[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2400-E2402]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

A PARTNERSHIP COMMITTED TO DEMOCRACY

______

HON. FRANK R. WOLF

of virginia

in the house of representatives

Friday, November 21, 2003

Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I would like to commend the President for
highlighting the longstanding friendship between the United States and
the United Kingdom in his recent speech delivered at Whitehall Palace
in London. It is encouraging that this administration is taking a
strong stand against tyranny, but I am further encouraged that we are
not forced to travel this road alone. The history of the United States
and the United Kingdom has been forged on the belief that freedom is
the natural right of all men. It is the role of governments to preserve
this right, not hinder it.
The conflict in Iraq is our joint commitment to promoting democracy
in the 21st century. Our countries will not idly stand by while
dictators, hunger, disease, war and corruption ravage human beings
across the globe. However, the United States and United Kingdom cannot
combat these evils alone. I therefore support the three pillars set
forth by the President in combating tyranny. International
organizations that are equal to the challenges of our world, free
nations willing to meet evil by force, and a commitment to the
international spread of democracy.
I support the President's vision to see peace and stabilization in
the Middle East. I am hopeful that the world will one day see a secure
Israel and an independent Palestinian state. The people of Israel and
Palestine deserve our best efforts in helping them to achieve a future
that restores peace and dignity to a land rich with history and
culture. I share the President's passion spreading democracy and commit
my efforts to help him achieve this end.
Below is the President's speech:

[Remarks by the President at Whitehall Palace, Royal Banqueting House-
Whitehall Palace, London, England]

President Bush Discusses Iraq Policy at Whitehall Palace in London

The President: Thank you very much. Secretary Straw and
Secretary Hoon; Admiral Cobbald and Dr. Chipman;
distinguished guests: I want to thank you for your very kind
welcome that you've given to me and to Laura. I also thank
the groups hosting this event--The Royal United Services
Institute, and the International Institute for Strategic
Studies. We're honored to be in the United Kingdom, and we
bring the good wishes of the American people.
It was pointed out to me that the last noted American to
visit London stayed in a glass box dangling over the Thames.
(Laughter.) A few might have been happy to provide similar
arrangements for me. (Laughter.) I thank Her Majesty the
Queen for interceding. (Laughter.) We're honored to be
staying at her house.
Americans traveling to England always observe more
similarities to our country than differences. I've been here
only a short time, but I've noticed that the tradition of
free speech--exercised with enthusiasm--(laughter)--is alive
and well here in London. We have that at home, too. They now
have that right in Baghdad, as well. (Applause.)
The people of Great Britain also might see some familiar
traits in Americans. We're sometimes faulted for a naive
faith that liberty can change the world. If that's an error
it began with reading too much John Locke and Adam Smith.
Americans have, on occasion, been called moralists who often
speak in terms of right and wrong. That zeal has been
inspired by examples on this island, by the tireless
compassion of Lord Shaftesbury, the righteous courage of
Wilberforce, and the firm determination of the Royal Navy
over the decades to fight and end the trade in slaves.
It's rightly said that Americans are a religious people.
That's, in part, because the ``Good News'' was translated by
Tyndale, preached by Wesley, lived out in the example of
William Booth. At times, Americans are even said to have a
puritan streak--where might that have come from? (Laughter.)
Well, we can start with the Puritans.
To this fine heritage, Americans have added a few traits of
our own: the good influence of our immigrants, the spirit of
the frontier. Yet, there remains a bit of England in every
American. So much of our national character comes from you,
and we're glad for it.
The fellowship of generations is the cause of common
beliefs. We believe in open societies ordered by moral
conviction. We believe in private markets, humanized by
compassionate government. We believe in economies that reward
effort, communities that protect the weak, and the duty of
nations to respect the dignity and the rights of all. And
whether one learns these ideals in County Durham or in West
Texas, they instill mutual respect and they inspire common
purpose.
More than an alliance of security and commerce, the British
and American peoples have an alliance of values.
And, today, this old and tested alliance is very strong.
(Applause.)
The deepest beliefs of our nations set the direction of our
foreign policy. We value our own civil rights, so we stand
for the human rights of others. We affirm the God-given
dignity of every person, so we are moved to action by poverty
and oppression and famine and disease. The United States and
Great Britain share a mission in the world beyond the balance
of power or the simple pursuit of interest. We seek the
advance of freedom and the peace that freedom brings.
Together our nations are standing and sacrificing for this
high goal in a distant land at this very hour. And America
honors the idealism and the bravery of the sons and daughters
of Britain.
The last President to stay at Buckingham Palace was an
idealist, without question. At a dinner hosted by King George
V, in 1918, Woodrow Wilson made a pledge; with typical
American understatement, he vowed that right and justice
would become the predominant and controlling force in the
world.
President Wilson had come to Europe with his 14 Points for
Peace. Many complimented him on his vision; yet some were
dubious. Take, for example, the Prime Minister of France. He
complained that God, himself, had only 10 commandments.
(Laughter.) Sounds familiar. (Laughter.)
At Wilson's high point of idealism, however, Europe was one
short generation from

