The
problem is that our leaders haven’t yet told us what
”victory” means. This is, for the short term, understandable and defensible,
given the complexity of the situation. We are up against
an enemy of secret global networks of suicide bombers, operating
with the secret backing or at least toleration of numerous
sovereign governments, some of them critical to our current
military operations in Afghanistan, not to mention network
ties
with drug lords and international crime syndicates.
But, given the global appeal of the causes espoused by the
terrorists, and the real risk of eventual American public
frustration, I believe it is time for our leaders to stop focusing
only on current tactics, no matter how well they play on CNN,
and to begin to build the case for a long range strategy.
Indeed, I think the present public support for the
war on terrorism not only frees our leaders to pursue current,
necessarily reactive, national and international policies,
but provides as well a superb opportunity for a more profound
achievement. People everywhere, not just here, want a more secure, peaceful
and just world order.
Experience
over a half century leads me to believe that cooperation,
politically powerful cooperation toward that goal worldwide,
is now feasible. And
that cooperation among
democratic governments, their peoples, and the peoples now
oppressed by tyrants, toward a democratically based world
order of sovereign states, would succeed in spite of the naysayers
here and elsewhere.
Let me share with you some glimpses of the way my thinking
about this has developed.
As
a boy at our dining room table near Boston, looking up at
the portrait on the wall of my namesake, a 1776 Minuteman
at the Battle of Concord and Lexington, I often heard my mother
enthuse about Woodrow Wilson’s dream during World War I of
a powerful League of Nations, and disparage Henry Cabot Lodge,
my Father’s cousin, for blocking its realization. But
the American people before you were born, took quite seriously
Wilson’s idea that they were fighting that War to make
the world safe for democracy.
Later,
in March 1945, I saw teen-aged boys in German uniforms, emerging
from the woods, their hands in the air, mowed down by fellow
paratroopers mopping up the bridgehead we were establishing across
the Rhine River. That was forgotten a few minutes later
when I was blown over backwards by an exploding shell. One
of the lucky ones unhurt, I hid in a ditch, sick with terror,
as the shells kept coming.
I came back from that mercifully brief combat experience
with a new aspiration. Looking out over the troopship rail
at the Statue of Liberty on a bright August morning, I began
to dream of doing something, anything, about peace and freedom,
before the prospect of again holding my gorgeous Southern
bride in my arms drove out all else.
Four years later, a Harvard law degree and my father’s
friendship with Allen Dulles gave me a job at Sullivan &
Cromwell, the Wall Street law firm presided over by his brother,
John Foster Dulles, soon to be President Eisenhower’s Secretary
of State. But
sixteen hour days left no time or energy to pursue my dream,
so in 1955 I switched to investment banking, I had a friend
at Paine Webber, with shorter hours and more pay.
In
1956, when the first popular uprising to threaten Soviet power
in Eastern Europe exploded in Budapest, I was horrified by
Washington inaction.
My urge to help prompted a failed effort to airdrop
bazookas to the freedom fighters battling Soviet Russian tanks,
and then a successful effort to supply Leo Cherne, Board Chair
of the International Rescue Committee, a humanitarian organization,
with a token gift of antibiotics for their wounded.
Cherne took the antibiotics with him on a wild ride
through roadblocks to Budapest in the midst of the fighting.
This produced a headline story for the International
Rescue Committee, record breaking contributions, and, for
me, an invitation to join the Board where I still serve fifty-five
years later. When
the revolt was crushed, with 200,000 Hungarian refugees fleeing
to the West, my wife Thelma’s anguished reaction led to broadening
the family involvement. Fourteen-year old Eva Selek
became our fifth daughter after a year alone in an Austrian
refugee camp.
These
Hungarian encounters whetted my activist appetite. So
a few friends and I set out to find a way to show American
support for another brave European people, the Poles, as they
waged a non-violent struggle against the Communist dictatorship
imposed by Moscow. After visiting Poland to determine
the most urgent humanitarian needs, we persuaded American
pharmaceutical companies including Merck, Pfizer and Smith
Kline, to provide drugs, and Pan American Airways to transport
them, free. A
highlight was the distribution through CARE of polio shots
from Eli Lilly to immunize some 300,000 Polish children in
the midst of a terrible epidemic.
