CFR Speech - John Kerry: Real Security in the Post 9/11 World

[kerrygoddess]

John Kerry: Real Security in the Post 9/11 World
December 8th, 2005

Today, John Kerry is delivering a speech on the war on terror at the Council on Foreign Relations. The Democratic Daily has obtained an advanced copy of the text of Kerry’s speech:

Senator John Kerry: “Real Security in the Post-9/11 World”
Council on Foreign Relations, New York City
December 8, 2005 - Remarks As Prepared For Delivery

So much of what we used to take for granted in national security policy has now been called into question.

We used to know that despite our differences in philosophy and in perspective our two great parties could cooperate to craft international policies in our national interest.

We used to understand that the vast and unique role of the United States in world affairs required a far-sighted and multi-faceted approach to protecting our people and our interests.

We used to value as a national treasure the international alliances and institutions that enhanced our strength, amplified our voice, and reflected our traditions and ideals in maintaining a free and secure world.

We used to measure America’s strength and security by our moral authority, our economic leadership, and our diplomatic skills, as well as by the power of our military.

And we used to say politics stopped at the water’s edge–we used to call on our people to share in the sacrifices demanded by freedom, and our leaders used to raise hopes and inspire trust, not raise fears and demand blind faith.

All that has changed in a remarkably brief period of time.

In recalling what we’ve lost, I’m not looking back to the Greatest Generation of World War II–or to the leaders who shaped our Cold War policies, and wore down the threat of totalitarian communism. I’m not talking about thirty or forty or fifty years ago–I’m talking about what we had just four short years ago.

After September 11th, the American people, elected officials from both parties, and much of the whole world offered the President of the United States their loyal support when he announced our intention to wage a global war on terror. Not since the bombing of Pearl Harbor has a president enjoyed a greater reservoir of moral and political capital, or more material and diplomatic resources, at the beginning of a war.

Four years later, our reservoir of resources has been diminished and our goodwill has been squandered. And as the 9/11 Commission’s final report has just told us, Washington is failing to take the basic steps necessary to make us safe. It is an inexplicable abdication of responsibility.

So where do we go from here?

MORE - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=1340

[ginnyinWI]

1. thanks for posting

I printed out the whole eight pages. :)

[kerrygoddess]

2. Word Doc

I just link to a WORD DOC of the speech also - http://www.thedemocraticdaily.com/RealSecurityinthePost9-11World.doc

[ginnyinWI]

3. good idea

I made my own word doc out of what you posted on Dem Daily. ;)

[Mass]

4. Great speech - Unfortunately, it will probably be ignored by the media

because it does not focus on immediate news.

Now this is a speech that a president should give.

[whometense]

5. Or a

shadow president. I wondr if one single honest media figure will note the contrast between yesterday's speech and today's.

[karynnj]

6. I wonder what the people watching thought

If it's a conference wouldn't it be about the same people hearing both.

[rosesaylavee]

19. That was a speech yesterday? I thought it was

a recitation of several others' thoughts read aloud by *.

[kerrygoddess]

7. There was a lot of media coverage there

Just because it was not broadcast does not mean it will not get coverage.

It woud be most helpful, if there are concerns about this getting seen, if others could help pass it around to other blogs and forums.

[blm]

10. hey, kg...how was attendance and QandA...any reports?

.

[MH1]

8. LBN thread already

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1974558&mesg_id=1974558

Kerry says U.S. needs terror war allies (UPI)

[Mass]

13. At this point, UPI seems to be the only one to have something.

Sad state of the news reporting that AP and Reuters still have nothing.

[ProSense]

9. Thanks for posting the entire speech. n/t

[Dr Ron]

11. So far Dean getting the coverage re Iraq statements

A controversial statement beats out serious analysis every time.

Hotline is reporting that the Mobile Register is the first paper to call Democrats to dump Dean:
http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2005/12/mobile_register.html

Anyone know about the Mobile Register. I wonder if they are offering serious advice to Democrats or if it is a right wing paper which is taking advantage of this to bash Democrats.

[blm]

12. Posted full speech in GD where they prefer rhetoric over real solutions

Oh well...often times I find some really good true blue Dems there mixed in with the Dem haters.

[ProSense]

14. Kerry's speech was brilliant!

The real war on terror is an even bigger challenge. It is a war that has drawn us smack into the middle of an internal struggle in the Islamic World. It is fundamentally a war within Islam for the heart and soul of Islam, stretching from Morocco East to Indonesia. -It leads, ultimately, to a struggle for the transformation of the Greater Middle East into a region that is no longer isolated from the global economy, no longer dependent on despotism for stability, no longer fearful of freedom, and no longer content to feed restive and rising populations of unemployed young people a diet of illusions, excuses, and dead end government jobs.

As the 2004 Arab Human Development Report tells us, “By 21st century standards, Arab countries have not met the Arab people’s aspirations for development, security and liberation … Indeed, there is a near-complete consensus that there is a serious failing in the Arab world …located specifically in the political sphere.” And in addition, in regions where the mosque remains the only respected alternative to the autocratic state structures, there is no credible secular alternative. So we are caught in a cauldron of religious struggle where today there is no center of moral authority that forcefully condemns those who murder in the name of Islam.

