, rights to property, and the protection of
minority rights. If people cannot speak their minds; if they
cannot form political parties freely and elect governments
without coercion; if they cannot practice their religion freely;
if they cannot raise their families in peace; if they cannot
enjoy a just return from their labor; if they cannot live
fruitful lives and, at the end of their days, look upon their
achievements and their society's progress with pride -- if these
simple conditions for the good life do not exist, tempers will
flare and bullets will fly. Governments that fail to carry out
their primary responsibility -- protecting the freedoms that
enable people to live good lives -- will fall in favor of systems
that do.
In the years to come, we will face the challenge of
reconciling people's yearnings for freedom and identity with the
need to live in a peaceful world. We must nurture feelings
people's sense of identity without shredding the fabric of
international society and without inciting the kind of bloody
7
factionalism that led to our first world war -- and ultimately,
perhaps, to the Cold War.
For the people in this room, the challenge is simple: Honor
the commitments we have made by signing the United Nations
Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
[[This chamber in past years has made a mockery of its
founding document by distorting the meaning of such simple terms
as "liberty" and "democracy."
The New World Information and Communications Order and the
New World Economic Order enjoyed great currency here not too many
years ago. Both crusades mocked the principles upon which this
organization was founded. They promoted equality, by which they
meant an especially virulent form of envy. They ignored the
human striving to create lasting things; the human thirst for
sensible risk. It sought, under cover of lofty rhetoric, to
replace the natural human impulse for production and self-
expression with the corrosive striving to seize wealth from one
party and give it to another.
George Orwell once derided this dishonest rhetoric by
noting, "The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic,
realistic, justice have each of them several different meanings
which cannot be reconciled with one another
Words of this kind
are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the
person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows
his hearer to think he means something quite different. "
8
David Hare, talking about the United Nations during the days
of hypocritical rhetoric, put the matter more bluntly. "When
they speak," he said of some representatives, "dead frogs fall
from their mouths. "
If we hope to build confidence in our abilities to promte
prosperity and peace, we must reject the Newspeak of the old era
and speak clearly and honestly. ]]
Let us begin with the charter's pledge "to practice
tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good
neighbors."
This pledge renounces bigotry and dishonesty, and commits
this body to tolerance and concord. In that spirit, I call upon
you today to repeal UNGA resolution 3379, the so-called "Zionism
is racism" resolution -- and to do so this year. Resolution 3379
invites the world to embrace religious bigotry and take sides on
a dispute that has defied the best efforts of statesmen for
decades.
In repealing this resolution no one agrees to submit
unequivocally to every decision made by the government of Israel.
Many of us will disagree with particular stands taken by Israel,
just as we do with any member state.
But understand: Zionism is not a policy; it is the idea that
led to the creation of a home for the Jewish people, to the state
of Israel. To equate Zionism with the intolerable sin of racism
is to twist history, since the Jewish people died by the millions
during World War II precisely because of their race. To equate
9
Zionism with racism is to reject Israel -- something this body
cannot and should not do.
We stand on the verge of convening an historic peace
conference between Israel and its Arab neighbors. The United
Nations can support this process by repealing unconditionally
Resolution 3379, and conceding that each nation in this
conference deserves a seat at the table.
The United Nations played a major role in ringing up the
final curtain on communism. It now has a chance to support a
Middle East peace. Repeal Resolution 3379. Give peace a chance.
The U.N. Charter also pledges to "employ international
machinery for the promotion of the economic and social
advancement of all peoples." I can think of no better way to
encourage this new era than by promoting the free flow of goods
and ideas.
In truth, ideas and goods will travel around the globe with
or without our help. The information revolution has destroyed
the weapons of enforced isolation and ignorance. It has made
geography obsolete. Ideas zip around the globe at the speed of
light. Devices of mass communication can send news over high
walls and through the thickest stone cells. In our lifetime,
technology has overwhelmed tyranny, proving that the age of
information also can become the age of liberation -- if we limit
state power wisely and let our cultures make the best use of new
ideas, new products, new insights.
