0 votes

John McCain's "Worldwide League of Democracies"

Chuck Baldwin talking about - John McCain's "Worldwide League of

May 1, 2007

ARLINGTON, VA - Senator McCain Addresses The Hoover Institution on
U.S. Foreign Policy at Stanford University in Stanford, California at
12:00 p.m. PDT. Below are Senator McCain's remarks, as prepared for

"Since the dawn of our republic, Americans have believed our nation
was created for a purpose. We were, as Alexander Hamilton said, a
people of great destinies.' In the Revolution, the Civil War, in World
Wars One and Two, and in the many struggles of the Cold War, our
forebears met and overcame threats to our nation's survival and to our
way of life. They believed they had a duty to serve a cause greater
than their self-interest. They kept faith with the eternal principles
of our Declaration of Independence against the evils of despotism,
fascism, and totalitarianism. And they changed the world. Democracy
was born and then spread across the globe, from North America to
Europe to Asia and Latin America, to Africa and the Middle East. Today
we stand, grateful, on this foundation of freedom.

"Now it is our generation's turn to build. It is our generation's turn
to restore and replenish the faith in our nation and our principles.
We have suffered terrible attacks at the hands of a new enemy that
relentlessly seeks our destruction. New dangers have arisen, great
powers are emerging and seek to shift the international balance of
power, and we are in the midst of two wars whose outcome will shape
our future. Here at home there is discord and doubt, and our famous
optimism as a people has begun to flicker. It must not. Ever since
Jamestown, we have displayed courage in the face of adversity. We are
a hardy, spirited and steadfast people, a nation of pioneers and
inveterate problem solvers. Today, America remains the most attractive
of nations, where people the world over wish to visit, study, live,
start businesses, invest and look for inspiration in our values and
our freedoms. That is why I believe we are about to enter our greatest
and proudest years as a nation.

"Our great president, Harry Truman once said of America, God has
created us and brought us to our present position of power and
strength for some great purpose.' In his time, that great purpose was
to erect structures of peace and prosperity that could provide safe
passage through the Cold War. Today, we face new dangers and new
opportunities and we must have a new common mission: To build an
enduring global peace, and to build it upon the foundations of
freedom, opportunity, prosperity and hope.

"There is so much promise in today's world. We live in an era of
unprecedented human progress. An increasingly global commerce is
spreading a better and freer life to millions. Our scientists and
physicians are eradicating diseases that once ravaged populations.
More people live under democracy than at any time in human history.
More than ever before, a father and mother can pass on to their
children a happier, healthier, longer, and freer life than they
themselves knew. Yet as we seize and expand these opportunities, we
must recognize the dangers posed by the forces of terrorism and
tyranny that look backward into a world of darkness and violence. With
our democratic friends and allies around the world, we need to build a
new global order of peace, a peace that can last not just for a decade
but for a century, where the dangers and threats we face diminish, and
where human progress reaches new heights.

"Almost two centuries ago James Madison declared that the great
struggle of the Epoch' was between liberty and despotism.' Many
thought that this struggle ended with the Cold War, but it didn't. It
took on new guises, such as the modern terrorist network, an enemy of
progress that has turned our technological advances to its own use,
and in rulers trying to rebuild 19th-century autocracies in a 21st
century world. Today the talk is of the war on terror, a war in which
we must succeed. But the war on terror cannot be the only organizing
principle of American foreign policy. International terrorists capable
of inflicting mass destruction are a new phenomenon. But what they
seek and what they stand for are as old as time. They comprise part of
worldwide political, economic, and philosophical struggle between the
future and the past, between progress and reaction, and between
liberty and despotism. Upon the outco me of that struggle depends our
security, our prosperity, and our democratic way of life.

"Democracy and freedom continue to flourish around the world, but
there have been some discouraging trends. In China, despite miraculous
economic growth and a higher standard of living for many millions of
Chinese, hopes for an accompanying political reform have diminished.
The ruling party seems determined to dominate political life, and as
in the past, the talk is of order, not democracy, the supremacy of the
party not of the people. China astonishes the world with its economic
and technological modernization, but then spends billions trying to
control that great icon of the modern era, the internet. China
recognizes its vital interest in economic integration with the
democratic world. But it has also joined Russia in hindering
international efforts to put pressure on dictators in Iran, Sudan,
Zimbabwe, Burma, and other pariah states. China expresses its desire
for a stable peace in East Asia, but it contin ues to increase its
military might, fostering distrust and concerns in the region about
Beijing's ambitions. We must insist that China use its newfound power
responsibly at home and abroad.

"A decade ago, the great Russian people had thrown off communist
tyranny and seemed determined to build democracy and a free market and
to join the West. Today, Russia looks more and more like some
19th-century autocracy, marked by diminishing political freedoms,
shadowy intrigue, and mysterious assassinations. Beyond its borders
Moscow has tried to expand its influence over its neighbors in
Eastern, Central and even Western Europe. While the more democratic
Russia of the 1990s sought to deepen its ties with Europe and America,
today a more authoritarian Moscow manipulates Europe's dependence on
Russian oil and gas to compel silence and obedience, and to try to
drive a wedge between Europe and the United States. The Russian
government is even more brutal toward the young democracies on its
periphery, threatening them with trade embargoes and worse if they
move too close to the West. It supports separatist mov ements in
Georgia and Moldova and openly intervened in Ukraine's presidential
elections. And it is supplying weapons to Iran, Syria, and indirectly
to Hezbollah.

