[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 8 (Tuesday, January 23, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E51-E53]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

[[Page E51]]


                LEADERSHIP FOR THE NEXT AMERICAN CENTURY

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, January 23, 1996

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to bring to the attention of 
my colleagues a speech delivered late last week by Secretary of State 
Warren Christopher. Mr. Speaker, we are at the start of an election 
year, and we can expect partisanship to increase in the House. However, 
I hope all Members will temper their partisan views when it comes to 
foreign policy. To that end, I urge all of my colleagues to read 
Secretary Christopher's speech, delivered last week at the John F. 
Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. In the speech, the 
Secretary reviews the past year in foreign policy, when there were 
certainly a number of major accomplishments, and sets out the 
challenges the administration has set for itself for 1996. The 
Secretary also reviews the guiding principles of the administration's 
policy. I believe the speech makes absolutely clear what is driving 
U.S. foreign policy: the U.S. national interest. I hope my colleagues 
will take the time to read it.

                Leadership for the Next American Century

                        (by Warren Christopher)

       Let me begin by thanking Joe Nye not only for giving me 
     that warm introduction, but for laying to rest one persistent 
     canard about this fine institution. It used to be said in 
     some circles that the Kennedy School was a plot to infiltrate 
     the federal government. Joe Nye's appointment proves that the 
     opposite is true: the federal government is in fact a plot to 
     infiltrate the Kennedy School.
       A year ago, I met with you to explain the guiding 
     principles of this Administration's foreign policy and our 
     priorities for 1995. I am here today to assess a remarkable 
     period of achievement for American diplomacy and to discuss 
     our main objectives for 1996.
       The end of the Cold War has given us an unprecedented 
     opportunity to shape a more secure world of open societies 
     and open markets--a world in which American interests and 
     ideals can thrive. But we also face serious threats from 
     which no border can shield us--terrorism, proliferation, 
     crime and damage to the environment.
       This is not the end of history, but history in fast-
     forward. Eight decades ago, when this century's first Balkan 
     war ended, it took an international commission to piece 
     together what had happened. Now, images of violence in 
     Sarajevo are beamed instantly around the world. Six decades 
     ago, it took several years for the Great Depression to become 
     a global disaster. Now, an economic crisis in Mexico can 
     disrupt the global economy in the blink of an eye.
       In this time of accelerated change, American leadership 
     must remain consistent. We must be clear-eyed and vigilant in 
     pursuit of our interests. Above all, we must recognize that 
     only the United States has the vision and strength to 
     consolidate the gains of the last few years, and to build an 
     even better world.
       Six years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, some still 
     think that we can escape the problems of the world by 
     building walls around America. But the evidence of the last 
     three years should settle the debate about America's role in 
     the world. Because President Clinton has rejected the path of 
     retreat, we have forged a record that proves the enduring 
     value of American leadership and American engagement.
       The President, with help from internationalists in both 
     parties, has made the United States the world's driving force 
     for peace. Think of it. Had we not led, the war in Bosnia 
     would continue today, wasting innocent lives, threatening a 
     wider war and eroding the NATO Alliance. Had we not led, 
     there would not be the prospect of comprehensive peace in the 
     Middle East. And there would be scant hope for reconciliation 
     in Northern Ireland.
       Without American leadership, thugs would still rule in 
     Haiti, and thousands of Haitian refugees would be trying to 
     reach our shores. The Mexican economy would be in free-fall, 
     threatening our prosperity and harming emerging markets and 
     the global economy. We would not have made the kind of 
     progress on the fullest possible accounting of American POWs 
     and MIAs that allowed us to recognize Vietnam. We would not 
     have gained the indefinite extension of the Nuclear Non-
     Proliferation Treaty--the most important barrier against the 
     spread of nuclear weapons. And North Korea could be building 
     nuclear bombs.
       The lesson in clear. If we lead, we can sustain the 
     momentum that defeated communism, freed us from the danger of 
     nuclear war, and unfurled freedom's flag around the world. 
     Our strength is a blessing, not a burden. President Clinton 
