President Bush Discusses
Iraq Policy
at Whitehall Palace in London
Remarks by the President at
Whitehall
Palace
Royal Banqueting
House-Whitehall Palace
London, England
19 November
2003, 01:24
P.M. (Local)

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 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 ompelling 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 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.)
END 2:03
P.M. (Local)
Photo
Note 1: President George W. Bush and Laura Bush listen to the playing
of
America's national anthem during an official welcome ceremony at
Buckingham
Palace in London, Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2003. Standing with them are Her
Majesty Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. The
President
and Mrs. Bush last visited Buckingham Palace July of 2001.
Photo
Note 2: Arriving for the official ceremonial welcome for America's
State
Visit, President George W. Bush and Laura Bush are greeted by Her
Majesty
Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, at Buckingham
Palace
in London Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2003.
Photo
Note 3: The Household Calvary of Buckingham Palace parade by, from
left,
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, President George W. Bush, Laura Bush and
Prince
Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, during the ceremonial welcome at Buckingham
Palace in London, Wednesday, Nov. 19, 2003.