[[Page E2401]]

Munich and Auschwitz and the Blitz. Looking back, we see the
reasons why. The League of Nations, lacking both credibility
and will, collapsed at the first challenge of the dictators.
Free nations failed to recognize, much less confront, the
aggressive evil in plain sight. And so dictators went about
their business, feeding resentments and anti-Semitism,
bringing death to innocent people in this city and across the
world, and filling the last century with violence and
genocide.
Through world war and cold war, we learned that idealism,
if it is to do any good in this world, requires common
purpose and national strength, moral courage and patience in
difficult tasks. And now our generation has need of these
qualities.
On September the 11th, 2001, terrorists left their mark of
murder on my country, and took the lives of 67 British
citizens. With the passing of months and years, it is the
natural human desire to resume a quiet life and to put that
day behind us, as if waking from a dark dream. The hope that
danger has passed is comforting, is understanding, and it is
false. The attacks that followed--on Bali, Jakarta,
Casablanca, Bombay, Mombassa, Najaf, Jerusalem, Riyadh,
Baghdad, and Istanbul--were not dreams. They're part of the
global campaign by terrorist networks to intimidate and
demoralize all who oppose them.
These terrorists target the innocent, and they kill by the
thousands. And they would, if they gain the weapons they
seek, kill by the millions and not be finished. The greatest
threat of our age is nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons
in the hands of terrorists, and the dictators who aid them.
The evil is in plain sight. The danger only increases with
denial. Great responsibilities fall once again to the great
democracies. We will face these threats with open eyes, and
we will defeat them. (Applause.)
The peace and security of free nations now rests on three
pillars: First, international organizations must be equal to
the challenges facing our world, from lifting up failing
states to opposing proliferation.
Like 11 Presidents before me, I believe in the
international institutions and alliances that America helped
to form and helps to lead. The United States and Great
Britain have labored hard to help make the United Nations
what it is supposed to be--an effective instrument of our
collective security. In recent months, we've sought and
gained three additional resolutions on Iraq--Resolutions
1441, 1483 and 1511--precisely because the global danger of
terror demands a global response. The United Nations has no
more compelling advocate than your Prime Minister, who at
every turn has championed its ideals and appealed to its
authority. He understands, as well, that the credibility of
the U.N. depends on a willingness to keep its word and to act
when action is required.
America and Great Britain have done, and will do, all in
their power to prevent the United Nations from solemnly
choosing its own irrelevance and inviting the fate of the
League of Nations. It's not enough to meet the dangers of the
world with resolutions; we must meet those dangers with
resolve.
In this century, as in the last, nations can accomplish
more together than apart. For 54 years, America has stood
with our partners in NATO, the most effective multilateral
institution in history. We're committed to this great
democratic alliance, and we believe it must have the will and
the capacity to act beyond Europe where threats emerge.
My nation welcomes the growing unity of Europe, and the
world needs America and the European Union to work in common
purpose for the advance of security and justice. America is
cooperating with four other nations to meet the dangers posed
by North Korea. America believes the IAEA must be true to its
purpose and hold Iran to its obligations.
Our first choice, and our constant practice, is to work
with other responsible governments. We understand, as well,
that the success of multilateralism is not measured by
adherence to forms alone, the tidiness of the process, but by
the results we achieve to keep our nations secure.
The second pillar of peace and security in our world is the
willingness of free nations, when the last resort arrives, to
retain* (sic) aggression and evil by force. There are
principled objections to the use of force in every
generation, and I credit the good motives behind these views.
Those in authority, however, are not judged only by good
motivations. The people have given us the duty to defend
them. And that duty sometimes requires the violent restraint
of violent men. In some cases, the measured use of force is
all that protects us from a chaotic world ruled by force.
Most in the peaceful West have no living memory of that
kind of world. Yet in some countries, the memories are
recent: The victims of ethnic cleansing in the Balkans, those
who survived the rapists and the death squads, have few
qualms when NATO applied force to help end those crimes. The
women of Afghanistan, imprisoned in their homes and beaten in
the streets and executed in public spectacles, did not
reproach us for routing the Taliban. The inhabitants of
Iraq's Baathist hell, with its lavish palaces and its torture
chambers, with its massive statues and its mass graves, do
not miss their fugitive dictator. They rejoiced at his fall.
In all these cases, military action was proceeded by
diplomatic initiatives and negotiations and ultimatums, and
final chances until the final moment. In Iraq, year after
year, the dictator was given the chance to account for his