     is determined to use it wisely and decisively.
       Our strength simply cannot be maintained on the cheap. And 
     yet for a year now, the President and I have been fighting 
     those forces in Congress who would cut our foreign affairs 
     budget so deeply that we would have to draw back from our 
     leadership--closing important embassies, shutting down 
     peacekeeping, and self-destructively slashing our 
     international programs. These are not responsible proposals. 
     They would weaken America precisely when we must remain 
     strong, precisely when other nations are looking to us for 
     leadership. They betray a lack of appreciation for what 
     America has accomplished in the last 50 years and a lack of 
     confidence that our great nation can shape the future.
       The recent shutdown of the U.S. government was particularly 
     troubling to me because it eroded our international 
     reputation for reliability and integrity. In my recent 
     travels abroad, I have been struck by the far-reaching 
     consequences of the shutdown. For leaders and ordinary 
     citizens in many parts of the world, it seemed as if the most 
     powerful nation in the world was closing for business. Our 
     failure to pay our bills and our employees was conduct not 
     worthy of a great nation. It must not happen again.
       Three weeks ago, I was described in the pages of Newsweek 
     as a ``true believer that America must be involved in the 
     world.'' I plead guilty. I came of age after World War II, in 
     the years our leaders made the investments whose benefits all 
     of us are reaping today. I am not a politician. But I do have 
     a bias: for the kind of foreign policy that makes America a 
     reliable and principled leader; a bias for a foreign policy 
     that projects America's unique purpose and strength. I hope 
     that every candidate who aspires to the presidency will keep 
     these important guideposts in mind.
       Our commitment to provide leadership is the first of the 
     central principles guiding our foreign policy that I outlined 
     here last year. A second principle I enunciated then is the 
     need to strengthen the institutions that provide an enduring 
     basis for global peace and prosperity. These institutions, 
     such as the United Nations, NATO, and the World Bank, help us 
     to share the burdens and costs of leadership. This year, a 
     top priority will be working with Congress to meet our 
     financial obligations to the UN as it undertakes an essential 
     program of reform.
       A third principle is that support for democracy and human 
     rights reflects our ideals and reinforces our interests. Our 
     dedication to universal values is a vital source of America's 
     authority and credibility. We simply cannot lead without it. 
     Our interests are most secure in a world where accountable 
     government strengthens stability and where the rule of law 
     protects both political rights and free market economies. 
     That is why we have provided such strong support for 
     courageous reforms in nations like South Africa, Mexico, and 
     the new democracies of Central Europe. That is why we are so 
     pleased that there have been sixteen inaugurations following 
     free elections in this hemisphere in the three years we have 
     been in office. This year, another important goal will be to 
     help the War Crimes Tribunals establish accountability in the 
     Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda for two of the greatest 
     tragedies of this decade.
       A fourth principle is the critical importance of 
     constructive relations with the great powers. These nations--
     our allies in Europe and Japan, as well as Russia and China--
     have the greatest ability to affect our security and 
     prosperity.
       In the last few years, some have said that the United 
     States and Europe would inevitably drift apart. We have 
     proved them wrong. Our common action in Bosnia has 
     dramatically reinforced the transatlantic alliance and has 
     opened new prospects for lasting European security 
     cooperation. And the New Transatlantic Agenda agreed by the 
     United States and the European Union in Madrid last month 
     will not only expand our economic ties but enhance 
     coordination on political and security challenges around the 
     world.
       With Japan, we are also putting each pillar of our 
     alliance--security, economic, and political--on a sound 
     basis. A year-long review of our relationship, which Joe Nye 
     led with Assistant Secretary Winston Lord, has revitalized 
     our security ties. We have reached 20 market access 
     agreements which have contributed to the recent sharp decline 
     in our bilateral trade deficit.
       We have also pursued our interest in strengthening our 
     cooperation with Russia and China, at a time when both 
     countries are undergoing difficult transitions.
       From the beginning of his Administration, President Clinton 
     has recognized that only by engaging with Russia could we 
     protect 

