[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 36, Number 20 (Monday, May 22, 2000)]
[Pages 1127-1133]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Commencement Address at the United States Coast Guard Academy in New 
London, Connecticut

May 17, 2000

    Thank you very much. Secretary Slater, Admiral Loy, Rear Admiral 
Teeson, Captain Dillon, Senator Dodd, distinguished members of the 
diplomatic corps, Dr. Haas, members of the faculty and staff, and 
honored guests--the friends, family, and members of the class of 2000.
    I want to begin by complimenting Cadet Christopher Burrus on what I 
thought was a remarkable speech showing the devotion to the Coast Guard 
and the country that every American can be proud of.
    I would also like to thank the family members who are here for 
standing behind these cadets for 4 years and for making it possible for 
them to be here.
    This is a highly appropriate place for me to give what is, for me, a 
very nostalgic address. It is the last speech I will ever give as 
President to a graduating class of one of our military service 
academies.
    This class came to Washington and marched in my second Inaugural 
Parade. I pledged to use this term to build a bridge to the 21st 
century. And in so many ways, the first class of the 21st century 
represents that bridge.
    I have been personally, deeply indebted to the Coast Guard because 
of the military aides I have had every year I've been President who are 
Coast Guard officer. The last one, Pat DeQuattro, class of '88, is here 
with me today. They have all been outstanding people, and it made me 
think more and more of the Coast Guard.
    You can be proud of the road you have traveled from Swab Summer to 
today. You've survived academic rigors, countless games of football and 
volleyball against officers, even golf balls and dog food in the 
wardroom. For those of you who, like me, are somewhat less literate in 
these matters, that is cadet-speak for hard-boiled eggs and corned beef 
hash. [Laughter]
    You have, as we have heard, done extraordinary volunteer work. You 
placed first among universities at one of America's most prestigious 
national science competitions. You engineered Solar Splash, the top-
ranked solar-powered boat in the Nation this year. Four of your 
classmates were all-American athletes, and one of your classmates even 
found fame and fortune on ``The Price is Right.'' [Laughter]
    I can't help noting that you were also the first class in history to 
have an adviser who had a recurring role on ``Baywatch.'' [Laughter] 
Now, Eric Kowack chose to give up that difficult duty, come back, and 
teach classes on personal finance for those of you who don't become TV 
stars. [Laughter]
    I have been told that your spirit as a class is so strong that this 
class received more letters from opposing class presidents complaining 
about heckling at soccer games than any other class in the history of 
this academy. [Laughter] It's really nice to know you feel bad about it. 
[Laughter] I don't know if any of you got in trouble for that, but 
pursuant

[[Page 1128]]

to long-standing tradition, I hereby grant amnesty to all candidates 
marching tours or serving restrictions for such minor offenses.
    As the first Coast Guard class of the 21st century, you will face a 
new set of challenges to America's security, values, and interests, 
though your mission will be consistent with the long and storied history 
of America's defenders. The waters off this shore have seen a lot of 
that history.
    In the West Wing of the White House, just a few feet from the Oval 
Office, there's a painting of the first naval battle of the War of 1812 
that happened off the coast of New London. That day a British frigate 
called the Belvidera  was chased by five American warships. You might be 
interested to know that three of those ships were named the President, 
the United States, and the Congress. History tells us the President was 
the fastest ship. [Laughter] But unfortunately, the  Belvidera got away 
anyway, because at a crucial moment the President  suffered significant 
damage. We're not sure exactly what caused it, but I am curious to know 
where  Congress  was at the time. [Laughter]
    I ask you to compare that picture with the picture to be painted in 
these same waters this summer, when the  Eagle  leads ships from more 
than 60 nations, including our adversary in 1812, Great Britain, into 
New London Harbor, the biggest, broadest gathering of its kind in 
history, a strong symbol of the global age in which you will serve.
    It is a wonderful sign of these times that two of the cadets who 
graduate in this class today come from Russia and Bulgaria, nations that 
were our adversaries when they were in elementary school, and neither 
they nor we think twice about it. We know it's a good thing.
    Globalization is tearing down barriers and building new networks 
among nations and people. The process is accelerated by the fact that 
more than half the world's people live in democracies for the first time 
in history, and by the explosive advance in information technology that 
is changing the way we all do business, including the Coast Guard.
    Just for example, a mere decade ago a cadet assigned to a buoy 
tender had to go through an elaborate process to place the buoys. Three 
people would stand back-to-back, tracking horizontal sextant angles, and 
then comparing those readings to hand-drawn navigational grids--with a 
lot of yelling back and forth. Today, all that work is done instantly by 
satellites and computers through the Global Positioning System.
    The very openness of our borders and technology, however, also makes 
us vulnerable in new ways. The same technology that gave us GPS and the 
marvelous possibilities of the Internet also apparently empowered a 
student sitting in the Philippines to launch a computer virus that in 
just a few hours spread through more than 10 million computers and 
caused billions of dollars in damage.
    The central reality of our time is that the advent of globalization 
and the revolution in information technology have magnified both the 
creative and the destructive potential of every individual, tribe, and 
nation on our planet.
    Now, most of us have a vision of the 21st century. It sees the 
triumph of peace, prosperity, and personal freedom through the power of 
the Internet, the spread of the democracy, the potential of science as 
embodied in the human genome project and the probing of the deepest 
mysteries of nature, from the dark holes of the universe to the dark 
floors of the ocean.
    But we must understand the other side of the coin, as well. The same 
technological advances are making the tools of destruction deadlier, 
cheaper, and more available. Making us more vulnerable to problems that 
arise half a world away, to terror, to ethnic, racial, and religious 
conflicts, to weapons of mass destruction, drug trafficking, and other 
organized crime.
    Today, and for the foreseeable tomorrows, we, and especially you, 
will face a fateful struggle between the forces of integration and 
harmony and the forces of disintegration and chaos. The phenomenal 
explosion of technology can be a servant of either side or, ironically, 
both. Of course, our traditional security concerns have by no means 
vanished. Still we must manage our relationships with great and 
potentially great powers in ways that protect and advance our interests. 
We must continue to maintain strong alliances, to have the best trained, 
best