weapons programs, and end the nightmare for his people. Now
the resolutions he defied have been enforced.
And who will say that Iraq was better off when Saddam
Hussein was strutting and killing, or that the world was
safer when he held power? Who doubts that Afghanistan is a
more just society and less dangerous without Mullah Omar
playing host to terrorists from around the world. And Europe,
too, is plainly better off with Milosevic answering for his
crimes, instead of committing more.
It's been said that those who live near a police station
find it hard to believe in the triumph of violence, in the
same way free peoples might be tempted to take for granted
the orderly societies we have come to know. Europe's peaceful
unity is one of the great achievements of the last half-
century. And because European countries now resolve
differences through negotiation and consensus, there's
sometimes an assumption that the entire world functions in
the same way. But let us never forget how Europe's unity was
achieved--by allied armies of liberation and NATO armies of
defense. And let us never forget, beyond Europe's borders, in
a world where oppression and violence are very real,
liberation is still a moral goal, and freedom and security
still need defenders. (Applause.)
The third pillar of security is our commitment to the
global expansion of democracy, and the hope and progress it
brings, as the alternative to instability and to hatred and
terror. We cannot rely exclusively on military power to
assure our long-term security. Lasting peace is gained as
justice and democracy advance.
In democratic and successful societies, men and women do
not swear allegiance to malcontents and murderers; they turn
their hearts and labor to building better lives. And
democratic governments do not shelter terrorist camps or
attack their peaceful neighbors; they honor the aspirations
and dignity of their own people. In our conflict with terror
and tyranny, we have an unmatched advantage, a power that
cannot be resisted, and that is the appeal of freedom to all
mankind.
As global powers, both our nations serve the cause of
freedom in many ways, in many places. By promoting
development, and fighting famine and AIDS and other diseases,
we're fulfilling our moral duties, as well as encouraging
stability and building a firmer basis for democratic
institutions. By working for justice in Burma, in the Sudan
and in Zimbabwe, we give hope to suffering people and improve
the chances for stability and progress. By extending the
reach of trade we foster prosperity and the habits of
liberty. And by advancing freedom in the greater Middle
East, we help end a cycle of dictatorship and radicalism
that brings millions of people to misery and brings danger
to our own people.
The stakes in that region could not be higher. If the
Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish,
it will remain a place of stagnation and anger and violence
for export. And as we saw in the ruins of two towers, no
distance on the map will protect our lives and way of life.
If the greater Middle East joins the democratic revolution
that has reached much of the world, the lives of millions in
that region will be bettered, and a trend of conflict and
fear will be ended at its source.
The movement of history will not come about quickly.
Because of our own democratic development--the fact that it
was gradual and, at times, turbulent--we must be patient with
others. And the Middle East countries have some distance to
travel.
Arab scholars speak of a freedom deficit that has separated
whole nations from the progress of our time. The essentials
of social and material progress--limited government, equal
justice under law, religious and economic liberty, political
participation, free press, and respect for the rights of
women--have been scarce across the region. Yet that has begun
to change. In an arc of reform from Morocco to Jordan to
Qatar, we are seeing elections and new protections for women
and the stirring of political pluralism. Many governments are
realizing that theocracy and dictatorship do not lead to
national greatness; they end in national ruin. They are
finding, as others will find, that national progress and
dignity are achieved when governments are just and people are
free.
The democratic progress we've seen in the Middle East was
not imposed from abroad, and neither will the greater
progress we hope to see. Freedom, by definition, must be
chosen, and defended by those who choose it. Our part, as
free nations, is to ally ourselves with reform, wherever it
occurs.
Perhaps-the most helpful change we can make is to change in
our own thinking. In the West, there's been a certain
skepticism about the capacity or even the desire of Middle
Eastern peoples for self-government. We're told that Islam is
somehow inconsistent with a democratic culture. Yet more than
half of the world's Muslims are today contributing citizens
in democratic societies. It is suggested that the poor, in
their daily struggles, care little for self-government. Yet
the poor, especially, need the power of democracy to defend
themselves against corrupt elites.
Peoples of the Middle East share a high civilization, a
religion of personal responsibility, and a need for freedom
as deep as our own. It is not realism to suppose that one-
fifth of humanity is unsuited to liberty; it is pessimism and
condescension, and we should have none of it. (Applause.)
We must shake off decades of failed policy in the Middle
East. Your nation and mine, in