[[Page E52]]
     our national interests. Our strategy has produced concrete benefits for 
     the security of the American people. We have achieved massive 
     reductions in nuclear arsenals and made nuclear materials 
     more secure. By working with Russia, we have advanced our 
     goals of peace in Bosnia and the Middle East.
       Of course, it is easy to enumerate our differences with 
     Russia, such as on nuclear cooperation with Iran and the war 
     in Chechnya. This week's events provide more evidence that 
     the current military approach in Chechnya will only deepen 
     that war. The cycle of violence can end only through 
     negotiations.
       But as I have said before, I do not have the luxury of 
     making a list of differences with Russia and then walking 
     away. My job is to build areas of agreement and to develop 
     policies to manage our difference.
       Back in 1993 in my first major speech as Secretary of 
     State, I observed that Russia's struggle to transform itself 
     would be long and hard, and that success was by no means 
     assured. That remains my judgment today. On the plus side, 
     four years into the post-Soviet period, Russia's economy is 
     increasingly governed by market principles. Free elections, 
     unthinkable a few years ago, are becoming a fact of life. But 
     Russia has not yet overcome the ruinous legacy of seven 
     decades of communism--a legacy visible in crime, corruption, 
     and poverty.
       Recent events reflect troubling signs of Russian reform 
     under strain. The Russian people face an important choice in 
     the June Presidential election. In the final analysis, only 
     they can choose their leaders and determine their future. Our 
     obligation--the American obligation--is to promote democratic 
     values and democratic institutions and to pursue our national 
     interests at all times.
       When I meet with new Russian Foreign Minister Primakov, I 
     will tell him that the United States is determined to 
     continue working with Russia on the many common challenges we 
     face. I will, however, make it clear that Russia's 
     integration with the institutions of the West, which is in 
     our mutual interest, depends on Russia's willingness to abide 
     by international norms and to stay on the path of reform.
       Turning to China, we also have a profound stake in helping 
     to ensure that that powerful nation pursues its modernization 
     in ways that contribute to the overall security and 
     prosperity of the region--for our own sake and in the 
     interest of our key allies and friends. That is why we are 
     pursuing a strategy of engagement. It is designed to 
     integrate China into the international community and to 
     enhance our cooperation on such common problems as the North 
     Korean nuclear program, drug trafficking and alien smuggling.
       We continue to have important differences with China on 
     such issues as human rights, proliferation and trade. In 
     recent months we have come through a rocky period in our 
     relations with China. The United States is ready to restore 
     positive momentum to our relationship. We have reaffirmed our 
     ``one-China'' policy and we reject the short-sighted counsel 
     of those who seek to isolate or contain China. China's 
     President has said that his country, too, seeks a positive 
     relationship. Let me be clear: The United States will do its 
     part, but if we are to build a lasting productive 
     relationship, China has a responsibility to take meaningful 
     steps to address areas of our concern and to respect 
     internationally accepted principles.
       In the coming year, we will give special emphasis to three 
     main objectives: first, pursuing peace in regions of vital 
     interest to the United States; second, confronting the new 
     transnational security threats; and third, promoting open 
     markets and prosperity.
       A year ago, the war in Bosnia was the greatest unresolved 
     problem we face. Nothing is yet assured in Bosnia of course. 
     But by joining the use of force to diplomacy, we have 
     transformed a situation some considered hopeless into one in 
     which rebuilding, reconciliation, and justice are all 
     possible. The President's visit to our troops last week 
     reminded us again of the uncommon spirit and confidence they 
     bring to their mission.
       The peace agreement we forged in Dayton means that we can 
     look beyond four years of horror--the concentration camps, 
     the ethnic cleansing, the hunger and death. In 1996, our 
     immediate challenge is to implement the military and civilian 
     aspects of the Dayton agreement. We expect all parties to 
     comply fully with their obligations under that carefully 
     negotiated agreement.
       It is important to recognize that success in Bosnia will 
     also have broad implications for our goal of an integrated 
     Europe at peace. Our actions in Bosnia have proven that NATO 
     is here to stay as the guarantor of transatlantic security. 
     Without NATO's action, it is clear this war would continue 
     today.
       The very nature of the coalition we have forged and are 
     leading in Bosnia has historic implications. This is the 
     first time that soldiers from every power and region of 
     Europe will serve in the same military operation. Russians 
     and Lithuanians, Greeks and Turks, Poles and Ukranians, 
     British, Germans and French, have joined with Americans and 
     Canadians to share the same risks, under the same flag, to 
     achieve the same noble goal. As we help overcome the 
     divisions of Bosnia, we also help overcome the division of 
     Europe itself.
       The mission in Bosnia will give some of our new partners in 
     the Partnership for Peace a chance to show that they can meet 
     the challenges of membership in an enlarged NATO Alliance. 