On each vial of medicine was the message “Gift of the
American People.”
Out
of that volunteer Polish medical assistance effort came
my job, thanks again to Allen Dulles, by then Director of
the CIA, as Chief Executive Officer of Radio Free Europe,
a major weapon in the Cold War. Among other rewards of that
position in the 1960’s was the opportunity for insight into
political realities on both sides of a global conflict.
That war could not have been won without the erosion
of Soviet Communist power through the nonviolent resistance
of people in Central Europe and the Soviet Union. While working for freedom in Central Europe, I was awakened
by a friend to the reality of oppression at home, right in
our upscale New York suburb, the Village of Bronxville.
When we approached the local clergy for help in starting
a fair housing effort, the pastor of the leading Protestant
church was horrified.
Letting in Jews would undermine my congregational base
here was his stated reason for turning us down flat.
We never cracked the local wall of silence, but that
involvement led to one of the most thrilling patriotic experiences
of my life, as a participant in the huge crowd on the Mall
in Washington listening to Martin Luther King’s “I Have a
Dream” speech. (I’m reminded of that struggle against bigotry
by every report of harassment of Arab Americans.)
Later
jobs as U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Educational
and Cultural Affairs, as CEO of Youth for Understanding, an
international high school home stay student exchange program,
as a founding staff member of the United States Institute
of Peace, as well as volunteer President of Freedom House,
contributed to my education and my convictions.
I learned that human solidarity is not just a slogan.
It is a political reality in the age of globalization, of
accelerating interdependence. I learned also that generally
accepted criteria have been developed to assess levels of
democratic achievement.
And I learned that democracies, already in the majority
worldwide, and the democratically governed peoples of the
world, already a majority of the global population, constitute
the most potent engine of peace, freedom and justice in human history.
So human solidarity is already much more than an aspiration
it is a growing reality within that zone, with bad governments
the primary obstacle to its expansion.
One-on-one
relationships with refugees from Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia
and totalitarian Communist governments in Eastern Europe helped
to shape my conviction about bad governments, as did an evening
sitting on the floor in the dark in besieged Sarajevo during
the Bosnian War after a shell destroyed the apartment next
door. Those with
a hand in creating the National Endowment for Democracy in
the eighties (I among them, and also Chairman of its first
Board of Directors) shared a related conviction. American
support for the worldwide democracy movement, which has made
such huge strides since World War II, is in our national interest
as well as a duty owed to freedom lovers everywhere. More recently, the idea of a long-range strategy to institutionalize
democratic collaboration has taken hold.
In June 2000, 107 governments met at ministerial level
in Warsaw, Poland to affirm the present reality of a worldwide
“Community of Democracies,” agreeing:
1.to
foster democracy where it is lacking;
2.to defend democracy where it is threatened; and
3.to form democracy caucuses in international institutions.
I
was privileged to participate in a parallel private Warsaw
gathering organized by Freedom House with the support of the
Soros foundations. The highlight for me was Secretary General
Kofi Annan’s closing speech at the official conference, especially
powerful because of its timing one year before he was to run,
successfully, for re-election as Secretary General, needing
a two thirds majority of member governments, authoritarian
as well as democratic.
These
are some of his words:
I am delighted to associate myself today with a new coalition
of democracies, dedicated to expanding the frontiers of freedom
and to ensuring that, wherever democracy has taken root, it
will not be reversed...The principle of democracy is now universally
recognized...I am particularly gratified that this new coalition
is meeting to support the founding values of our Organization,
as set out in the Charter and in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights... Indeed, the theme of this conference, “Towards
a Community of Democracies” represents my own most profound
aspiration for the United Nations as a whole...And yet this
meeting is not just a celebration...The work of democracy
is never done, too many people are still denied their human
rights, while too many democracies remain imperfect and vulnerable
to subversion by ruthless leaders.... There are many good
reasons for promoting democracy.
Not the least of these, in the eyes of the United Nations,
is that, when sustained over the long term, it is a highly
effective means of preventing conflict, both within and between
states. Certainly,
the record shows that democratically governed states rarely
if ever make war on one another.
