america's leadership, america's opportunity

Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC

America's Leadership, America's OpportunityAuthor(s): Warren ChristopherSource: Foreign Policy, No. 98 (Spring, 1995), pp. 6-27Published by: Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLCStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1148954 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 11:28

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive, LLC is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Foreign Policy.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 185.44.78.31 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 11:28:25 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=wpni

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1148954?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


America's Leadership,

America's Opporunity by Warren Christopher

s we stand at the threshold of a new century, America faces a challenge that recalls the opportunities and dangers that we confronted at the end of the First and the Second World Wars. Then, as now, two paths lay before us: to claim victory and withdraw, or with U.S. leader-

ship to build a more peaceful, free, and prosperous world for Amer- ica and people everywhere. After World War I, our leaders chose the first path and we paid a terrible price. No one will dispute that Harry Truman, George Marshall, and Arthur Vandenberg-and the Amer- ican people--wisely chose the second.

That same farsighted commitment to U.S. leadership and engagement must guide our foreign policy today. The United States has a remarkable opportunity to help shape a world conducive to Amer- ican interests and consistent with American values: a more secure and prosperous world of open markets and open societies that will improve the lives of our people for generations to come. This is an American foreign policy that should command bipartisan support.

The Soviet empire is gone, and with it our primary security im- perative of the past half century-to contain communist expansion while preventing a nuclear holocaust. Today, no great power views any other as an immediate military threat. And the triumph of democracy and free markets is transforming countries from Europe to Latin America, and from Asia to Africa.

But we cannot and must not take these hopeful developments for

WARREN CHRISTOPHER is the U.S. secretary of state.

6



Christopher

granted, or assume that if left untended, they will continue. Many of the emergent democracies are facing a difficult and uncharted course. Rogue states such as Iraq, Iran, and Libya still threaten their neighbors, important U.S. allies, and vital American interests. Conflicts within borders rage on, causing widespread suffering and often undermining regional stability. The totalitarian ideology that motivated our Cold War foes is dead, but today, as President Clinton has said, "we face a contest as old as history-a struggle between freedom and tyranny . . between those who would build free societies governed by laws and those who would impose their will by force."

In this new era, we face heightened threats that spill across borders. The breakup of the Soviet Union brought risks that nuclear material could fall into the wrong hands, just as advances in technology and the diffusion of expertise could place weapons of mass destruction within reach of an increasing number of states. Drug trafficking and international crime bring violence to our streets and wreak havoc in struggling democracies from Russia to Peru. The bombings in New York and Buenos Aires have brought home with horrific brutality that terrorism can strike innocent people any- where. And once seemingly remote problems like environmental degradation, unsustainable population growth, and the mass movement of refugees today can threaten emerging democracies, undermine prosperity, exacerbate regional conflicts, and ultimately harm American interests.

As a global power with global interests, it is the United States that stands to lose the most if we retreat. The post-Cold War momentum toward greater freedom, openness, and tolerance must not be re- versed through shortsighted neglect or indifference. Only the United States has the capacity and the vision to consolidate these gains-as long as we remain engaged, and lead.

Foreign policy can often seem arcane. But there is a bottom line: Is our nation more secure, and are America's economic opportunities greater, than two years ago? The answer is yes.

We have put in place the building blocks of a more prosperous, more secure, more democratic world that will serve our national interests well into the twenty-first century. We have stopped Iraqi aggression and halted North Korea's nuclear program. Russian troops have left the Baltic states and Germany. We helped persuade Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus to get rid of the nuclear weapons

7



FOREIGN POLICY

on their territory. We have begun to reshape Europe's security archi- tecture. And we have brought the Middle East closer to a comprehensive peace. We have set up the framework for the most open global trading system in history-through the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the new World Trade Organization (WTO), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum (APEC), and the Summit of the Americas plan for hemispheric free trade. And we have helped secure democracy from Central Europe to Asia, and from southern Africa to Haiti and the Americas.

STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES

ur strategy for forging a world in which America can thrive is guided by four main principles. First, America must lead. Sec- ond, we must seek to maintain productive political and eco-

nomic relations with the world's most powerful states. Third, we must adapt and build lasting institutions to enhance cooperation. Fourth, we must support democracy and human rights to advance our interests and our ideals.

American Leadership

American leadership is our first principle and a central lesson of this century. The simple fact is that if we do not lead, no one else will. What would the world be like without American leadership just in the last two years? We might have four nuclear states with the breakup of the Soviet Union, instead of one; a North Korea building nuclear bombs; a rising protectionist tide rather than rising trade flows under the Uruguay Round and NAFTA; brutal dictators still ter- rorizing Haiti and forcing its people to flee; and Iraqi troops very likely back in Kuwait, threatening the world's oil supplies.

American leadership requires that we back persistent diplomacy with the credible threat of force and that we act alone when necessary to defend our interests. We are not the world's policeman, but our engagement and our power can often be decisive. And when we determine to send American troops abroad, we will send them with a clear mission and the means to prevail.