"But if some in Russia yearn to turn the clock back two decades, the
zealots of Islamic radicalism would turn it back centuries. The
mullahs of Iran and the leaders of Al Qaeda and Hezbollah want to
cleanse the Muslim world of modernity and the ideals of the
Enlightenment, and return it to an imagined past of theological
purity. They state their goal plainly: a universal Islamic theocracy,
a new Caliphate across all the lands once dominated by Islam,
including the lands held in Europe centuries ago. Meanwhile, Mideast
autocracies fuel this radicalism by denying their people political
expression, economic opportunity or hope for a better future.

"These governments differ from one another in a thousand ways, and our
policies toward them must reflect those differences. Our national
interests require that we pursue economic and strategic cooperation
with China and Russia, that we support Egypt and Saudi Arabia's role
as peacemakers in the Middle East, and that we work with Pakistan to
fight the Taliban and Al Qaeda. But our national interests also
require that we continually press for progress.

"We have seen how autocratic governments often work against our
interests. Iran is able to aggressively pursue nuclear weapons and
hegemony in the Persian Gulf, in part, because it has been shielded by
the world's powerful autocracies. North Korea defies the international
community with its nuclear weapons and missile programs and an obscene
human rights record. Last month, North Korea unsurprisingly missed the
first deadline in the most recent nuclear agreement and it remains to
be seen if China will use its enormous influence to demand better

"The path to an enduring peace lies in a clear-eyed pursuit of our
national interest that does not accede to autocratic trends. We must
expand the power and reach of democracy, freedom, and human rights
using our many strengths as a free people. But that means making some
substantial changes in how we do business. Change must begin at home.

"Back in 1947, just a year into the Cold War, the Truman
administration launched a massive overhaul of the nation's foreign
policy, defense, and intelligence agencies to meet new challenges.
Today, we must do the same to meet the challenges of the 21st century.
I will have much more to say about this in the future but our needs
are clear in the organization, skills, and capabilities needed to
prevail in the conflict with violent extremists: an intelligence
community that is able to collect and analyze information on and
conduct operations against our enemies; a public diplomacy effort that
makes our case to the world effectively; a diplomatic corps that
understands stability' does not mean supporting dictatorships; foreign
aid programs that foster good governance; generals that understand and
learn from past wars and apply those lessons to the future; defense
procurement that is transparent, accountable and e ffective; and
civilian defense leadership that is held accountable for results and
provides the resources necessary to achieve results. We must never
again launch a military operation with too few troops to complete the
mission and build a secure, stable, and democratic peace. When we
fight a war, we must fight to win.

"We cannot build an enduring peace based on freedom by ourselves. Nor
do we want to. The Declaration of Independence proclaimed our duty to
pay decent respect to the opinions of mankind.' When I think back to
the 1980s, the decade of triumph in the Cold War, I think about our
great alliances. Reagan, Thatcher, Kohl, Mitterrand, Nakasone they
were all strong leaders who jealously guarded the interests of their
peoples. But they linked arms against communist tyranny.

"Today we need to revive that vital democratic solidarity. We need to
renew the terms of our partnership and strike a new grand bargain for
the future. We Americans must be willing to listen to the views and
respect the collective will of our democratic allies. Like all other
nations, we reserve the sovereign right to defend our vital national
security when and how we deem necessary. But our great power does not
mean we can do whatever we want whenever we want, nor should we assume
we have all the wisdom, knowledge and resources necessary to succeed.
When we believe international action is necessary, whether military,
economic, or diplomatic, we must work to persuade our democratic
friends and allies that we are right. But in return, we must be
willing to be persuaded by them. To be a good leader, America must be
a good ally.

"Our partners must be good allies, too. They must have the will and
the ability to act in the common defense of freedom, democracy, and
economic prosperity. They must spend the money necessary to build
effective militaries that can train and fight alongside ours. They
must help us deliver aid to those in need and encourage good
governance in fragile states. They must face the threats of our world
squarely and not evade their global responsibilities. And they must
put an end to the mindless anti-Americanism that today mars
international discourse. No alliance can work unless all its members
share a basic faith in one another and accept an equal share of the
responsibility to build a peace based on freedom.

"If we strike this new bargain and renew our transatlantic solidarity,
I believe we must then take the next step and expand the circle of our
democratic community. As we speak, American soldiers are serving in
Afghanistan alongside British, Canadian, Dutch, German, Italian,
Spanish, Turkish, Polish, and Lithuanian soldiers from the NATO
alliance. They are also serving alongside forces from Australia, New
Zealand, Japan, the Philippines, and South Korea --all democratic
allies or close partners of the United States. But they are not all
part of a common structure. They don't work together systematically or
meet regularly to develop diplomatic and economic strategies to meet
their common problems. The 21st century world no longer divides neatly
into geographic regions. Organizations and partnerships must be as
international as the challenges we confront.