But even more important, in this era of intra-state
wars, is the fact that democratic governance, by protecting
minorities, encouraging political pluralism, and upholding
the rule of law, can channel dissent peacefully, and thus
help avert civil wars. Conversely, authoritarian and highly
personalized forms of governance, ethnic discrimination, human
rights violations and corruption are among the root causes
of today’s internal conflicts. Thus democracy offers us a
double promise as an agent of peace as well as liberation...
End of quote from the Secretary General.
I
came home from Warsaw resolved to redouble my efforts, through
the Council for a Community of Democracies, which I was helping
to get started here in Washington, toward the further development
of organized democratic cooperation, at regional and global
levels, and within international organizations.
Since then, a fledgling democratic caucus has been
started in the General Assembly, and the Organization of the
American States and other regional intergovernmental bodies
have taken up the challenge.
But progress is slow.
Meantime we run frightening risks, from weapons of
mass destruction in the hands of rogue states such as Iraq
and North Korea as well as from terrorist networks.
Piecemeal responses based on dated National Defense
dogma can only be a partial answer.
Management
gurus have been telling us for a generation that without a
long-range vision, clear goals and appropriate strategies,
organizations are not likely to get very far. Lacking
thought and debate about what kind of a world we want for
future generations, we Americans, along with the rest of humanity,
are not likely to get very far either. We still lack focus
on the obvious long-range requirement to build democratic
political institutions responsive to the requirements of our
global village. In addition to the terrorist networks
we are now confronting, global corporations compete in largely
unregulated global markets; scientific discoveries useful
in building weapons of mass destruction are shared globally
over the internet and the “CNN effect” produces mass awareness
of impending crises’ without effective international response.
We are stuck with a United Nations lacking the capacity to
fill the gaps, in spite of Kofi Annan, probably the best -equipped,
most competent Secretary General ever.
The
United States, with a preponderance of military, economic,
technological and cultural power unseen since the Roman Empire,
has, in the decade since the end of the Cold War, looked like
a helpless giant. The first President Bush was ridiculed when he suggested after
the desert war with Iraq that our triumph heralded a “New
World Order.” Our skepticism was justified because we knew
instinctively there was no vision, no strategy to make that
victory a step toward a better world. Now we have a second President Bush, aided by an exceptionally
experienced and capable national security team, with an unparalleled
opportunity to provide that vision, that strategy. It is my fondest hope that President Bush will grasp this extraordinary
moment while waging war against terrorism, to provide a sense
of direction, yes, a vision for us now, and for generations
of Americans yet unborn. In doing so, his speech writers
will have some precedents to rely on.
*President Lincoln at Gettysburg and in his second inaugural
in the midst of our Civil War
*President Wilson in his fourteen points leading to the establishment
of the League of Nations
*President Roosevelt in the Atlantic Charter signed with Winston
Churchill in 1941, before Pearl Harbor when the Soviet Union
was already a crucial ally, leading to the establishment of
the United Nations.
*President Reagan in his speech in the 80’s to the British
Parliament calling for an international commitment to promote
democracy. In the heat of the Cold War it took
guts to make such a soft, liberal idealistic proposal and
to follow up with effective action. The first result
was the establishment by Congress of the National Endowment
for Democracy, followed by ever increasing proportions
of national, international and UN development spending committed
to the promotion of democratic governance.
In this era of accelerating change, such Presidential leadership
is crucial in establishing a sense of direction. I believe
Americans and hundreds of millions of others around the world
who share our faith in liberty, including Muslims and Afghans
and, most especially, women everywhere, would gladly work
together over the long haul toward a world of sovereign democratic
nations. They would collaborate through existing
and new international institutions to pursue their common
interests and concerns based on their common values.
Human rights, the rule of law, social justice, free elections
and peace are ideals at least as attractive to peoples denied
them as they are to us. It is not enough to fight against
terrorism. We Americans have the power and therefore
the responsibility to do so much more. I ask you. Couldn’t
the speechwriters for President Bush or his successor make
a persuasive case for such a vision?