Today, our military is the best-equipped, best-trained, and best-

8



Christopher

prepared fighting force in the world, and President Clinton will keep it that way. In December, the president called on Congress to provide the funding needed to cover the costs of last year's unanticipated deployments. And he announced a five-part initiative to enhance readiness, bolster training, operations, and maintenance, improve the quality of life for our troops, and increase pay.

American leadership also requires that we galvanize the support of allies, friends, and international institutions in achieving common objectives-as we did with Iraq, Haiti, and North Korea. Lately it has become fashionable to argue that we should simply go it alone. That view is naive: It limits our flexibility, weakens our influence, and harms our interests. That would be tantamount to unilateral disar- mament against some of the world's most pressing threats. Many of our most important objectives cannot be achieved without the cooperation of others. We did not win the Cold War by facing down the Soviet Union alone. We will not win the global fight against proliferation, terrorism, crime, or threats to the environment without cooperation from friends and allies. At this time of great opportunity, we cannot build a more secure and prosperous world by ourselves.

The debate between proponents of unilateral and multilateral action assumes a false choice. By leading-whether through an alliance like NATO, a coalition of nations, or the United Nations-we can augment our power and leverage our resources. We can solve problems that affect us all-such as the spread of weapons of mass destruction, humanitarian crises, and environmental catastrophes. And we can take actions, such as economic sanctions against Iraq, that would be ineffective if we acted alone. Working with others gives us an option in humanitarian and political crises when the only other alternatives-acting alone or doing nothing-are often unaccept- able. It permits us to influence events without assuming all the risks and costs and without compromising our ultimate freedom of action. That is a sensible bargain that I know the American people support. At the same time, we must remember that our willingness to act alone and to lead are often what makes joint action possible.

Leadership, however, cannot be a sometime thing. International institutions-and our friends and allies-will not be there when we need them if we seek their support solely when we think it will suit our immediate convenience. We have an obligation to tend to Amer- ica's long-term interests, not simply to the crisis of the day. That not

9



FOREIGN POLICY

only means leading international institutions, but also making sure that they focus on critical long-term challenges, from nonproliferation and crisis prevention to environmental protection, democratic governance, and population.

Maintaining Productive Relationships

The second tenet of our strategy is that maintaining productive relationships with the world's most powerful states is vital-not for the sake of good relations alone, but because it allows us to pursue our objectives in a safer and more favorable environment. These nations could pose the greatest threat to the United States if any should stand against us, but when they work with us, we can reap great benefits. We know we will not always agree, sometimes on matters of great importance. When we disagree, we will vigorously defend our interests and our principles, and we will not countenance any notions of spheres of influence. What we seek is to forge relationships in which disagreements can be constructively resolved.

Deep political, military, economic, and cultural links underscore the vital importance of our close ties to our European allies. Coop- eration between the democratic market economies of North Amer- ica and Europe is a powerful force for stability and prosperity, not only in our own regions, but worldwide. That is why we will maintain these vital relationships through our continued commitment to the NATO alliance, our half-century support for European integration, and our partnership with the European Union (EU).

We do not know what kind of state Russia will be in the twenty- first century. But we do know that Russia's future will have a profound impact on our security and that of our European allies. And we do know what kind of state we want Russia to be: a healthy, prosperous democracy, integrated into the political and economic life of the world; a nation secure in its borders and that respects international law and the sovereignty and independence of its neighbors; a coun- try that resolves internal disputes in a peaceful, democratic manner, upholding the rights of its citizens.

In the last few years, Russia has made remarkable progress in over- coming its authoritarian past. But the Russian military assault in Chechnya has been a setback for democracy in Russia. It underscores that the democratic transformation so many Russians have fought for

10



Christopher

is neither complete nor irreversible. And it has hurt Russia in its relations with other countries. Still, the vigorous public debate in Rus- sia over the fighting in Chechnya, as well as the thorough coverage by Russia's independent media, are reflections of Russia's emerging democracy and civil society. We have urged the Russian government to respect human rights, end the war, and seek reconciliation with the Chechen people. That is the way for Russia to get back on the track of reform.

A growing chorus of critics in the United States argues that Rus- sia is inevitably imperial and undemocratic, and that we should write off Russian reform. I believe this view is wrong and potentially dangerous. In fact, it would help produce the kind of Russia we most want to avoid.

We must continue to support reform and reformers in Russia. As former president George Bush and the bipartisan leadership of Con- gress recognized, supporting reform in Russia is in our vital interest. Despite the recent setbacks, we must continue to engage that nation and encourage it to become a responsible partner in a democratic and undivided Europe, with deeper ties to key European and global structures and institutions, including the Partnership for Peace and NATO, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), political and security aspects of the Group of Seven (G-7), the world's nonproliferation regimes, and the new World Trade Organi- zation. We must not prejudge the outcome of the struggle for Russia's future, and we must not abandon our support for reform. That would be handing a victory to the enemies of Russian democracy.