[[Page 1129]]

equipped military in the world, to be vigilant that regional conflicts 
do not threaten us.
    In this scenario, one of the biggest question marks of the 21st 
century is the path China will take. Will China emerge as a partner or 
an adversary? Will it be a society that is opening to the world and 
liberating to its people or controlling of its people and lashing out at 
the world?
    Next week the Congress and the United States will have a once-in-a-
lifetime opportunity to influence that question in the right way. There 
are brave people in China today working for human rights and political 
freedom. There are brave people within the Government of China today 
willing to risk opening the Chinese economy knowing that it will unleash 
forces of change they cannot control.
    For example, in a country of 1.3 billion people, 2 years ago there 
were just 2 million Internet users. Last year there were 9 million. This 
year there will be over 20 million. When over 100 million people in 
China can get on the net, it will be impossible to maintain a closed 
political and economic society.
    If Congress votes to normalize trade relations with China, it will 
not guarantee that China will take the right course. But it will 
certainly increase the likelihood that it will. If Congress votes no, it 
will strengthen the hand, ironically, of the very people the opponents 
of this agreement claim to fight. It will strengthen the hands of the 
reactionary elements in the military and the state-owned industries who 
want America for an opponent, to justify their continued control and 
adherence to the old ways and repression of personal freedom.
    I believe that a no vote invites a future of dangerous 
confrontations and constant insecurity. It also, by the way, forfeits 
the largest market in the world for our goods and services and gives 
Europe and Japan all those benefits we negotiated to bring American jobs 
here at home.
    Granting China permanent normal trading relations, it's clearly in 
our economic interests. But from your point of view, even more 
important, it is a national security issue for stability in Asia, peace 
in the Taiwan Straits, possible cooperation with China to advance 
freedom and human rights within the country and to retard the 
proliferation of dangerous weapons technology beyond it. It is 
profoundly important to America's continued leadership in the world. 
That's why all former Presidents, without regard to party, as well as 
former Secretaries of State, Defense, Transportation, Trade, National 
Security Advisers, Chairs of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, support this 
legislation.
    It illustrates a larger issue I want you to think about today, which 
is the importance of a balanced security strategy with military, 
diplomatic, and economic elements. I have worked hard to adapt our 
security strategy to the 21st century world, with all its possibilities 
and threats. Last year, as part of that effort, I asked the task force 
to conduct a fresh look at the roles and missions of the Coast Guard. 
What are you going to do in this new world anyway? The task force found 
that a flexible, highly motivated Coast Guard continues to be vital to 
our security.
    We often see, personally, our reliance on the Coast Guard during 
floods in North Carolina, after Hurricane Floyd, after the tragedies of 
EgyptAir and Air Alaska. Today, in the average week, you and your fellow 
coasties will seize more than $60 million worth of dangerous drugs, 
board 630 vessels for safety checks, intercept hundreds of illegal 
immigrants, investigate 119 marine accidents, respond to more than 260 
hazardous chemical spills, assist more than 2,500 people in distress, 
and save 100 lives. And the more we travel and the more we are connected 
together, the more those responsibilities and opportunities for service 
will rise.
    So your class will play an even larger role in defending and 
advancing America's security. It is very important to me, as the 
Commander in Chief, that each and every one of you understand the 
threats we face and what we should do to meet them.
    First, international terrorism is not new, but it is becoming 
increasingly sophisticated. Terrorist networks communicate on the World 
Wide Web, too. Available weapons are becoming more destructive and more 
miniaturized, just as the size of cell phones and computers is 
shrinking--shrinking to the point where a lot of you with large hands 
like mine wonder if you'll be able to work