10
By the same token, the world has learned that capitalism --
free markets -- provide levels of prosperity, growth and
happiness that centrally planned economies could never dream of.
Even the most charitable reckoning of economic growth over the
past decade indicates that the economies of the free world have
grown at twice the rate of the former communist world. But long
lines throughout the former communist world indicate that the
growth rates may have differed even more dramatically.
The path to peace requires economic growth. When economies
grow, they serve people, they fulfill needs, and they create
opportunities. Growth drives out the rationale for envy; it
permits every person to gain -- not at the expense of others, but
to the benefit of others.
This applies to international relations as well. We can
minimize the possibility of war -- and especially of global
conflict -- if we protect free trade and free information.
Many nations represented here have joined the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The Uruguay Round unfortunately
has stalled, as nations struggle to retain comparative advantage
in various areas. This striving is natural, but it also has
prevented negotiators from settling the greatest free-trade
agreement ever.
I cannot emphasize too strongly the importance of completing
a new GATT treaty. Protectionism set off the Great Depression,
and a new wave of protectionism could unleash furies the likes of
which we have never seen.
11
I call upon all members of GATT to redouble their efforts to
reach a successful conclusion for the Uruguay Round -- and then
to begin yet another round of freer and fairer trade.
You see, economic progress promises more than full shop
shelves. It provides the soil in which democracy can flourish.
So the future beckons, full of hope. Yet as we venture to
create new ties, to forge a New World Order, we must avoid
embracing unrealistic hopes.
We have been liberated from the fear of nuclear
conflagration -- our nation's atomic scientists turned their
doomsday clock back to ten minutes before midnight last year;
this year, they may turn it back to noon. But the end of the
Cold War issued in an entirely new set of uncertainties.
We must do our best to control nuclear proliferation, and
prevent the spread of the poor man's atom bombs: chemical and
biological weapons. We must remember that self-interest will
continue tugging nations in different directions, and these
struggles occasionally will flare into violence.
We know that demagogues will try to peddle false dreams to
people whose hunger for hope overwhelms their common sense. We
can never say with confidence where the next conflict may arise,
which nation will spawn the next dangerous aggressor. Terrorists
still use our citizens as pawns; and we must band together to
overwhelm this affront to basic human dignity.
12
In a world defined by change, we must be as firm in
principle as we are flexible in our response to changing
international affairs.
I learned years ago that the United Nations has few
resources for resolving large-scale conflicts. But I also came
to love the special spirit of this place.
The strength of the United Nations lies in its economic and
social missions, in encouraging economic development -- and
deploying economic punishments, where necessary; in serving as a
vehicle through which willing parties can settle old disputes.
In the months to come, I look forward to working with Secretary
General Perez de Cuellar as we pursue peace in Cyprus, protect
democracy throughout Central America, work toward resolving
tensions in Cambodia, and try to establish a lasting peace the
Western Sahara and Angola.
Finally, many of you may wonder about America's role in the
new world I have described. Let me assure you, The United States
has no intention of encouraging or building a Pax Americana. We
encourage a Pax Terra constructed upon shared responsibilities
and aspirations.
My nation cannot lead this world to a promising future of
wealth and well-being and it will not try. Nor will we surrender
our sovereignty to any international institution. No nation
should do that.
Each of us has an obligation to follow where our national
interests lead. Yet together, we have a responsibility for
13
building a common interest around shared principles. I have
talked today about the core values for our future: individual and
minority liberties, democracy, free markets, and a collective
determination to advance these goals wherever we can.
We have an opportunity to spare our sons and daughters the
sins and foibles of the past; we can build a future more
satisfying than any our world has ever known.
None of us can hide from this responsibility. The
communications revolution and the evolution of weapons of mass
destruction have made it impossible for nations to isolate
themselves. As we become increasingly linked by ties of security
and trade, it will become impossible to distinguish domestic
policy from foreign policy. Increasingly, we all depend upon one
another for our peace and our prosperity.