If we want a responsible, democratic Russia to succeed, we must also support the sovereignty, independence, and viability of the other states that emerged from the Soviet Union. The transformation of the former Soviet empire into a region of sovereign, democratic states is of fundamental importance to the United States. If Ukraine suc- cessfully completes the transition from its Soviet past, other states in the region are more likely to thrive. Together with our G-7 partners, we have provided a comprehensive assistance package to Ukraine to support its political and economic reforms, and to close down the Chernobyl nuclear reactor in favor of alternative energy sources. The United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Russia have provided Ukraine with security assurances based on OSCE principles. And we are increasing defense cooperation with Ukraine, including

11



FOREIGN POLICY

the first joint peacekeeping exercise, to be conducted this spring. Our strategic alliance with Japan-as well as with South Korea

and our other allies-is essential to America's security and prosperity. And our engagement is essential to a secure, prosperous, and more democratic Asia. This administration has placed Asia at the core of its long-term foreign policy strategy. Realizing President Clinton's vision of a stable and prosperous Pacific community will continue to be a top priority. Our political ties and forward military presence help reduce opportunities and temptations for any regional power to as- pire to hegemony. Our engagement lowers incentives for others to build destabilizing levels of national defense. And it provides a secure environment for Asia's economic development and democratic nation-building. It is essential that the strength of our economic relations with Japan matches that of our political and security ties. We will continue to negotiate with Japan to reduce its barriers to trade and investment and will work with Japan in its role as chair this year of APEC to advance free trade and investment throughout the region.

There is a bottom line: Is our nation more secure,

and are America's economic opportunities

greater, than two years ago? The answer is yes.

Asia's future will depend greatly on the future of China, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, a nuclear power, and a growing military and economic force. If China is fully integrated into the international community, it could make a powerful contribution to regional and global stability and prosperity. If China chooses another path, it has the potential to destabilize the region and harm America's interests. The choice is China's, but American engagement can help encourage it to enjoy the benefits- and accept the obligations-that come with membership in international institutions and adherence to international norms.

We will continue to encourage China's participation in the global economy, including its accession to the WTO, if it undertakes the necessary obligations. Building on China's recent agreement to halt its ballistic missile exports, we need to foster greater Chinese coopera-

12



Christopher

tion with global nonproliferation regimes. We will continue to encourage China to respect internationally recognized human rights and the rule of law, for the benefit of its people, as the foundation for its respect for law abroad, and as the best guarantee of its long-term economic growth and political stability. And we will support China's deeper involvement in regional dialogues, including the Association of Southeast Asian Nations Regional Forum and APEC.

Building Lasting Institutions

The third principle of our strategy is that if the historic movement toward open societies and open markets is to endure, we must adapt and revitalize the institutions of global and regional cooperation. President Truman and Secretaries of State Marshall and Dean Ache- son recognized, as their European colleague Jean Monnet once said, that "nothing is lasting without institutions." They understood that security and economic cooperation are essential to the defense of democracy and our national well-being. Within five years of D-Day, America and its allies had launched the Marshall Plan, established NATO, the U.N., the GATT, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank, and laid the foundations for the EU and the Orga- nization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).

These institutions have set and enforced rules of conduct among an increasing number of nations. They have provided a framework for cooperation and conflict resolution. They have given structure, le- gitimacy, and strength to the common enterprise of Western democracies: avoiding war and promoting global economic growth. They have helped produce half a century of unparalleled peace and prosperity for the United States and its allies.

Our challenge today is to adapt and strengthen global and regional institutions and fora and to extend their benefits and obligations to new market democracies-not, as some want, to walk away or tear them down. If we are to lock in the gains of the Cold War's demise, we must build the security, political, and economic structures for the more integrated world of the twenty-first century. In part, that means helping to strengthen regional organizations, such as the Or- ganization of African Unity and APEC, and implementing the Sum- mit of the Americas Action Plan for revitalizing the Organization of American States. And in part, that means reforming the great post-

13



FOREIGN POLICY

war institutions, half a century after their creation. At President Clinton's initiative, our G-7 partners agreed that next summer in Halifax, Nova Scotia, we will chart a course to adapt the international economic institutions to the post-Cold War world.

As the U.N. marks its 50th year, we are determined to help re- make the way the U.N. works: more effectively, and in keeping with its strengths and limitations. We will not sacrifice American sovereignty, but neither will we heed calls to destroy an institution that serves our interests and the interests of peoples everywhere in building a more peaceful and prosperous world. With our leadership, the U.N. is streamlining and modernizing peacekeeping operations and has established an independent inspector general. The U.N.'s new undersecretary for management has put forward a serious reform program, which we strongly support. But much more needs to be done. We are using our permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council and bringing our considerable weight to bear to make sure that the U.N. more effectively responds to crises in a manner consistent with U.S. interests. We will ensure that peace operations are carried out with clear objectives, proper oversight, and realistic criteria for comple- tion. We will reduce our U.N. peacekeeping payment from 31 to 25 per cent this year, and we are working to get other countries to assume their fair share of peacekeeping costs.