[[Page 1130]]

the things before long. You should understand that the same process of 
miniaturization will find its way into the development of biological and 
chemical and maybe even nuclear weapons. And it is something we have to 
be ready for.
    As borders fade and old regimes struggle through transitions, the 
chance for free agents looking to make a profit on weapons of 
destruction and personal chaos is greater. In this sort of environment, 
cooperation is profoundly important--more vital than ever. We learned 
that in the days leading up to the millennium.
    We are joined today by the Ambassador from Jordan to the United 
States, Dr. Marwan Muasher. He's sitting here behind me. He's an 
excellent representative of his country. And I want to tell you a story 
that, unfortunately, will not be the last example you will have to face.
    Last December, working with Jordan, we shut down a plot to place 
large bombs at locations where Americans might gather on New Year's Eve. 
We learned this plot was linked to terrorist camps in Afghanistan and 
the organization created by Usama bin Ladin, the man responsible for the 
1998 bombings of our embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which cost the 
lives of Americans and hundreds of Africans.
    A short time later, a customs agent in Seattle discovered bomb 
materials being smuggled in to the U.S., the same materials used by bin 
Ladin in other places. Thankfully, and thanks to Jordan, New Year's 
passed without an attack. But the threat was real, and we had to 
cooperate with them, with the Canadians, with others throughout the 
world.
    So the first point I wish to make is, in a globalized world, we must 
have more security cooperation, not less. In responding to terrorist 
threats, our own strategy should be identical to your motto:  Semper 
paratus--always ready.
    Today I'm adding over $300 million to fund critical programs to 
protect our citizens from terrorist threats, to expand our intelligence 
efforts, to improve our ability to use forensic evidence, to track 
terrorists, to enhance our coordination with State and local officials, 
as we did over New Year's, to protect our Nation against possible 
attacks. I have requested now some $9 billion for counterterrorism 
funding in the 2001 budget. That's 40 percent more than 3 years ago, and 
this $300 million will go on top of that. It sounds like a lot of money. 
When you see the evidence of what we're up against, I think you will 
support it, and I hope you will.
    We also have to do all we can to protect existing nuclear weapons 
from finding new owners. To keep nuclear weapons and nuclear materials 
secure at the source, we've helped Russia to deactivate about 5,000 
warheads, to strengthen border controls and keep weapons expertise from 
spreading. But Russia's economic difficulties have made this an even 
greater challenge.
    Just for example, I know you know that when you decided to become a 
Coast Guard officer, you made a decision that you would not be wealthy. 
But let me give you some basis of comparison. The average salary today 
of a highly trained weapons scientist in Russia is less than $100 a 
month. Needless to say, there are a lot of people who'd like to develop 
nuclear weapons capability who are out there trying to hire those folks.
    The programs that we fund in joint endeavors to secure the Russian 
nuclear force and the materials and to do other kinds of joint research 
help to give such scientists a decent living to support their families. 
And I think we have to do even more to help them turn their expertise to 
peaceful projects. We shouldn't just depend upon their character to 
resist the temptation to earn a living wage with all of their knowledge 
and education. And we have asked Congress for extra funding here to help 
Russia keep its arsenal of nuclear weapons secure.
    Still, we have to face the possibility that a hostile nation, sooner 
or later, may well acquire weapons of mass destruction and the missiles 
necessary to deliver them to our shores. That's what this whole debate 
over whether we should have a limited national missile defense is all 
about. Later this year, I will decide whether we should begin to deploy 
it next spring, based on four factors that I will have to take into 
account.
    First, has this technology really proved it will work? Second, what 
does it cost, and how do we balance that cost against our other defense 
priorities? Third, how far advanced is