In the long run–and we’re in this for the long run-the war on terror cannot be won without the successful transformation of the Greater Middle East, and especially its Arab core. And our strategy must do what it takes to increase the internal demand for change in that region.

That means we are in a war of ideas and ideologies–but ultimately a war that must be fought and won within the Islamic world.

That means we have a huge stake in finding partners in the Arab world who are willing not only to support the transformation of the Middle East, but to reestablish the broad and unchallenged moral authority needed to isolate and defeat terrorists.

And ultimately, that means we must liberate ourselves and the Middle East itself from the tyranny of dependence on petroleum, which has frustrated every impulse towards modernization of the region, while giving its regimes the resources to hold onto power.


snip...

So this is the long range mission in the war on terror: one, make sure the right side wins the war of ideas within the Islamic world; two, build up diversified economies and civil society; and, three, end the empire of oil. These three challenges make it abundantly clear this is not a war the United States should fight alone.



snip...

In the critical days after Saddam's regime collapsed, we got just about everything wrong. You know the list: failing to seal the borders and prevent sabotage of critical infrastructure; creating a formal occupation; privatizing the reconstruction; disbanding the entire Iraqi security structure; and on and on. No one in the administration has been fired for these mistakes, but our courageous troops, and the Iraqi people, are paying a high price for them every day.


snip...

I’ve set out a series of steps we should take to eliminate the perception of a permanent military occupation, to achieve the political solution our generals say we need to weaken the insurgency, to isolate the foreign jihadists, and to bring Iraq stability.


snip...

The right rhetoric's not enough. Statements of "resolve" are not enough. We need skill as well as resolve, and a strategy as well as an attitude.



snip...

Harry Truman was an uncomplicated man. Yet he was also a man who believed he should be held personally accountable for every decision and every judgment, every day, not just on election days. At the end of one great war against totalitarianism and at the beginning of another, Harry Truman presided over the greatest era of bipartisan, multi-lateral foreign policy our country or the world has ever seen. It’s time for the President to put a little more Harry Truman in his foreign policy.

And if he won't, then those who admire Harry Truman will keep up the fight at home, in order to win the fight against terrorism around the world. And we'll be joined by other Americans and, I hope, by leaders in organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations, who understand this is a fight we dare not lose. More than that, it is a fight we must win.

[blm]

15. I like the parts you emphasized -they are crucial to the debate.

Please add your highlights to the GD thread on Kerry's speech.

[ProSense]

16. Will do. Thanks.

[_dynamicdems]

17. Thanks for posting this. This should have been televised on every

station in America back-to-back with Bsh's speech. Let people see and compare the real thing and Brand X.

[ProSense]

18. Link to transcript with Q&A

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9390/

[karynnj]

20. Thanks for the link

He answered the questions really well, incuding the hostile woman at the end.

[ProSense]

21. Yes. That made me chuckle. n/t

[Mass]

22. Thank you for the post.

This is very important to understand what Kerry is proposing.


For example, I noticed that he is proposing to keep a force in Kuwait, as Murtha is as well. This
is something I had not noted in previous speeches.

IMHO, this may be the most important part of the QA, though. It seems more and more clear that the next goal of the neo-cons is China and that they want to start at best a cold war with it, and it would be catastrophic. I am happy that Kerry says clearly that he sees China as a partner and not the adversary that some would want (that does not mean we have to give them our jobs, but we have to work with them certainly).

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9390/

KERRY: Well, I believe China is an opportunity. Again, you know, I’m privileged to be the ranking member of that committee. I’ve been chairman of it. I can remember going to Shanghai around 1989, ‘90, and you could still see across the bond (ph) — Prudong was rice fields, paddies. It’s a city bigger than New York today. Anybody who’s traveled to China understands the stunning transformation that’s taking place and even how life there is changing as a consequence.

I don’t view China the way some people want to view it. I don’t think they’re hegemonistic, I don’t think that they’re — they want to be respected and they want to be taken seriously, and they’re a world power. And they’re going to be (a/the ?) preeminent economy of this century as we go forward, and we’re going to have to therefore do a lot of things differently in order to respond to that reality.

Needless to say, there are things we want to see them change on. Human rights. We abhor the political structure, but it is changing also. I mean, anybody who read about the last series of elections there, you’ve got to be just stunned by the competition even within the one party, with different people out there with different programs and criticisms of the government and so forth.

So I view China as an opportunity. I view it as a vital partner in our resolution of these problems that I talked about. And we need to be much more engaged. I remember being in China watching the prime minister — two or three prime ministers of countries arrive the same time I was there, all going to engage in commerce. And when I was in Hong Kong, our foreign commercial service representative said to me, “You know, Senator, we’re losing billions of dollars of business over here because we don’t have enough people and we don’t have enough place engaged in building the relationships and doing what’s necessary to get that commerce.

And in the Far East, as we all know, relationships are very, very important. They’re important in business and they’re very important in the conduct of foreign affairs. We don’t take enough time. Secretaries of State flying over or the assistant secretaries for a brief visit doesn’t do the job, folks. We have to be much more deeply engaged, building those relationships, have some kind of consistency and longevity even in the building of those relationships and we’ll be much stronger as a country.