As we revitalize these international institutions, so too must we adapt the way we conduct America's foreign policy to meet the challenges and opportunities of the twenty-first century. From our mis- sions abroad to our activities at home, we are reexamining our structures and processes to ensure that we can efficiently carry out not only the traditional elements of diplomacy, but also the other central tasks of promoting American economic and business interests abroad, supporting the spread of democracy and market economies, and tack- ling new global issues such as international crime, terrorism, population, sustainable development, and the environment. Our diplomacy must be supported by adequate resources and effective institutions.

Promoting Democracy and Human Rights

Finally, securing and expanding the community of democratic nations and respect for human rights are consistent with American ideals and advance our interests. Democratic nations are far less likely

14



Christopher

to go to war with each other and far more likely to respect international law. They are more likely to promote open markets and free trade, and to pursue policies that lead to sustained economic development. Democratic nations are critical to building a world where long-term stability is strengthened by accountable governments, not weakened by dictatorships; a world where disputes are mediated by dialogue, not by repression and violence; where information flows freely; and where the rule of law protects property, contracts, patents, and the other essential elements of free-market economies. Indeed, our nation's support for accountable government and the rule of law is vital to most of our other interests: a Russia at peace with itself and its neighbors, a stable Central Europe, economic reform and development in nations such as China, and the fight against crime, narcotics, and terrorism-to name just a few.

In sum, support for democracy is not some starry-eyed crusade; it is a determination to help freedom take hold where it can. In the past two years, the United States has played a major, and in some cases decisive, role in promoting democracy, human rights, and the peaceful resolution of conflicts. In Haiti, we and our neighbors came to the defense of democracy in a nation close by our shores. President Clin- ton brought together 34 elected heads of state at the Summit of the Americas to strengthen and safeguard the historic movement toward democracy and open markets in this hemisphere. Our assistance in Central Europe, Russia, Ukraine, and the other newly independent states of the former Soviet Union is helping to consolidate their political and economic transformations. From South Africa, Angola, and Mozambique to Northern Ireland and Cambodia, American engagement has helped bring peace and reconciliation to lands long wracked by civil strife. Our quiet diplomacy has made the difference for democracy in countries like Malawi and Guatemala. And finally, we have helped establish war crimes tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and will vigorously support their efforts to enforce accountability and promote reconciliation.

At bottom, support for democracy and human rights, setting an example, and standing up for what we believe in are vital parts of U.S. leadership. Other nations have long followed America's lead in part because our nation has a proven willingness to stand for some- thing larger than itself. From the time of the American Revolution, people everywhere have looked to the United States for inspiration

15



FOREIGN POLICY

in their struggles for freedom and a better life. We are committed to carrying on that tradition because it is right and because it is our greatest source of strength in the world. If we turn our backs on our ideals, others will cease to heed our voice and respect our interests, and our leadership on the great issues of the day-from fighting the spread of weapons of mass destruction to building a world of open societies and open markets-will be severely constrained.

AREAS OF OPPORTUNITY FOR 1995

These strategic principles-American leadership, productive relations with the world's most powerful states, lasting institutions, and democracy and human rights-have been our guide-

posts. These principles form the core of our strategies as we focus during 1995 on five key areas that offer significant opportunities to advance America's interest in shaping a more secure and prosperous world: consolidating an open global trading system; developing a new European security order; helping foster a comprehensive peace in the Middle East; combating the spread of weapons of mass destruction; and fighting international crime, narcotics, and terrorism.

Promoting Economic Security

One of the keys to building a world in which America can thrive is U.S. leadership in promoting open markets and sustainable economic growth. I believe that history will judge this priority to be a distinc- tive imprint-and a lasting legacy-of this administration's foreign policy. It used to be said that balance-of-power diplomacy and arms control were "high politics," and economics "low politics." President Clinton and I reject that distinction. We are convinced that political and economic diplomacy are indivisible. The United States learned from the catastrophic experience of Smoot-Hawley that America can only flourish in a world where trade is rising and barriers are falling.

America's economic strengths at home and abroad are mutually reinforcing. At bottom, U.S. security depends on a strong economy. And in today's global economy, America's economic well-being increasingly depends on our ability to open foreign markets and promote free trade and investment.

16



Christopher

President Clinton has carried out the most ambitious international economic agenda of any president since Harry Truman. To put our own house in order, President Clinton pushed through the largest deficit-re- duction program in history-nearly $700 billion over five years. We have imposed fiscal discipline and regained the confidence of our international partners. And about 5.2 million new private-sector jobs have been created in the two years since the administration took office.