[[Page E2402]]

the past, have been willing to make a bargain, to tolerate
oppression for the sake of stability. Longstanding ties often
led us to overlook the faults of local elites. Yet this
bargain did not bring stability or make us safe. It merely
bought time, while problems festered and ideologies of
violence took hold.
As recent history has shown, we cannot turn a blind eye to
oppression just because the oppression is not in our own
backyard. No longer should we think tyranny is benign because
it is temporarily convenient. Tyranny is never benign to its
victims, and our great democracies should oppose tyranny
wherever it is found. (Applause.)
Now we're pursuing a different course, a forward strategy
of freedom in the Middle East. We will consistently challenge
the enemies of reform and confront the allies of terror. We
will expect a higher standard from our friends in the region,
and we will meet our responsibilities in Afghanistan and in
Iraq by finishing the work of democracy we have begun.
There were good-faith disagreements in your country and
mine over the course and timing of military action in Iraq.
Whatever has come before, we now have only two options: to
keep our word, or to break our word. The failure of democracy
in Iraq would throw its people back into misery and turn that
country over to terrorists who wish to destroy us. Yet
democracy will succeed in Iraq, because our will is firm, our
word is good, and the Iraqi people will not surrender their
freedom. (Applause.)
Since the liberation of Iraq, we have seen changes that
could hardly have been imagined a year ago. A new
Iraqi police force protects the people, instead of
bullying them. More than 150 Iraqi newspapers are now in
circulation, printing what they choose, not what they're
ordered. Schools are open with textbooks free of
propaganda. Hospitals are functioning and are well-
supplied. Iraq has a new currency, the first battalion of
a new army, representative local governments, and a
Governing Council with an aggressive timetable for
national sovereignty. This is substantial progress. And
much of it has proceeded faster than similar efforts in
Germany and Japan after World War II.
Yet the violence we are seeing in Iraq today is serious.
And it comes from Baathist holdouts and Jihadists from other
countries, and terrorists drawn to the prospect of innocent
bloodshed. It is the nature of terrorism and the cruelty of a
few to try to bring grief in the loss to many. The armed
forces of both our countries have taken losses, felt deeply
by our citizens. Some families now live with a burden of
great sorrow. We cannot take the pain away. But these
families can know they are not alone. We pray for their
strength; we pray for their comfort; and we will never forget
the courage of the ones they loved.
The terrorists have a purpose, a strategy to their cruelty.
They view the rise of democracy in Iraq as a powerful threat
to their ambitions. In this, they are correct. They believe
their acts of terror against our coalition, against
international aid workers and against innocent Iraqis, will
make us recoil and retreat. In this, they are mistaken.
(Applause.)
We did not charge hundreds of miles into the heart of Iraq
and pay a bitter cost of casualties, and liberate 25 million
people, only to retreat before a band of thugs and assassins.
(Applause.) We will help the Iraqi people establish a
peaceful and democratic country in the heart of the Middle
East. And by doing so, we will defend our people from danger.
The forward strategy of freedom must also apply to the
Arab-Israeli conflict. It's a difficult period in a part of
the world that has known many. Yet, our commitment remains
firm. We seek justice and dignity. We seek a viable,
independent state for the Palestinian people, who have been
betrayed by others for too long. (Applause.) We seek security
and recognition for the state of Israel, which has lived in
the shadow of random death for too long. (Applause.) These
are worthy goals in themselves, and by reaching them we will
also remove an occasion and excuse for hatred and violence in
the broader Middle East.
Achieving peace in the Holy Land is not just a matter of
