Full text of Blair's EU speech
Thursday, June 23, 2005 Posted: 1108 GMT (1908 HKT)
BRUSSELS, Belgium -- Here is the full text of British Prime Minister Tony Blair's speech to the European Parliament in Brussels on Thursday, as provided by the UK's Press Association:
It is an honor to be here in the European Parliament today. With your permission, I will come back after each European Council during the UK Presidency and report to you.
In addition, I would be happy to consult the parliament before each Council, so as to have the benefit of the views of the European Parliament before Council deliberations.
This is a timely address. Whatever else people disagree upon in Europe today, they at least agree on one point: Europe is in the midst of a profound debate about its future. I want to talk to you plainly today about this debate, the reasons for it and how to resolve it. In every crisis there is an opportunity.
There is one here for Europe now, if we have the courage to take it.
The debate over Europe should not be conducted by trading insults or in terms of personality. It should be an open and frank exchange of ideas. And right at the outset I want to describe clearly how I define the debate and the disagreement underlying it.
The issue is not between a "free market" Europe and a social Europe, between those who want to retreat to a common market and those who believe in Europe as a political project.
This is not just a misrepresentation. It is to intimidate those who want change in Europe by representing the desire for change as betrayal of the European ideal, to try to shut off serious debate about Europe's future by claiming that the very insistence on debate is to embrace the anti-Europe.
It is a mindset I have fought against all my political life. Ideals survive through change. They die through inertia in the face of challenge.
I am a passionate pro-European. I always have been. My first vote was in 1975 in the British referendum on membership and I voted yes. In 1983, when I was the last candidate in the UK to be selected shortly before that election and when my party had a policy of withdrawing from Europe, I told the selection conference that I disagreed with the policy. Some thought I had lost the selection. Some perhaps wish I had. I then helped change our policy in the 1980s and was proud of that change.
Since being Prime Minister I signed the Social Chapter, helped, along with France, to create the modern European Defense Policy, have played my part in the Amsterdam, the Nice, then the Rome treaties.
This is a union of values, of solidarity between nations and people, of not just a common market in which we trade but a common political space in which we live as citizens. It always will be.
I believe in Europe as a political project. I believe in Europe with a strong and caring social dimension. I would never accept a Europe that was simply an economic market.
To say that is the issue is to escape the real debate and hide in the comfort zone of the things we have always said to each other in times of difficulty.
There is not some division between the Europe necessary to succeed economically and social Europe. Political Europe and economic Europe do not live in separate rooms.
The purpose of social Europe and economic Europe should be to sustain each other.
The purpose of political Europe should be to promote the democratic and effective institutions to develop policy in these two spheres and across the board where we want and need to cooperate in our mutual interest.
But the purpose of political leadership is to get the policies right for today's world.
For 50 years Europe's leaders have done that. We talk of crisis. Let us first talk of achievement. When the war ended, Europe was in ruins. Today the EU stands as a monument to political achievement. Almost 50 years of peace, 50 years of prosperity, 50 years of progress. Think of it and be grateful.
The broad sweep of history is on the side of the EU. Countries round the world are coming together because in collective cooperation they increase individual strength. Until the second half of the 20th century, for centuries European nations individually had dominated the world, colonized large parts of it, fought wars against each other for world supremacy.
Out of the carnage of the Second World War, political leaders had the vision to realize those days were gone. Today's world does not diminish that vision. It demonstrates its prescience. The USA is the world's only superpower. But China and India in a few decades will be the world's largest economies, each of them with populations three times that of the whole of the EU. The idea of Europe, united and working together, is essential for our nations to be strong enough to keep our place in this world.
Now, almost 50 years on, we have to renew. There is no shame in that. All institutions must do it. And we can. But only if we remarry the European ideals we believe in with the modern world we live in.
If Europe defaulted to Euroskepticism, or if European nations faced with this immense challenge, decide to huddle together, hoping we can avoid globalization, shrink away from confronting the changes around us, take refuge in the present policies of Europe as if by constantly repeating them, we would by the very act of repetition make them more relevant, then we risk failure. Failure on a grand, strategic, scale. This is not a time to accuse those who want Europe to change of betraying Europe. It is a time to recognize that only by change will Europe recover its strength, its relevance, its idealism and therefore its support amongst the people.
And as ever the people are ahead of the politicians. We always think as a political class that people, unconcerned with the daily obsession of politics, may not understand it, may not see its subtleties and its complexities. But, ultimately, people always see politics more clearly than us. Precisely because they are not daily obsessed with it.