We have decisively shaped the most open global trading system in history and put America at its hub-producing countless new Amer- ican jobs and new opportunities for trade and investment. We suc- cessfully concluded the Uruguay Round of GATT and worked with Congress to obtain final approval. We fought for and won passage and implementation of NAFTA. We helped elevate APEC's importance as a forum for economic integration and cooperation across the Asia-Pa- cific, and reached agreement to achieve free trade in the region by 2020. At the Summit of the Americas, the president and his coun- terparts decided to conclude negotiations on a Free Trade Agreement of the Americas by the year 2005. And in bilateral accords with Japan and other key trading partners, we have opened markets, expanded export and investment opportunities, and protected intellectual property rights for American companies.

Our challenge over the next year is to sustain momentum on each of these fronts. If we succeed, we will have constructed much of the essential global economic framework for the post-Cold War world.

We will begin to implement the Uruguay Round and ensure that the WTO safeguards the rules and disciplines of the open global trading system-fairly, and transparently, while respecting America's own laws and interests.

We will ensure that our regional leadership reinforces global open trade. As we approach the next APEC leaders' meeting in Osaka in November, we will work with Japan and our other APEC partners to develop a blueprint for free trade in the Asia-Pacific region. We are beginning to implement the Summit of the Americas Action Plan to forge a free-trade pact in this hemisphere. We will seek congressional fast-track authority to open more markets and begin NAFTA accession negotiations with Chile. Our commitment to the financial stability of Mexico reflects our understanding that America's prosperity and regional stability are both intimately tied to the economic and political health of Mexico, our great neighbor to the south. In addi-

17



FOREIGN POLICY

tion, we will expand U.S. access to the big emerging markets-such as Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Poland, South Africa, South Korea, and Turkey-as well as to Japan.

To ensure that economic growth is sustainable, American leadership is critical on issues such as population, development, and the environment. That is why the Clinton administration is putting the issues of population growth and sustainable development in the mainstream of American foreign policy and diplomacy. From the remarkable accomplishments of the Cairo conference on population and development-where an overwhelming majority of nations agreed to work together on improving reproductive health, educat- ing and immunizing children, promoting women's development, and strengthening families-to international efforts on greenhouse gases and biological diversity, U.S. leadership has made the difference.

Enhancing European Security

Stability in Europe remains essential to our security and prosperity. For half a century we have stood shoulder to shoulder with our allies to defend our security and our common values. Now, the Warsaw Pact is gone, Germany is one, and Central Europe is free. The democracies emerging where the Soviet bloc once imposed its will have become the continent's most promising new markets. But the Iron Cur- tain must not be replaced with a veil of indifference if open markets and open societies are to prevail across a continent at peace.

In the last two years, we have made considerable progress in adapt- ing the institutions of European security to extend stability to a free, undivided, and democratic Europe. At NATO's summit in January 1994, President Clinton proposed, and NATO approved, the Partner- ship for Peace-the first security partnership that can encompass all the nations of the continent. So far, 24 countries have joined.

A vigorous Partnership is integral to European security. It will remain a permanent element of our strategy for an integrated Europe. In very practical ways, it is enabling NATO and partner states to work under common military standards and procedures. And it is encour- aging military reform and transparency in the East. We will continue to expand the Partnership's joint exercise program in 1995. Finally, the Partnership is the best path to NATO membership for those will- ing and able to make the necessary commitments.

18



Christopher

The NATO alliance will remain the anchor of American engagement in Europe and the linchpin of transatlantic security. That is why we must keep it strong, vital, and relevant. For the United States and its allies, NATO has always been far more than a transi- tory response to a temporary threat. It has been a guarantor of Eu- ropean democracy and a force for European stability. That is why its mission endures even though the Cold War has receded into the past. And that is why its benefits are so clear to Europe's new democracies.

The North Atlantic Treaty has always looked to the addition of members who shared the alliance's purposes and its values, as well as its commitment to respect borders and international law, and who could add to its strength; indeed, NATO has expanded three times since its creation. In January 1994, President Clinton made it plain that "the question is no longer whether NATO will take on new members, but when and how." Under American leadership last Decem- ber, the alliance began a steady, deliberate, and transparent process that will lead to NATO expansion. During 1995, we look forward to coming to agreement with our allies on the process and objectives, and we will share our conclusions with the members of the Partner- ship for Peace.

When NATO is ready to turn to the question of candidates and timing, each nation will be considered individually. No non-member of NATO will have a veto.

Expanding the alliance will promote our interests by reducing the chance of conflict in Europe's eastern half-where two world wars and the Cold War began. It will help ensure that no part of Europe will revert to a zone of great power competition or a sphere of influence. It will build confidence and give new democracies a powerful incentive to consolidate their reforms. And each potential member will be judged by present-day realities, not by accidents of history- according to the strength of its democratic institutions and its capacity to contribute to the goals of the alliance.