"The NATO alliance has begun to deal with this gap by promoting global
partnerships between current members of the alliance and the other
great democracies in Asia and elsewhere. We should go further and
start bringing democratic peoples and nations from around the world
into one common organization, a worldwide League of Democracies. This
would not be like the universal-membership and failed League of
Nations' of Woodrow Wilson but much more like what Theodore Roosevelt
envisioned: like-minded nations working together in the cause of
peace. The new League of Democracies would form the core of an
international order of peace based on freedom. It could act where the
UN fails to act, to relieve human suffering in places like Darfur. It
could join to fight the AIDS epidemic in sub-Saharan Africa and
fashion better policies to confront the crisis of our environment. It
could provide unimpeded market access to t hose who share the values
of economic and political freedom, an advantage no state-based system
could attain. It could bring concerted pressure to bear on tyrants in
Burma or Zimbabwe, with or without Moscow's and Beijing's approval. It
could unite to impose sanctions on Iran and thwart its nuclear
ambitions. It could provide support to struggling democracies in
Ukraine and Serbia and help countries like Thailand back on the path
to democracy.

"This League of Democracies would not supplant the United Nations or
other international organizations. It would complement them. But it
would be the one organization where the world's democracies could come
together to discuss problems and solutions on the basis of shared
principles and a common vision of the future. If I am elected
president, I will call a summit of the world's democracies in my first
year to seek the views of my democratic counterparts and begin
exploring the practical steps necessary to realize this vision.

"Americans should lead this effort, as we did sixty years ago in
founding NATO. But if we are to lead responsibly, our friends and
allies must see us as responsible nation, concerned not only about our
own well-being but about the health of the world's economy and the
future of our planet.

"Throughout the Cold War, America's support for a global economic
system based on free trade and free flows of capital went hand-in-hand
with our support of political freedom and democracy. To build a new
era of peace based on freedom, we have to work even harder through our
economic and trade policies to encourage open societies and create a
climate of opportunity and hope. Our economic strategies in the Middle
East must complement our political strategies by supporting
modernizers who want to improve the lives of their people against
those radicals and autocrats who would impoverish them. In Latin
America and Africa, we need to support those who favor open economies
and democratic government against populist demagogues who are dragging
their nations back to the failed socialist policies of the past. In
Asia we need to show that growing democratic economies can do more for
the average man and woman and less for corrupt senior officials than
growing economies in a one-party state.

"Americans are the most generous and caring people in the world. No
one has sacrificed more in lives and treasure to save the world from
tyranny. No nation spends more in combined public and private
philanthropic efforts to combat disease and poverty around the world.
And no one works harder to ensure the continued health and vitality of
the global economy.

"Still, there is more we can do. To be successful international
leaders, we need to be good international citizens. This means
upholding and strengthening international laws and norms, including
the laws of war. We must champion the Geneva Conventions, and we must
fulfill the letter and the spirit of our international obligations. It
is profoundly in our interest to do so, since our failure to abide by
these rules puts our own soldiers at risk. Our moral standing in the
world requires that we respect what are, after all, American
principles of justice. Our values will always triumph in any war of
ideas, and we can't let failings like prisoner abuse tarnish our
image. If we are model citizens of the world, more people around the
world will look to us as a model.

"When our nation was founded over two hundred years ago, we were the
world's only democratic republic. Today, there are more than 100
electoral democracies spread all across the globe. We must reaffirm
our faith in the principles that our founders declared to be
universal, that all people are created equal and possess inalienable
rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. We fought a
Revolution, a Civil War, two world wars, and a cold war to vindicate
these principles and ensure that freedom could be enjoyed, as Abraham
Lincoln promised, by all people of all colors everywhere.' We were
right to struggle for democracy then, and we are right to do so now.

"This is not idealism, my friends. It is the truest kind of realism.
Today as in the past, our interests are inextricably linked to the
global progress of our ideals. The vision of a new era of enduring
peace based on freedom is not a Republican vision. It is not a
Democratic vision. It is an American vision. The American people have
known instinctively for two centuries that we are safer when the world
is more democratic. Whatever our differences, we all share the same
goal: a world of peace and freedom, of prosperity and opportunity, of
hope. We have a duty to ourselves to be true to those beliefs, to use
our great power wisely on behalf of freedom. As Ronald Reagan
proclaimed in his speech to the British Parliament in 1982, Let us go
to our strength. Let us offer hope. Let us tell the world that a new
age is not only possible but probable.'"

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Sounds like Woodrow Wilson & FDR had a child named John

Looks like McCain is trying to channel Wilson & FDR, and continue there two great systems of entangling alliances.

Thank you Dr. Paul for making my act on what I already knew was right.

*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*


i thought the League of Nations died before WW2...hmmm...

2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.


I'm interested in hearing him say this... but I can not stomach reading his propaganda, it makes me sick.

Video please.

Aku Soku Zan

Aku Soku Zan

Utubes - League of Democracies...



2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

League of Democracies=UN on steroids...

"We Americans must be willing to listen to the views and respect the collective will of our democratic allies," McCain says


2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.