The issue is not about the idea of the European Union. It is about modernization. It is about policy. It is not a debate about how to abandon Europe but how to make it do what it was set up to do: improve the lives of people. And right now, they aren't convinced. Consider this.
For four years Europe conducted a debate over our new constitution, two years of it in the Convention. It was a detailed and careful piece of work setting out the new rules to govern a Europe of 25 and in time 27, 28 and more member states. It was endorsed by all Governments. It was supported by all leaders. It was then comprehensively rejected in referendums in two founding member states, in the case of the Netherlands by over 60 percent. The reality is that in most member states it would be hard today to secure a "yes" for it in a referendum.
There are two possible explanations. One is that people studied the Constitution and disagreed with its precise articles. I doubt that was the basis of the majority "no." This was not an issue of bad drafting or specific textual disagreement.
The other explanation is that the Constitution became merely the vehicle for the people to register a wider and deeper discontent with the state of affairs in Europe. I believe this to be the correct analysis.
If so, it is not a crisis of political institutions, it is a crisis of political leadership. People in Europe are posing hard questions to us. They worry about globalization, job security, about pensions and living standards.
They see not just their economy but their society changing around them. Traditional communities are broken up, ethnic patterns change, family life is under strain as families struggle to balance work and home.
We are living through an era of profound upheaval and change. Look at our children and the technology they use and the jobs market they face. The world is unrecognizable from that we experienced as students 20, 30 years ago. When such change occurs, moderate people must give leadership. If they don't, the extremes gain traction on the political process. It happens within a nation. It is happening in Europe now.
Just reflect. The Laeken Declaration which launched the Constitution was designed "to bring Europe closer to the people." Did it? The Lisbon agenda was launched in the year 2000 with the ambition of making Europe "the most competitive place to do business in the world by 2010." We are halfway through that period. Has it succeeded?
I have sat through Council Conclusions after Council Conclusions describing how we are "reconnecting Europe to the people." Are we?
It is time to give ourselves a reality check. To receive the wake-up call. The people are blowing the trumpets round the city walls. Are we listening? Have we the political will to go out and meet them so that they regard our leadership as part of the solution not the problem?
That is the context in which the budget debate should be set. People say: We need the budget to restore Europe's credibility. Of course we do. But it should be the right budget. It shouldn't be abstracted from the debate about Europe's crisis. It should be part of the answer to it.
I want to say a word about last Friday's summit. There have been suggestions that I was not willing to compromise on the UK rebate; that I only raised CAP [Common Agricultural Policy] reform at the last minute; that I expected to renegotiate the CAP on Friday night. In fact, I am the only British leader that has ever said I would put the rebate on the table. I never said we should end the CAP now or renegotiate it overnight. Such a position would be absurd. Any change must take account of the legitimate needs of farming communities and happen over time.
I have said simply two things: that we cannot agree a new financial perspective that does not at least set out a process that leads to a more rational budget; and that this must allow such a budget to shape the second half of that perspective up to 2013. Otherwise it will be 2014 before any fundamental change is agreed, let alone implemented. Again, in the meantime, of course Britain will pay its fair share of enlargement. I might point out that on any basis we would remain the second highest net contributor to the EU, having in this perspective paid billions more than similar-sized countries.
So, that is the context. What would a different policy agenda for Europe look like?
First, it would modernize our social model. Again some have suggested I want to abandon Europe's social model. But tell me: what type of social model is it that has 20 million unemployed in Europe; productivity rates falling behind those of the USA; that is allowing more science graduates to be produced by India than by Europe; and that, on any relative index of a modern economy -- skills, R&D, patents, IT, is going down, not up. India will expand its biotechnology sector fivefold in the next five years. China has trebled its spending on R&D in the last five.
Of the top 20 universities in the world today, only two are now in Europe.
The purpose of our social model should be to enhance our ability to compete, to help our people cope with globalization, to let them embrace its opportunities and avoid its dangers. Of course we need a social Europe. But it must be a social Europe that works.
And we've been told how to do it. The Kok report in 2004 shows the way. Investment in knowledge, in skills, in active labor market policies, in science parks and innovation, in higher education, in urban regeneration, in help for small businesses. This is modern social policy, not regulation and job protection that may save some jobs for a time at the expense of many jobs in the future.
And since this is a day for demolishing caricatures, let me demolish one other: the idea that Britain is in the grip of some extreme Anglo-Saxon market philosophy that tramples on the poor and disadvantaged.