As the president has made clear, the United States has a major stake in ensuring that Russia is engaged as a vital participant in Eu- ropean security affairs. We are committed to a growing, healthy NATO-Russia relationship and we want to see Russia closely involved in the Partnership for Peace. Recognizing that no single institution can meet every challenge to peace and stability in Europe, we have

19



FOREIGN POLICY

begun a process that will strengthen the OSCE and enhance its conflict prevention and peacekeeping capabilities.

The quest for stability in Europe cannot rely on security institutions alone. Economic integration is critical as well. Central and East European countries must become full members of the world's trading system through accession to the wTo and cooperation with the OECD. We have made clear our hope that the association agreements the EU has signed or will sign with Central European states will, before long, lead to full EU membership. Together with our West Eu- ropean partners, we must continue to lower trade barriers that limit exports by the new democracies.

As we work with our allies to shape Europe's future, we must also confront the demons of its past. The wounds of the Cold War are nowhere more tragically clear than in the shattered empire and splin- tered states of the former Yugoslavia. We are all frustrated by the in- tractability of the Bosnian war. But unilaterally lifting the U.N. arms embargo would be dangerously shortsighted. We have always believed that the arms embargo is wrong and counterproductive, but going it alone would be worse. It would Americanize the conflict and lead others to abandon the sanctions on Serbia. It would cause a serious rift between the United States and our NATO allies, and a con- frontation with Russia. It would undermine the authority of all U.N. Security Council resolutions, including sanctions on Iraq and Libya. And on the ground, it would help no one it was designed to assist- not the Bosnian government, not the innocent civilians, not the cause of peace. The president and I are determined to continue pursuing an active diplomatic track with our Contact Group partners to contain and resolve the murderous war in Bosnia and to preserve Bosnia as a sovereign state within its internationally recognized borders. Only a negotiated solution has any chance of lasting. And the war in Bosnia makes ever more clear the need to adapt Europe's security institutions to deal with ethnic conflicts and to bring stability to Central Europe.

Advancing Peace in the Middle East

Emblematic of the opportunities presented by the end of the Cold War is the previously unthinkable progress in the Middle East toward a region increasingly at peace, where trade, not violence, will one day

20



Christopher

mark relations among peoples. For more than four decades, adminis- trations of both parties have understood America's vital interests in the Middle East: Arab-Israeli peace, Israel's security, and unimpeded access to Persian Gulf oil. Today, a comprehensive peace between Is- rael and its Arab neighbors is closer than ever. Patient American diplomacy has helped forge an agreement between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization and a peace treaty between Israel and Jordan. It has led to progressive dismantling of the Arab boycott of Israel and to new ties between Israel and a growing number of Arab states, including Morocco, Tunisia, and Oman. Negotiations between Israel and Syria are entering a critical phase.

The Middle East stands at the threshold of a more promising era. But to get there, the parties must be prepared, in the near future, to make the bold, difficult decisions required to accelerate negotiations. We should have no illusions: Any slow down in the search for peace carries enormous risks. The enemies of peace are determined to kill this historic chance for reconciliation. We must not let them succeed. We have no doubt that with the courageous determination of Israel and its neighbors a comprehensive peace is possible. In their efforts, they will have the full support of the United States.

To make a difference in the daily lives of the peoples of the region, we must also help broaden and deepen the peace in the region by creating new structures of confidence and cooperation in the multilateral talks on arms control and regional security, and by building on the economic promise of the Casablanca summit, including progress in creating a Middle East development bank. We will also continue to press the Arab League to end the boycott of Israel.

As we promote peace, we must also deal with the enemies of peace. That is why it is so important to continue our opposition to Iran and Iraq, the region's most dangerous actors. Indeed, through the president's "dual containment policy," the United States is leading the international effort to combat the threat they pose and helping to create the secure environment in which Arab-Israeli peace- making can succeed.

Last October, President Clinton acted promptly and decisively to dispatch U.S. troops to Kuwait and stopped renewed Iraqi aggression dead in its tracks. Iraq's actions reinforced the importance of maintaining strict U.N. sanctions against Baghdad until it complies fully with all relevant U.N. obligations. We will continue to enforce the

21



FOREIGN POLICY

no-fly zones and help protect the Kurdish minority. Turkey's recent decision to extend Operation Provide Comfort was a significant step in support of our common objectives.

Iran is the world's most significant state sponsor of terrorism, and the most ardent opponent of the Middle East peace process. It sup- ports those who commit atrocities from Tel Aviv to Buenos Aires, and throughout the Arab world. The international community has been far too tolerant of Iran's outlaw behavior. Others have sold arms and given Iran preferential economic treatment, making it easier for Iran to divert resources to terrorism and to building weapons of mass destruction. That must end. The evidence is overwhelming: Iran is still intent on projecting terror and extremism across the Middle East and beyond. Only a concerted international effort can stop it.