the shape of a border. As we work on the details of peace, we
must look to the heart of the matter, which is the need for a
viable Palestinian democracy. Peace will not be achieved by
Palestinian rulers who intimidate opposition, who tolerate
and profit from corruption and maintain their ties to
terrorist groups. These are the methods of the old elites,
who time and again had put their own self-interest above the
interest of the people they claim to serve. The long-
suffering Palestinian people deserve better. They deserve
true leaders, capable of creating and governing a Palestinian
state.
Even after the setbacks and frustrations of recent months,
goodwill and hard effort can bring about a Palestinian state
and a secure Israel. Those who would lead a new Palestine
should adopt peaceful means to achieve the rights of their
people and create the reformed institutions of a stable
democracy.
Israel should freeze settlement construction, dismantle
unauthorized outposts, end the daily humiliation of the
Palestinian people, and not prejudice final negotiations with
the placements of walls and fences.
Arab states should end incitement in their own media, cut
off public and private funding for terrorism, and establish
normal relations with Israel.
Leaders in Europe should withdraw all favor and support
from any Palestinian ruler who fails his people and betrays
their cause. And Europe's leaders--and all leaders--should
strongly oppose anti-Semitism, which poisons public debates
over the future of the Middle East. (Applause.)
Ladies and gentlemen, we have great objectives before us
that make our Atlantic alliance as vital as it has ever been.
We will encourage the strength and effectiveness of
international institutions. We will use force when necessary
in the defense of freedom. And we will raise up an ideal of
democracy in every part of the world. On these three pillars
we will build the peace and security of all free nations in a
time of danger.
So much good has come from our alliance of conviction and
might. So much now depends on the strength of this alliance
as we go forward. America has always found strong partners
in London, leaders of good judgment and blunt counsel and
backbone when times are tough. And I have found all those
qualities in your current Prime Minister, who has my
respect and my deepest thanks. (Applause.)
The ties between our nations, however, are deeper than the
relationship between leaders. These ties endure because they
are formed by the experience and responsibilities and
adversity we have shared. And in the memory of our peoples,
there will always be one experience, one central event when
the seal was fixed on the friendship between Britain and the
United States: The arrival in Great Britain of more than 1.5
million American soldiers and airmen in the 1940s was a
turning point in the Second World War. For many Britons, it
was a first close look at Americans, other than in the
movies. Some of you here today may still remember the
``friendly invasion.'' Our lads, they took some getting used
to. There was even a saying about what many of them were up
to--in addition to be ``overpaid and over here.'' (Laughter.)
At a reunion in North London some years ago, an American
pilot who had settled in England after his military service,
said, ``Well, I'm still over here, and probably overpaid. So
two out of three isn't bad.'' (Laughter.)
In that time of war, the English people did get used to the
Americans. They welcomed soldiers and fliers into their
villages and homes, and took to calling them, ``our boys.''
About 70,000 of those boys did their part to affirm our
special relationship. They returned home with English brides.
Americans gained a certain image of Britain, as well. We
saw an island threatened on every side, a leader who did not
waver, and a country of the firmest character. And that has
not changed. The British people are the sort of partners you
want when serious work needs doing. The men and women of this
Kingdom are kind and steadfast and generous and brave. And
America is fortunate to call this country our closest friend
in the world.
May God bless you all. (Applause.)

____________________