Alexander M. Haig Jr.: There Is a West (And it had better get it's act together… or else!)

I am delighted to speak to you today here in Philadelphia under the auspices of the Foreign Policy Research Institute. FPRI is near and dear to me and we have had some history together. After returning from the Supreme Command of NATO in 1979, I became an Institute Senior Fellow at the suggestion of FPRI’s founder, the late Robert Strausz-Hupé. Two of the Institute’s scholars, Woody Goldberg and Harvey Sicherman, worked with me to produce an important book on the Alliance. Later, they joined me in Washington during my time as Secretary of State. I’m not sure that any of us fully recovered from the experience! But we all benefited from Robert’s talent, skill, and devotion to the idea of the West. That idea, embodied in the Atlantic Alliance, rescued Western civilization from the dangers of communism during the Cold War. Under NATO’s protection, both sides of the Atlantic flourished together as never before.

In recent years, however, the concept of the “West” has been challenged. Critics of our values question whether the West as constituted is even worth defending. Others doubt whether the democracies have anything to give the rest of the world. After the Cold War ended, the doubters increased. They argued that the Soviet Union having expired, it might be time for NATO to be retired.

Then came September 11, 2001. After rallying together, we and some of our European allies then fell into a quarrel over how to deal with the dictator of Iraq. This very public dispute aggravated earlier doubts. Soon the critics of NATO, the only industry that never knows recession, were in full cry. I can sum up their position this way. First, NATO is no longer necessary, having fulfilled its great mission of deterring the Soviet threat. Second, judging by the split over Iraq, it does not work all that well anyway.

The critics have had their say. Now allow me mine. First, NATO is more necessary than ever precisely because much of its most important mission has not been achieved. Second, the Atlantic Alliance is actually in better shape than most people think, even on the issue of Iraq. Third, we can adapt to the new challenges only if we understand the reality of the military, intelligence, and political work before us.

Let me begin with the unfinished business of the Atlantic Alliance. Far too many on both sides of the Atlantic have forgotten the main purpose of the partnership. It was not only to deter the Soviet Union but also to facilitate the reconciliation of the European nations whose quarrels twice plunged the world into war. Today’s European Union is the monument to that reconciliation.

But while the pundits have been fixated on the sophistries of the war over Iraq, we have failed to notice that the European Union may be facing the greatest crisis in its history. Most members are increasingly opposed to political and economic arrangements that effectively give Paris and Berlin license to protect their unsupportable welfare states. Unbelievably, the European Commission is preparing to sue France and Germany for violating the Stability Pact, a key backstop for the unified Euro currency. While analysts on both sides of the Atlantic pontificate about common European Union foreign policies and common European Union defense policies as a replacement for NATO, in Europe today there is neither the money nor the political will to do either.

We ought to face the truth. Our European allies, trying to deepen and expand a contentious economic union, have not reached a common identity. They will be hard pressed to sort out new arrangements much more suited to an international economy far more complex and global than ever imagined by the founders.

Therefore, is this the time for the Atlantic Alliance to dissolve, throwing huge additional doubts about the future of the European experiment? A Europe “whole and free” has been the bipartisan pledge of American presidents since the end of the Cold War. It is the integration of transatlantic security that remains the bedrock upon which the European experiment must rely. This is not finished business, not by a long shot.

Yet, there is little choice but to take the risks. When all is said and done, terrorists threaten the international order every bit as much as the dictators of old. Everything we have built up, the entire web of international relationships, our great cities, our global communications will be lost if terrorism becomes the way to succeed in achieving political objectives.

Some have called this a war of civilizations. I disagree. It is more accurately a war for civilization. Not theirs, for the terrorists have none, but ours. The war against terror is thus a war for the West and all those who share, or wish to share, our values.

This document is the text of the keynote speech delivered by Alexander M. Haig, Jr. to the Foreign Policy Research Institute conference on “Is There Still a West?,” February 12-13, 2004. A trustee of FPRI, General Haig is former Secretary of State and former Supreme Allied Commander Europe.

He used to use bigger words. I guess he learned to tone down so that we could understand what he is saying.

2 posted on 03/03/2004 6:50:10 PM PST by El Gran Salseron (It translates as the Great, Big Salsa Dancer, nothing more. :-))

3 posted on 03/03/2004 6:53:07 PM PST by jocon307 (The dems don't get it, the American people do.)

Thanks for posting! It's a great speech by a very smart man.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.