Nonproliferation and Arms Control

With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction now poses the most pressing threat to the security of the United States and our allies. Advances in technology and the diffusion of expertise have put nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and their delivery systems within reach of a growing number of nations. Ironically, the breakup of the Soviet Union and our success in dismantling Cold War nuclear arsenals also increase the chances that nuclear material could fall into the wrong hands. The advent of nuclear smuggling reminds us that a threat once symbolized by superpowers and giant silos may one day live on in rogue states and suitcases.

Nonproliferation and arms control policies are essential to ensuring security and regional stability in the post-Cold War world. Pres- ident Clinton and I are committed to pursuing our nonproliferation objectives as a central component of our diplomacy. Despite the dire predictions of many experts, the international effort to stop the spread of nuclear weapons has been largely successful thus far. That would not have been possible without strong and continuing Amer- ican leadership. Now is no time for complacency.

In the last two years, we have made important strides in reducing the global threat posed by present and potential nuclear weapons states. Russian missiles are no longer targeted at our cities or our citizens-nor ours at theirs. With our efforts, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and

22



Christopher

Belarus have joined the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) as nonnuclear states. We brought START I (the Strategic Arms Reduc- tion Treaty) into force, paving the way for ratification of START II.

Together with the Russians, we have been destroying nuclear warheads at an unprecedented rate.

When implemented, START I and START II will cut Russian and U.S. strategic forces by two-thirds. As Presidents Clinton and Boris Yeltsin agreed at their summit last September, we are beginning negotiations to make nuclear reductions irreversible and transparent. Under an agreement with the United States, Russia is converting tons of highly enriched uranium from dismantled weapons into commer- cial reactor fuel for purchase by the United States. Through "Nunn-Lugar" and other programs, we are helping Russia and other states of the former Soviet Union improve security over nuclear material, including that generated by Russia's dismantling of nuclear warheads, and that located at vulnerable civilian facilities. As Sec- retary of Defense William Perry has said, "Nunn-Lugar actually re- moves the threat, missile by missile, warhead by warhead, factory by factory." Those who would eliminate or dramatically restrict these programs should explain how lax control advances U.S. interests. We will vigorously defend this program in Congress, confident that the American people understand its importance to our national interest. To complement our source-control efforts to thwart trafficking in nuclear materials, we are increasing law enforcement and customs cooperation with key countries.

The NPT is the linchpin of the international effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Our objective is to obtain indefinite and unconditional extension of the NPT at this spring's review conference. Shorter-term extension-let alone outright failure-would severely undermine the NPT and would risk prompting some states to develop nuclear weapons programs (or chemical and biological ones) as a hedge against a world without controls on proliferation. That is in no one's interest. And at the same time, we must and will work with the bipartisan leadership in Congress to obtain ratification of the new Chemical Weapons Convention, and work with other sig- natories to strengthen the compliance mechanisms of the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention.

The United States is observing a moratorium on the testing of nuclear weapons, along with Russia, France, and the United Kingdom.

23



FOREIGN POLICY

We are pressing hard for a global treaty banning all nuclear tests. And as President Clinton announced at last September's U.N. General Assembly, we also seek a global ban on the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons.

For many years, the world has known that North Korea had an active nuclear weapons program. Last fall, this administration ended it. To prevent the outbreak of a destabilizing nuclear arms race in Northeast Asia and the undermining of global proliferation controls, the United States concluded an Agreed Framework with North Ko- rea. The framework safeguards the security of our allies and friends in the region and maintains the vital integrity of the NPT. It has the strong support of Japan and South Korea-key allies whose security is directly at stake and who will provide most of the financing for its implementation-and of the broader international community.

Consider the alternatives: an uncontrolled North Korean nuclear-weapons program, rising tensions on the Korean peninsula, growing calls in some quarters for preemptive strikes, the risk of war, and with it countless American and Korean lives lost. Those who op- pose this framework have a responsibility to offer a more effective way to protect the interests of America, our regional allies, and the im- perative of nonproliferation. They have not done so.

The Agreed Framework attains all our nonproliferation goals. As the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has recently determined, it has already effectively stopped North Korea's existing program to develop nuclear weapons. With rigorous oversight and implementation, the framework will ensure the safe disposition of the spent nuclear fuel now in North Korea, require North Korea to come into full compliance with its obligations under the NPT, and subject North Korea to restrictions beyond what the NPT requires-namely, no reprocessing of spent fuel, no refueling of its five-megawatt reactor, removal of spent fuel rods from North Korea, and conversion from graphite-moderated to light-water reactors. Before the North Koreans receive any nuclear components for light-water reactors, the framework requires North Korea to accept whatever steps the IAEA deems necessary to address questions about past conduct-including, if asked, inspections of waste storage sites. We are determined to hold the North to its specific obligations under the framework.