The present British government has introduced the new deal for the unemployed, the largest jobs program in Europe that has seen, long-term youth unemployment virtually abolished. It has increased investment in our public services more than any other European country in the past five years. We needed to, it is true, but we did it. We have introduced Britain's first minimum wage. We have regenerated our cities. We have lifted almost one million children out of poverty and two million pensioners out of acute hardship and are embarked on the most radical expansion of childcare, maternity and paternity rights in our country's history. It is just that we have done it on the basis of, and not at the expense of, a strong economy.
Secondly, let the budget reflect these realities. Again the Sapir report shows the way. Published by the European Commission in 2003, it sets out in clear detail what a modern European Budget would look like. Put it into practice. But a modern budget for Europe is not one that 10 years from now is still spending 40 percent of its money on the CAP.
Thirdly, implement the Lisbon Agenda. On jobs, labor market participation, school leavers, lifelong learning, we are making progress that nowhere near matches the precise targets we set out at Lisbon. That agenda told us what to do. Let us do it.
Fourth, and here I tread carefully, get a macroeconomic framework for Europe that is disciplined but also flexible. It is not for me to comment on the Eurozone. I just say this: If we agreed real progress on economic reform, if we demonstrated real seriousness on structural change, then people would perceive reform of macro policy as sensible and rational, not a product of fiscal laxity but of common sense. And we need such reform urgently if Europe is to grow.
After the economic and social challenges, then let us confront another set of linked issues -- crime, security and immigration.
Crime is now crossing borders more easily than ever before. Organized crime costs the UK at least £20 billion annually.
Migration has doubled in the past 20 years. Much of the migration is healthy and welcome. But it must be managed. Illegal immigration is an issue for all our nations, and a human tragedy for many thousands of people. It is estimated that 70 per cent of illegal immigrants have their passage facilitated by organized crime groups. Then there is the repugnant practice of human trafficking whereby organized gangs move people from one region to another with the intention of exploiting them when they arrive. Between 600,000 and 800,000 people are trafficked globally each year. Every year over 100,000 women are victims of trafficking in the European Union.
Again, a relevant JHA agenda would focus on these issues: implementing the EU action plan on counter-terrorism which has huge potential to improve law enforcement as well as addressing the radicalization and recruitment of terrorists; cross-border intelligence and policing on organized crime; developing proposals to hit the people and drug traffickers hard, in opening up their bank accounts, harassing their activities, arresting their leading members and bring them to justice; getting returns agreements for failed asylum seekers and illegal immigrants from neighboring countries and others; developing biometric technology to make Europe's borders secure.
Then there is the whole area of CFSP. We should be agreeing practical measures to enhance European defense capability, be prepared to take on more missions of peacekeeping and enforcement, develop the capability, with NATO or where NATO does not want to be engaged outside it, to be able to intervene quickly and effectively in support of conflict resolution. Look at the numbers in European armies today and our expenditure. Do they really answer the strategic needs of today?
Such a defense policy is a necessary part of an effective foreign policy. But even without it, we should be seeing how we can make Europe's influence count. When the European Union agreed recently a doubling of aid to Africa, it was an immediate boost not just for that troubled continent, but for European cooperation. We are world leaders in development and proud of it. We should be leading the way on promoting a new multi-lateral trade agreement which will increase trade for all, especially the poorest nations. We are leading the debate on climate change and developing pan-European policies to tackle it. Thanks to Javier Solana, Europe has started to make its presence felt in the Middle East peace process. But my point is very simple. A strong Europe would be an active player in foreign policy, a good partner, of course, to the US but also capable of demonstrating its own capacity to shape and move the world forward.
Such a Europe -- its economy in the process of being modernized, its security enhanced by clear action within our borders and beyond -- would be a confident Europe. It would be a Europe confident enough to see enlargement not as a threat, as if membership were a zero sum game in which old members lose as new members gain, but an extraordinary, historic opportunity to build a greater and more powerful union. Because be under no illusion: if we stop enlargement or shut out its natural consequences, it wouldn't, in the end, save one job, keep one firm in business, prevent one demoralization. For a time it might, but not for long.
And in the meantime Europe will become more narrow, more introspective and those who garner support will be those not in the traditions of European idealism but in those of outdated nationalism and xenophobia. But I tell you in all frankness: it is a contradiction to be in favor of liberalizing Europe's membership but against opening up its economy.
If we set out that clear direction, if we then combined it with the Commission -- as this one under Jose Manuel Barroso's leadership is fully capable of doing -- that is prepared to send back some of the unnecessary regulation, peel back some of the bureaucracy and become a champion of a global, outward-looking, competitive Europe -- then it will not be hard to capture the imagination and support of the people of Europe.