The only historical force we must confront is the march
toward liberty. The future lies undefined before us, full of
promise; littered with peril. In our activities as citizens and
statesmen, we will define just what kind of future we shall
enjoy: a future made peaceful by reflection and choice, or one
blistered by fires of war and subjected to the ugly whims of
coercion and chance.
We can make history here. We can build a decent future
here. We can inaugurate an era of peace and understanding here.
Here, we can help define and shape a New World Order.
Take this challenge seriously. Inspire future generations
to praise and venerate you.
14
Good luck, and may God bless the United Nations, and the
principles upon which it stands.
Questions:
Do we wish to talk about SDI?
IDEAS FOR A NEW WORLD ORDER SPEECH
1. A New Vision
-- Last year at UN sketched out a vision of a new
partnership of nations -- spoke in visionary terms about
a new world order.
-- Developments since then make this vision even more
attractive and potentially realizable. A world
coalition of countries came together to defeat Iraqi
aggression, collapse of communism in the Soviet Union,
major movement toward democracy throughout the world.
-- Now at a stage of uncertainty and opportunity -- many
old forms are in ruins and new ones not yet developed --
necessary to move quickly to give shape to new
structures -- not have a chance to do so again within
our lifetimes -- we are at a turning point in history.
2. A New World Architecture
-- Some have spoken critically of the NWO as an era of U.S.
hegemony -- we do not seek such a role, nor do we intend
to play the role of world hegemon -- will use influence
- 2 -
in a constructive way, but it must be a common world
effort -- do not want a world where order is dependent
on the threat of force.
-- See the outline of a new world architecture -- old forms
are shattered -- distortions of the Cold War are over.
-- New architecture must be present in all areas of
international endeavor.
O Political -- we are moving toward a world of
pluralist democracies -- end of dictatorship,
totalitarian and personal -- emphasis on human rights
and rule of law -- we are seeing cooperation among
states to further democracy. Democratic nations
stand ready to assist those seeking a free and open
society -- an increasingly free flow of information
has helped peoples to protect and defend newly won
freedom.
O
Security -- world of blocs is over -- a system of
collective security must be realized -- recent
history has proven that collective action in defense
against aggression works -- prospects for greater
possibility of negotiated settlements of disputes are
- 3 -
bright -- critical importance of nonproliferation --
notion of security must be extended beyond tradtional
concepts of defense against aggression to inlclude
transnational threats such as narcotics, terrorism,
and the environment.
o Economic -- world of open borders for goods and
people -- equal opportunity for individuals and
nations -- building an open world trading system --
U.S. and a growing number of nations believe that
free market economies and private enterprise are the
best assurances of accomplishing this.
3. Role of the United Nations
-- Role of UN and other transnational bodies'is critical to
the New World Order.
-- UN already provides a workable framework for a New World
Order -- transformation of the CSCE process in Europe
provides one example for the UN of how a body can be
infused with new powers and effectiveness.
-- Must be structural and process changes
- 4 -
o
Practices developed in the Cold War era of opposing
blocs (East-West, North-South) must be changed.
O
Attitudes reflecting these practices must be changed
to reflect new realities and hopes.
o
General Assembly must be transformed into a genuine
legislative body where serious debate and work takes
place.
o
Specialized bodies must be given more powers, but at
same time must be subject to greater controls by the
General Assembly and the Secretary General.
O
Need to focus UN energy on fostering democracy and
rule of law.
O
Need to invigorate existing bodies, such as the UN
Human Rights Commission, to take on problems of
discrimination as well as violations of commonly
accepted human rights -- UNHRC must be concerned not
only with uncovering violations of rights but of
developing action programs to deal with them.
The American vision for the NWO would encourage "our allegiance
to an idea that all people everywhere must be free."
Snow, McGroarty, Duggan
Grossman, Simon, Bunton
UN
September 22, 1991
Draft Four
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS: THE UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY HALL
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1991
12:45 P.M.
Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. Secretary General,
distinguished delegates of the United Nations, I am honored to
speak with you as you open the 46th Session of the General
Assembly.