That progress toward ending proliferation is possible has also been demonstrated in South America, where Argentina and Brazil have

24



Christopher

ended their nuclear competition and acceded to the Treaty of Tlatelolco, bringing into force a nuclear-free zone. But the years ahead pose special risks of proliferation in other key regions. In the Middle East, we will remain vigilant in monitoring Iraq's weapons programs. We will continue to insist that other states-including Russia and China-stop assisting Iran's efforts to acquire nuclear arms under the guise of peaceful nuclear cooperation. In South Asia, we will continue to work with India and Pakistan to cap, reduce, and ultimately eliminate weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile delivery systems from the subcontinent.

For many years, the world has known that North Korea had an active nuclear weapons program. Last fall, this administration ended it.

To stymie attempts by rogue states such as Iran and Iraq to acquire advanced conventional weaponry, dual-use technology, and missile delivery systems, we will broaden membership in the Missile Tech- nology Control Regime and seek to establish a new regime to promote transparency and restrain trade in arms and dual-use technology. To make these agreements more effective, we are working to integrate Russia into these regimes, once the question of its arms sales to Iran is resolved.

As the president pledged in his address to the United Nations General Assembly last fall, we will combat a less visible but still deadly threat: the world's millions of antipersonnel landmines, which continue to maim and kill innocent men, women, and children around the world-long after the conflicts in those lands have ended. As we push for a global convention to control exports of these landmines, we are already working with governments around the world to help detect and remove those mines still in place.

Fighting Terrorism, Narcotics, and International Crime

International crime syndicates, drug traffickers, and terrorists pose direct threats to our people and to our nation's interests. The re-

25



FOREIGN POLICY

sults are evident on American streets. They ruin countless lives, destroy property, and siphon away productive economic resources. They threaten the survival of democratic institutions and new market economies around the world. They exploit open borders and new technologies to extend their dangerous reach and to avoid detection. They are aided by indifferent or complicit governments. And they are impervious to exclusively national efforts to eradi- cate them. In short, they pose real dangers to American security and prosperity.

Under President Clinton's leadership, the United States is con- fronting these problems head on. The crime bill we passed last year expands street-level law enforcement and drug treatment. But we cannot combat these threats alone. We are mobilizing global law enforcement against the cartels. We are using foreign aid and urg- ing international financial institutions to back licit alternatives to opium poppy and coca cultivation and to promote sustainable development. We are beefing up law enforcement training and rule of law programs in affected countries. And we are helping strengthen and safeguard democratic institutions in key regions against the corrupting influence of drug trafficking and crime. The Summit of the Americas Action Plan will advance many of these goals in our hemisphere.

Our policy on terrorism is straightforward: We make no conces- sions to terrorists; we galvanize international pressure against states that sponsor them; and we bring terrorists to justice. To help achieve those goals, the United States is sharing intelligence and coordinat- ing antiterrorist efforts with friends and allies.

President Clinton has placed anti-crime programs among the top foreign policy priorities of his administration. The State Department is working closely with the Departments of Justice and Treasury and other law enforcement agencies, and in 1995 we will be announc- ing a series of new initiatives as a part of our comprehensive strategy. Among the initial ones: We will improve law enforcement and intelligence cooperation through interagency teams in our em- bassies. We will help other nations bolster their laws against money laundering and financial crimes and their asset forfeiture laws. We will impose strict visa security standards and seek tougher domestic legislation to keep foreign drug traffickers, money launderers, mob- sters, alien smugglers, and terrorists out of the United States. We

26



Christopher

will beef up law enforcement training and rule of law programs in key regions. And we will put measures in place to thwart the efforts of terrorists to buy guns and explosives and to raise money in the United States.

ADVANCING AMERICA'S ENDURING INTERESTS

Harry Truman forged a bipartisan partnership with farsighted congressional leaders to advance American interests in the perilous years following World War II. With the Cold War

past, we now have the chance to extend the security, prosperity, and democracy that their accomplishments helped preserve for us. The principles and priorities I have outlined here reflect America's enduring interests. And they reflect my commitment to make the secretary of state's office America's Desk. They can and should have bipartisan support.

This administration will work with members of both parties to achieve our common goals. At the same time, we will not heed the calls of those who would have us shrink back into ourselves or have America stand for nothing.

Much has changed in the world since Truman, Marshall, Ache- son, and their Democratic and Republican colleagues in Congress forged America's postwar foreign policy. But America's core interests remain constant. Harry Truman had it right 40 years ago: "Circum- stances change," he said, "but underneath, the great issues remain the same-prosperity, welfare, human rights, effective democracy, and above all, peace."

The United States is the world's largest military and economic power. Our nation's founding principles still occupy a special place in the imaginations of people all over the world. We are blessed with great resources and resolve. And we will continue to use them with wisdom, with strength, and with the backing of the American people to advance our fundamental interests and to take advantage of the emerging opportunities to help shape a more secure, democratic, and prosperous world.

27



america's leadership, america's opportunity

Documents