[[Page 1131]]

the threat; how likely is it that another nation could deliver long-
range ballistic missiles to our shore within 3 years, 5 years, 10 
years--what is the time frame? And finally, what impact will it have on 
our overall security, including our arms control efforts in other areas, 
our relationships with our allies in other countries around the world?
    I also want you to know, as I said earlier, we've got to be ready 
for the prospect of biological and chemical warfare. We saw that in the 
sarin gas attack in Japan 4 years ago. We've established a national 
defense preparedness office to train first responders, using new 
technology to improve our ability to detect these agents quickly. And 
we're doing all we can to see that poison gas and biological weapons 
are, in fact, eliminated from the face of the Earth.
    We have to do the same when it comes to problems in cyber security. 
Today, critical systems like power structures, nuclear plants, air 
traffic control, computer networks, they're all connected and run by 
computers. Two years ago we had an amazing experience in America and 
around the world. We saw that a single failed electronics link with one 
satellite malfunction disable pagers, ATM's, credit card systems, and TV 
and radio networks all over the world. That was an accident. The ``love 
bug'' was not an accident.
    So to protect America from cybercrime and cyberterrorism, we have 
developed a national plan for cybersecurity, with both public and 
private sector brains putting it together. We're asking for increased 
funding to implement this plan to protect our vital networks. That's 
something else I hope you will support.
    We talk about computer viruses and often forget the world is also 
threatened by physical infection like malaria, TB, and AIDS. Some people 
questioned me when our administration announced a couple of weeks ago 
that we considered the AIDS crisis a national security threat. But let 
me just give you a couple of examples.
    In Africa alone, there are 70 percent of the world's AIDS cases. The 
fastest growing rate of AIDS is in India, which happens to be a nuclear 
power. In Africa, some countries are actually hiring two employees for 
every job, on the assumption that one of them is going to die from AIDS. 
In other African countries, 30 percent of the teachers and 40 percent of 
the soldiers have the virus. In addition, millions of people suffer from 
malaria, and about a third of the world has been exposed to TB, a 
disease that can reach our shores at the speed of jet travel.
    With malaria, people now discuss in common parlance, airport 
malaria, something people can get at any international airport in any 
country in the world because we're all traveling around and bumping into 
people from other countries. These diseases can ruin economies and 
threaten the very survival of nations and societies. I think meeting 
this public health challenge is a moral imperative and a national 
security concern.
    I issued an Executive order last week to help make AIDS drugs more 
affordable to people in poor countries. I propose that we give a 
generous tax credit to our private pharmaceutical companies to give them 
an incentive to develop vaccines for things like AIDS, malaria, and TB, 
because the people who need it most can't afford to pay for it. If we 
help them pay for it, we can save millions of lives and strengthen our 
security. If we don't, we will dramatically increase the chances of 
chaos, murder, the abuse of children, the kind of things we have seen in 
some of the terrible tribal wars in Africa in the last couple of years.
    Finally, there's one more global challenge I want you to think about 
that I think is a security challenge, the challenge of climate change. 
Nine of the 10 warmest years since the 15th century were recorded in the 
1990's--9 of the 10 warmest years since the 15th century. Unless we 
change course and reverse global greenhouse gas emissions, most 
scientists are convinced that storms and droughts will intensify as the 
globe continues to warm. Crop patterns will be disrupted. Food supplies 
will be affected. The seas will rise so high they will swallow islands 
and coastal areas, and if that happens, all the Luders training in the 
world won't save us. [Laughter]
    I want you to laugh, but I want you to listen. This is a huge 
challenge that can become a national security challenge. If we value our 
coastlands and farmlands, we must work at home. If we value the 
stability of

[[Page 1132]]