I would like to congratulate outgoing President Guido de
Marco of Malta, and incoming President Samir Shihabi of Saudi
Arabia. I also want to salute Secretary General Javier Perez de
Cuellar, who will step down in just over three months. Secretary
General Perez de Cuellar has served during a period of
unprecedented change and turmoil. For nine years we have enjoyed
the leadership of this man of peace; a man I feel proud to call
my friend. 11 Today, let us congratulate our friend, and praise
his spectacular service to the United Nations -- and the people
of the world. 11
Let me also welcome new members to this chamber: the unified
German delegation; two delegations representing Korea; the
republics of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania; and new missions from
the Marshall Islands and Micronesia. Just one week ago, 159
nations enjoyed membership in the U.N. Today, the number stands
at 166. The presence of these new members alone provides reason
for us to celebrate. 11
2
My address will not sound like any you have heard from a
President of the United States. I will not dwell on the
superpower competition that defined international politics for a
half century. Instead, I will discuss the challenges of building
peace and prosperity in a world leavened by the Cold War's end
and the resumption of history.
Communism held history captive for years. It suspended
ancient disputes; it suppressed ethnic rivalries, nationalist
aspirations, and old prejudices. As it has dissolved, suspended
hatreds have sprung to life. People who for years have been
denied their pasts have begun searching for their own identities
-- often through peaceful and constructive means, occasionally
through factionalism and bloodshed.
This revival of history ushers in a new era, teeming with
opportunities and obstacles. Let's begin by discussing the
opportunities.
First, history's renewal enables people to pursue their
natural instincts for enterprise. As this Century dawned,
nations suffocated by feudalism or restrained by all-powerful
states began feeling the promise and power of free enterprise.
Communism froze that progress -- until its failures became
too much for even its defenders to bear. Now, citizens
throughout the world have chosen enterprise over envy; personal
responsibility over the enticements of the state; prosperity over
the poverty of central planning.
3
The U.N. Charter encourages this adventure by pledging "to
employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic
and social advancement of all peoples." I can think of no better
way to fulfill this mission than to promote the free flow of
goods and ideas.
Frankly, ideas and goods will travel around the globe with
or without our help. The information revolution has destroyed
the weapons of enforced isolation and ignorance.
In many parts of the world technology has overwhelmed
tyranny, proving that the age of information can become the age
of liberation -- if we limit state power wisely and free our
people to make the best use of new ideas, inventions, and
insights.
By the same token, the world has learned that free markets
provide levels of prosperity, growth and happiness that centrally
planned economies can never offer. Even the most charitable
estimates indicate that in recent the free world's economies have
grown at twice the rate of the former communist world.
Growth does more than fill shelves. It permits every person
to gain -- not at the expense of others, but to the benefit of
others. Prosperity encourages people to live as neighbors and
not as predators.
Economic growth can aid international relations in the same
way. Many nations represented here are parties to the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The Uruguay Round, the latest in
the postwar series of trade negotiations, offers hope to
4
developing nations, many of which have been cruelly decieved by
the false promises of totalitarianism.
Here in this chamber we hear about North-South problems.
But free and open trade, including unfettered access to markets
and credit, offer developing countries means of self-sufficiency
and economic dignity.
If the Uruguay Round should fail, a new wave of
protectionism could destroy our hopes for a better future.
Therefore, I call upon all members of GATT to redouble their
efforts to reach a successful conclusion for the Uruguay Round.
I cannot stress this enough: Economic progress will play a
vital role in the new world. It supplies the soil in which
democracy grows best. And democracy is history's second bequest
to our new world.
People everywhere seek government of, by and for the people;
they want to enjoy their inalienable rights to freedom of
property and person. In one of history's rich ironies so-called
People's republics have been toppled by the people themselves.
[[XX such republics have surrendered to freer systems in just the
last year. ]]
Challenges to democracy also have failed. Just last month
coup plotters in the Soviet Union tried to derail the forces of
liberty and reform, but Soviet citizens refused to follow. Most
of the nations in this chamber stood with the forces of reform,
led by Mikhail Gorbachev and Boris Yeltsin -- and against the
coup plotters.