     The process of enlargement is already making NATO a force for 
     stability and democracy in the east. We have made it clear to 
     our partners that to gain NATO membership, they must 
     consolidate democratic reforms, place their armed forces 
     under firm civilian control, and resolve disputes with their 
     neighbors.
       It is in central and eastern Europe that the greatest 
     threats to European security--ethnic conflict, proliferation, 
     and poverty--must be faced. That is why it would be 
     irresponsible to lock out half of Europe from the structures 
     that ensure security and prosperity on the continent. That is 
     why the European Union is moving forward with its own plans 
     to add members. NATO enlargement should proceed on roughly a 
     parallel track.
       We recognize that as Russia redefines its international 
     role, NATO enlargement must proceed in a gradual, deliberate 
     and transparent way. But Russia should understand that the 
     Alliance with which it is working so closely in Bosnia does 
     not threaten its security. Indeed, we continue to encourage 
     Russia to construct a long-term, special relationship with 
     NATO.
       In the Middle East, American leadership is also 
     indispensable. Today, for the first time in half a century, 
     we stand on the threshold of ending the Arab-Israeli 
     conflict. A comprehensive peace between Israel and its 
     immediate neighbors, and indeed with the entire Arab world, 
     is no longer a dream, but a realistic possibility.
       I have just returned from my 16th trip to the region. Last 
     week I was with King Hussein of Jordan on the day he 
     dedicated a trauma unit to the late Prime Minister Rabin--
     it's hard to believe, but that was in a hospital in Tel Aviv. 
     Few events more vividly capture how much the landscape of the 
     region has changed. What is more, in just two days, almost a 
     million Palestinians will vote in the first free elections in 
     the West Bank and Gaza.
       Now we must work to complete the circle of peace in the 
     Middle East. The key lies in achieving a breakthrough between 
     Israel and Syria. Both sides believe the United States is 
     critical to this effort. Under our auspices, Israel and Syria 
     are now holding intensive negotiations on Maryland's eastern 
     shore. Although there is much work still to be done, we are 
     crossing important thresholds and we seek an agreement in 
     1996. The United States is determined to help complete this 
     historic task.
       We will also continue our efforts to resolve conflicts and 
     build security in other regions. We will pursue initiatives 
     in places such as Northern Ireland, Haiti, Cyprus, Angola, 
     Burundi, Peru and Ecuador. We will strengthen the foundations 
     of peace and security in the Asia-Pacific region by deepening 
     our security cooperation with our treaty allies, and through 
     our participation in the very promising ASEAN Regional Forum. 
     And in this hemisphere, we will build on the new level of 
     political cooperation we achieved at the Summit of the 
     Americas in Miami.
       Our second major area of focus this year is to continue to 
     take on new challenges to global security. As the President 
     emphasized in a landmark UN speech last October, 
     transnational threats like proliferation, terrorism, 
     international crime, drugs, and environmental damage threaten 
     all of us in our interdependent world.
       We will continue working to stop the spread of weapons of 
     mass destruction, the gravest potential threat to the United 
     States and our allies. Thirty-three years ago, the nuclear 
     powers took what President Kennedy called a ``step backward 
     from the shadows of war'' by signing the Limited Test Ban 
     Treaty. Now we must complete a Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty 
     in time to sign it this year. And this year we must ratify 
     the Chemical Weapons Convention.
       We must also lock in deep reductions in the nuclear 
     arsenals of the United States and the countries of the former 
     Soviet Union. I urge the Senate and the Russian Duma to 
     ratify the START II Treaty, which will remove an additional 
     5,000 warheads from the arsenals of our two countries.
       Our regional nonproliferation efforts are also vital. It is 
     critical that North Korea's nuclear program stays shut down 
     and on the way to the scrap heap. And pariah states like 
     Iraq, Iran and Libya must be stopped in their efforts to 
     acquire weapons of mass destruction. The information that UN 
     inspectors have uncovered on Iraq's biological program is 
     chilling. It is now clear that Saddam Hussein possessed 
     biological weapons and was on the verge of using them against 
     civilians in the Gulf War. These revelations are an urgent 
     reminder that Saddam remains a menace and that sanctions 
     against Iraq must be maintained.
       President Clinton has also put the fight against 
     international criminals, terrorists and drug traffickers at 
     the center of our foreign policy. We are determined to 
     continue our drive to put such international predators out of 
     business. We have taken unprecedented steps against the Cali 
     cartel and many of its leaders are now behind bars. We will 
     continue to deny terrorists and drug kingpins access to their 
     assets; we will put decisive pressure on governments that 
     tolerate such organizations; and we will step up operations 
     attacking crime and drugs at their source.
       Protecting our fragile environment also has profound long-
     range importance for our country, and in 1996 we will strive 
     to fully integrate our environmental goals into our 
     diplomacy--something that has never been done before. We will 
     seek further reductions 

