America's role in the world - President George Bush speech - Transcript

US Department of State Dispatch, Jan 11, 1993

I want to share with you at this institution of leadership some of my thinking, both about the world you will soon be called upon to enter and the life that you have chosen. Any President has several functions. He speaks for and to the nation. He must faithfully execute the law. And he must lead.

But no function, none of the President's hats, in my view, is more important than his role as Commander in Chief. For it is as Commander in Chief that the President confronts and makes decisions that [in] one way or another affect the lives of everyone in this country as well as many others around the world.

I have had many occasions to don this most important of hats. Over the past 4 years, the men and women who proudly and bravely wear the uniforms of the US armed services have been called upon to go in harm's way and have discharged their duty with honor and professionalism.

I wish I could say that such demands were a thing of the past, that with the end of the Cold War the calls upon the United States would diminish. I cannot. Yes, the end of the Cold War, we would all concede, is a blessing. It is a time of great promise. Democratic governments have never been so numerous. What happened 2 or 3 days ago in Moscow would not have been possible in the Cold War days. Thanks to historic treaties, such as that START [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty] 11 pact just reached with Russia [signed on January 3; see p. 20], the likelihood of nuclear holocaust is vastly diminished.

But this does not mean that there is no specter of war, no threats to be reckoned with. And already, we see disturbing signs of what this new world could become if we are passive and aloof. We would risk the emergence of a world characterized by violence-- characterized by chaos-one in which dictators and tyrants threaten their neighbors; build arsenals brimming with weapons of mass destruction; and ignore the welfare of their own men, women, and children. And we could see a horrible increase in international terrorism, with American citizens more at risk than ever before.

We cannot and we need not allow this to happen. Our objective must be to exploit the unparalleled opportunity presented by the Cold War's end---to work toward transforming this new world into a new world order, one of governments that are democratic, tolerant, and economically free at home and committed abroad to settling inevitable differences peacefully, without the threat or use of force.

Unfortunately, not every one subscribes to these principles. We continue to see leaders bent on denying fundamental human rights and seizing territory regardless of the human cost. No, an international society-one more attuned to the enduring principles that have made this country a beacon of hope for so many for so long--will not just emerge on its own. It's got to be built.

Two hundred years ago, another departing President warned of the dangers of what he described as "entangling alliances." His was the right course for a new nation at that point in history. But what was "entangling" in Washington's day is now essential. This is why, at Texas A&M a few weeks ago [see Dispatch, Vol. 3, No. 51, p. 893], I spoke of the folly of isolationism, and of the importance-- morally, economically, and strategically-of the United States remaining involved in world affairs. We must engage ourselves if a new world order, one more compatible with our values and congenial to our interest, is to emerge. But even more, we must lead.

Leadership takes many forms; it can be political or diplomatic; it can be economic or military; it can be moral or spiritual. Leadership can take any one of these forms or it can be a combination of them.

Leadership should not be confused with either unilateralism or universalism. We need not respond by ourselves to each and every outrage of violence. The fact that America can act does not mean that it must. A nation's sense of idealism need not be at odds with its interests. Nor does principle displace prudence.

No, the United States should not seek to be the world's policeman. There is no support abroad or at home for us to play this role. Nor should there be. We would exhaust ourselves, in the process wasting precious resources needed to address those problems at home and abroad that we cannot afford to ignore.

But in the wake of the Cold War, in a world where we are the only remaining superpower, it is the role of the United States to marshal its moral and material resources to promote a democratic peace. It is our responsibility-it is our opportunity--to lead. There is no one else.

Leadership cannot be simply asserted or demanded; it must be demonstrated. Leadership requires formulating worthy goals, persuading others of their virtue, and contributing one's share of the common effort and then some. Leadership takes time; it takes patience; it takes work.

Some of this work must take place here at home. Congress does have a constitutional role to play. Leadership, therefore, also involves working with the Congress and the American people to provide the essential domestic underpinning if US military commitments are to be sustainable.