5
The challenge facing the Soviet peoples now -- that of
building political systems based upon individual liberty,
minority rights, democracy and free markets -- mirrors every
nation's responsibility for encouraging peaceful, democratic
reform. But it also testifies to the extraordinary power of the
democratic ideal.
As democracy flourishes, so does the opportunity for a third
historical breakthrough: international cooperation. Less than a
year ago, the Soviet Union joined the United States and a host of
other nations in defending a tiny country against aggression --
and opposing Saddam Hussein. For the very first time on a matter
of major importance, superpower competition took a back seat to
international cooperation.
The United Nations, in one of its finest moments,
constructed a measured, principled, deliberate and courageous
response to Saddam Hussein. It stood up to an outlaw who invaded
Kuwait, who threatened many states within the region, who sought
to set a menacing precedent for the post Cold War world.
The coalition effort established a model for the collective
settlement of disputes. Members set a goal -- the liberation of
Kuwait -- and devised a couragous, unified means of achieving it.
Now, for the first time, we have a real chance to fulfill
the U.N. Charter's ambition of working "to save succeeding
generations from the scourge of war
to reaffirm faith in
fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human
person, in the equal rights of men and women and nations large
6
and small
to promote social progress and better standards of
life in larger freedom. "
We will not revive these ideals if we fail to acknowledge
the challenges that the renewal of history presents.
Consider first the challenge of nationalism.
In Europe and Asia, nationalist passions have flared anew,
challenging borders, straining the fabric of international
society. You see signs of this tumult here. The United Nations
organized but four peacekeeping missions during its first 43
years; it has mounted nine missions in the past 36 months.
Although we now seem mercifully liberated from the fear of
nuclear holocaust, these smaller, virulent conflicts should
trouble us all.
We must face this challenge squarely: First, by pursuing the
peaceful resolution of disputes now in progress; second, and more
importantly, by trying to prevent others from erupting.
No one here can promise that today's borders will remain
fixed for all time. But we must strive to ensure the peaceful,
negotiated settlement of border disputes.
We can help by defending the inalienable rights outlined in
the UN's founding documents, and enabling minorities to enjoy the
full benefits of membership in a free society -- including the
right to retain ties of kinship with ancestors and relatives in
other lands. [[We cannot fend off legitimate national
aspirations. But neither can we let hate-filled factions
jeopardize the prospects for a productive peace.
7
We also must promote the cause of international harmony by
addressing old feuds. We should take seriously the charter's
pledge "to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one
another as good neighbors."
UNGA Resolution 3379, the so-called "Zionism is racism"
resolution, mocks this pledge and the principles upon which the
U.N. was founded. I call upon you to repeal it without delay.
Zionism is not a policy; it is the idea that led to the
creation of a home for the Jewish people, to the state of Israel.
To equate Zionism with the intolerable sin of racism is to twist
history, and forget the terrible plight of Jews in World War II,
and indeed throughout history. To equate Zionism with racism is
to reject Israel itself -- a member in good standing of the
United Nations.
This body cannot claim to seek peace and at the same time
challenge Israel's right to exist. By repealing Resolution 3379
unconditionally, the U.N. will enhance its credibility and serve
the cause of peace.
As we work to meet the challenge posed by the resumption of
history, we also must defend the Charter's emphasis on
inalienable human rights.
Government has failed if citizens cannot speak their minds;
if they cannot form political parties freely and elect
governments without coercion; if they cannot practice their
religion freely; if they cannot raise their families in peace; if
they cannot enjoy a just return from their labor; if they cannot
8
live fruitful lives and, at the end of their days, look upon
their achievements and their society's progress with pride.
Politicians who talk about "democracy" and "freedom" but
provide neither eventually will feel the sting of public
disapproval, and the power of people's yearning to live free.
Some nations still deny people their basic rights, and too
many voices cry out for freedom. The people of Cuba suffer
oppression at the hands of a dictator who hasn't gotten the word,
the lone hold-out in an otherwise Democratic hemisphere; a man
who hasn't adapted to a world that has no use for totalitarian
tyranny. Elsewhere, despots ignore the heartening fact that the
rest of the world has embarked upon a new age of liberty.