[[Page E53]]
     in greenhouse gases and press for Senate approval of conventions on 
     biodiversity and the Law of the Sea. Working closely with the 
     Vice President, I have also focused on how we can make 
     greater use of environmental initiatives to promote larger 
     strategic and economic goals. That means, for example, 
     encouraging joint water projects in the Middle East, 
     increasing environmental cooperation with our global 
     partners, and helping our environmental industries capture a 
     larger share of a $400 billion global market.
       The third element of our agenda is to build on the economic 
     achievements that will be a lasting legacy of the Clinton 
     Administration. President Clinton's personal leadership on 
     NAFTA, the Urguay Round, APEC and the Summit of the Americas, 
     has made the United States the hub of an increasingly open 
     global trading system. This year, our watchword is 
     implementation--making sure that the trade commitments and 
     agreements we have reached produce concrete opportunities so 
     that American companies and workers can compete abroad on a 
     level playing field. In the Asia-Pacific region through APEC, 
     with the European Union through the Transatlantic 
     Marketplace, and in this Hemisphere through the Miami 
     process, we are removing barriers to trade and investment and 
     opening markets for U.S. exports. We also remain committed to 
     obtaining fast-track authority to negotiate Chile's accession 
     to NAFTA.
       As this presidential election year begins, we are hearing 
     once again from those who preach the dangerous gospel of 
     protection and isolation. America and the world went down 
     that road in 1930s--and our mistake fueled the Great 
     Depression and helped set the stage for the Second World War. 
     Shutting America off from the world would be just as reckless 
     today as it was six decades ago. As President Clinton said at 
     the beginning of his Administration, ``we must compete, not 
     retreat.''
       Ladies and gentlemen, everywhere I go, I find that the 
     nations of the world look to America as a source of 
     principled and reliable leadership. They see American 
     soldiers bridging rivers and moving mountains to help peace 
     take hold in Bosnia. They see us working for peace in the 
     Middle East and for security in Korea. They see us 
     negotiating trade agreements so that every nation can find 
     reward in emerging markets. They see the most powerful nation 
     on earth standing up for persecuted peoples everywhere, 
     because we believe it is right and because those who struggle 
     for freedom represent the future.
       The world sees us as an optimistic people, motivated by a 
     broad view of our interests and driven by a long view of our 
     potential. They follow us because they understand that 
     America's fight for peace and freedom is the world's fight. 
     At the end of the American century, President Clinton is 
     determined that we continue to act in the highest traditions 
     of our nation and our people.
       The President's answer to the voices of isolationism is 
     clear. We can no more isolate our nation from the world than 
     we can isolate our families from our neighborhoods, or our 
     neighborhoods from our cities. As a global power with global 
     interests, retreat is not a responsible option for the United 
     States. We must continue to lead. If we do, the end of this 
     millennium can mark the start of a second American century.

                          ____________________