our neighbors and friends and the rights of people around the world, 
particularly in island nations, to live their lives in peace according 
to their cultures and religious faiths, we must work with other nations. 
This is a global challenge.
    And the good news is, we don't need to put more greenhouse gases in 
the atmosphere anymore to grow the economy. All we need is the vision 
and will and discipline to do the job.
    Finally, we have to deal with the global challenge of 
narcotrafficking and drugs. We have to do a lot here at home, zero 
tolerance for drug use, treatment for those who suffer, punishment for 
those who profit. But we also have to fight these big drug cartels and 
the criminal empires they finance. Ninety percent of the cocaine 
consumed in America, two-thirds of the heroin seized on our streets 
comes from or through just one country, Colombia.
    Now, Colombia has a courageous new President, Andres Pastrana, who 
has asked for our help to finance his comprehensive Plan Colombia to 
fight drugs, build the economy, and deepen democracy. I've asked 
Congress to give $1.6 billion to pay our share of Plan Colombia over the 
next 2 years. The House just passed a bill. I hope the Senate will do so 
as soon as possible. It is a national security issue.
    For Colombia, Latin America's oldest democracy, is not just fighting 
for its peoples' lives and its way of life; it's fighting to preserve 
stability in the entire Andean region, and it's fighting for the lives 
of our kids, too. So again, it's not in the Department of Defense budget 
in a direct way, or in the Department of Transportation budget in a 
direct way, but it directly affects our national security, and I hope 
you will support it.
    In all these challenges, the Coast Guard will play a vital role. You 
always have. In the 18th century the predecessor to today's Coast Guard 
manned antislavery patrols and coordinated tariff collection for a young 
nation. In the 19th century you assumed responsibility for search and 
rescue, marine inspection, and quarantine laws. In the last century, the 
20th century, you arrested rumrunners during Prohibition, enforced 
environmental laws, interdicted drugs, and even delivered marines to the 
beaches at Normandy.
    We're trying to make sure you can do your job in the 21st century. 
My 2001 budget requests another $376 million for the Coast Guard, the 
largest one-year increase in 20 years, including a 34 percent increase 
to buy ships. I will also recommend to the next President that America 
continue to support the Coast Guard's Deep Water Project, so you have 
the ships and planes you need to meet challenges that face us. We can't 
meet threats to the future with a Coast Guard fleet from the past.
    Let me say just this last point. We cannot accept the fact that the 
burden of protecting America's security falls solely on the shoulders of 
those who stand watch on our borders and coastlines, on the high seas or 
our allies' home ground, that it involves only immediate threats to our 
security.
    Ever since the end of the cold war, some people have been saying, 
``We don't need to play such an active role in the world anymore or 
worry about distant conflicts or play our part in international 
institutions like the United Nations.'' I want to ask you what you think 
the alternative is: a survivalist foreign policy, build a fence around 
America and retreat behind it; a go-it-alone foreign policy, where we do 
it our way, and if people disagree with us, we just don't do it at all? 
I profoundly disagree with both.
    Remember the story I told you about the millennium and the help we 
got from Jordan and the work we did with Canada. It wouldn't have 
mattered what we had done. If they hadn't helped us, we'd have had bombs 
going off here as we celebrated the millennium. We have got to be more 
involved in a cooperative way with other nations to advance our national 
security.
    America has been called a shining city on a hill. That doesn't mean 
our oceans are moats. It doesn't mean our country is a fortress. If we 
wait to act until problems come home to America, problems are far more 
likely to come home to America. I hope when you leave here today as new 
officers, you will be convinced that more than any previous time in 
history, your Nation must be engaged in the world, paying our fair 
share, doing our fair share, working with others to secure

[[Page 1133]]

peace and prosperity where we can, leading where we must, and standing 
up for what we believe.
    That's why I support the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. I 
hope the Congress will ratify it next year. That's why I've worked to 
relieve the debts of the poorest nations of the world and to help them 
build their economies and their educational systems; why we have worked 
to expand trade with Africa and the poor Caribbean nations, to deepen 
our economic ties to Latin American and Asia; why we work for peace in 
the Middle East and Northern Ireland, for democracy in Haiti, and an end 
to ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo; for reconciliation between 
North and South Korea, India and Pakistan, Greece, Turkey, and Cyprus. 
They may be along way from home but, more and more, as the years go by, 
you will see that in an age of globalism, our values and interests are 
at stake in these places, as well.
    Almost 40 years ago, President Kennedy stood on the deck of the  
Eagle,  and that day he said this: ``There is not a single person who 
has sailed any of our lakes or oceans who has not at one time or another 
been the beneficiary of the faithful service of the Coast Guard.''
    Today, that great tradition falls to you in the greatest age of 
possibility in human history. You are the generation chosen by 
providence to lead the Coast Guard into the new century. Your class 
motto says,  Ducentes viam en millennium--leading the way into the new 
millennium. Now you have the preparation to do it. You clearly have the 
courage and character to do it. I pray you will also have the vision and 
wisdom to take your motto and truly make it your own.
    Good luck. Thank you for your service, and God bless you.

 Note:  The President spoke at 11:40 a.m. at Cadet Memorial Field. In 
his remarks, he referred to Adm. James M. Loy, USCG, Commandant of the 
Coast Guard; Rear Adm. Douglas Teeson, USCG, Superintendent, and Capt. 
Thomas J. Haas, USCG (Ret.), Dean of Academics and Supervisory 
Professor, U.S. Coast Guard Academy; Capt. William P. Dillon, Chaplain 
Corps, USN, who delivered the invocation; Cadet First Class Christopher 
Burrus, who delivered the valedictorian address; and Onel de Guzman, who 
allegedly unleashed the ``love bug'' computer virus.