The renewal of history also imposes an obligation to remain
vigilant about new threats and old.
We must expand our efforts to control nuclear proliferation.
We must work to prevent the spread of chemical and biological
weapons, and the missiles to deliver them.
We must remember that self-interest will tug nations in
different directions, and that struggles over perceived interests
will flare sometimes into violence.
We can never say with confidence where the next conflict may
arise. And we cannot promise eternal peace -- not while
demagogues peddle false promises to people hungry with hope; not
while terrorists use our citizens as pawns, and drug dealers
destroy our people. As a result, we must band together to
overwhelm affronts to basic human dignity.
9
It is no longer acceptable to shrug and say that one man's
terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Let's put the law
above the crude and cowardly practice of hostage-holding. //
In a world defined by change, we must be as firm in
principle as we are flexible in our response to changing
international conditions.
That is especially true today of the outlaw regime in Iraq.
Six months after the passage of U.N. Security Council Resolutions
687 and 688, Saddam continues to rebuild his weapons of mass
destruction and subject the Iraqi people to brutal repression.
Let me repeat: Our argument has never been with the people of
Iraq. It was with a brutal dictator whose arrogance dishonored
the Iraqi people.
Saddam's contempt for U.N. resolutions -- first demonstrated
in August 1990 -- shows that we must keep U.N. sanctions in place
as long as he remains in power. It also shows that we cannot
compromise for a moment in seeing that Iraq destroys all its
weapons of mass destruction.
This is not to say that we should punish the Iraqi people.
Security Council Resolution 706 created a responsible mechanism
for sending humanitarian relief to innocent Iraqi citizens. Now,
we must put that mechanism to work.
We must not abandon our principled stand against Saddam's
aggression. This cooperative effort has liberated Kuwait; now it
must lead to a just government in Iraq. When it does, the Iraqi
10
people can look forward to better lives; free at home, free to
engage in the world beyond their borders.
The resumption of history also permits the United Nations to
resume the important business of promoting the values I have
discussed today. While this body cannot resolve large-scale
conflicts, it can serve as a vehicle through which willing
parties can settle old disputes. In the months to come, I look
forward to working with Secretary General Perez de Cuellar and
his successor as we pursue peace in Afghanistan, Cambodia,
Cyprus, El Salvador, and the Western Sahara.
The U.N. can encourage free-market development through its
international lending and aid institutions; it can discourage bad
behavior through the use of appropriate sanctions.
Where institutions of freedom have lain dormant, the United
Nations can offer them new life. These institutions play a
crucial role in our quest for a New World Order -- an order in
which no nation surrenders one iota of its sovereignty; an order
characterized by the rule of law, rather than the resort to
force; the cooperative settlement of disputes, rather than the
anarchy and bloodshed; and an unstinting belief in human rights.
Finally, you may wonder about America's role in the new
world I have described. Let me assure you, The United States has
no intention of striving for a Pax Americana. In a changing
world, the United States remain unchanged. We will not retreat
into isolationism. We will remain engaged. We will offer
11
freindship and leadership. In short, we seek a Pax Universalis
built upon shared responsibilities and aspirations.
The United Nations should not dictate the particular forms
of governments that nations should adopt. But it can and should
encourage the values upon which this organization was founded.
Together, we should insist that nations seeking our
acceptance meet basic standards of human decency.
My friends, we have an opportunity to spare our sons and
daughters the sins and errors of the past; we can build a future
more satisfying than any our world has ever known.
The future lies undefined before us, full of promise;
littered with peril. We can choose the kind of world we want:
one blistered by the fires of war and subjected to the whims of
coercion and chance, or one made peaceful by reflection and
choice.
Take this challenge seriously. Inspire future generations
to praise and venerate you -- to say: On the ruins of conflict,
these brave men and women built an era of peace and
understanding; they inaugurated a new world order, an order worth
preserving for the ages.
Good luck. Thank you very, very much.
#
#
#
#