In our Presidency, we will try to take forward the budget deal; to resolve some of the hard dossiers, like the Services Directive and Working Time Directive; to carry out the union's obligations to those like Turkey and Croatia that wait in hope of a future as part of Europe; and to conduct this debate about the future of Europe in an open, inclusive way, giving our own views strongly but fully respectful of the views of others.
Only one thing I ask: don't let us kid ourselves that this debate is unnecessary; that if only we assume "business as usual," people will sooner or later relent and acquiesce in Europe as it is, not as they want it to be. In my time as prime minister, I have found that the hard part is not taking the decision, it is spotting when it has to be taken. It is understanding the difference between the challenges that have to be managed and those that have to be confronted and overcome. This is such a moment of decision for Europe.
The people of Europe are speaking to us. They are posing the questions. They are wanting our leadership. It is time we gave it to them.
■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■
PM’s remarks at the reception hosted by Indian Ambassador in Washington
July 19, 2005 Washington
“I am very pleased to be with all of you this evening and appreciate your warm welcome. I am here in Washington on a visit at the invitation of President Bush. It is our shared hope that the discussions that we had yesterday would mark a transformation of ties between our two great democracies. I take the opportunity today to share with you my thoughts regarding the vision of our partnership and what you, as Indians resident in the United States, could contribute to these goals.
In 1949, Panditji came here on what he himself described as a ‘voyage of discovery’. I am here on a mission to give U.S. leaders an overview of the dramatic changes now taking place in India in our quest for social and economic transformation. India now happens to be one of the fastest growing economies in the world. Indian economy has now acquired the capacity to grow annually at the rate of 7-8 per cent. It is an endeavour to communicate to the opinion makers the ferment and energy that characterize Indian society. It is to convey that there is a new India in the making: one of world class firms, of a dynamic services sector, of young entrepreneurs and risk takers, of confident professionals and of rising urban and rural income levels. My purpose in coming to the United States were three. First, to enhance an appreciation of these very changes which have given us the capability to better partner the United States. Second, to emphasise that the United States can contribute to these processes, accelerate growth rates in India by its policies and that it is in US strategic interest that the Indian economy expands rapidly. And third, that the educational empowerment of a demographically young India provides the basis for a long-term partnership between two key knowledge powers. My message is that India is an open economy as well as an open society, one capable and confident of closely engaging the world.
I believe that these last two days, the groundwork has been laid for a new relationship. I saw a different level of interest in India on the part of the President himself, key members of the Administration and among members of the US Congress, to whom I had the honour of delivering an address this morning. I saw as well that the corporate sector in the United States is looking at India very much more positively. This is reflected in the enthusiasm of the CEOs who have joined the bilateral forum that the President and I inaugurated yesterday. Initiatives and understandings that emerge from this visit should contribute to the long-term strength and competitiveness of India. For me, this visit represents an important step in our journey towards reform and modernization that began in 1991.
Our challenge in India is to meet the rising aspirations of the upwardly mobile while simultaneously addressing the basic needs of those who are still vulnerable. We are committed to take determined measures to get rid of poverty, ignorance and disease which still afflict large section of our population. These are not choices, but two faces of the challenge of taking India forward. In the past, our ties with the United States have benefited India greatly. We seek now to build on that tradition while forging a new partnership. Obviously, with the passage of time, the terms of agreement are bound to change. Renewed cooperation in agricultural research, a focus on promoting agri-business, supporting innovative technologies, expanding educational networking, and building frontier science capabilities are all steps designed at giving our ties a contemporary relevance. Our two countries can cooperate to use the advances in modern science and technology to accelerate the pace of social and economic development. Our capability to partner the US on addressing global challenges has also increased and strengthening democratic capacities, addressing the HIV/AIDS challenge and responding to natural disasters are among our shared goals.
Our track record, even within the last year, clearly conveys a determination to raise the quality and scope of our cooperation. We have completed the Next Steps in Strategic Partnership, established Energy and Economic Dialogues, put in place an IPR regime and investment policies that encourage business, addressed the Dabhol problem, concluded an Open Skies Agreement with the USA, expanded our defence cooperation with a new framework, and worked closely on tsunami relief. These achievements give us the confidence to now tackle the more ambitious agenda that we have before us.
The role of the Indian community and Indian-Americans in this transformation process is vital. It is your creativity, knowledge, entrepreneurship and work ethic that has helped to greatly transform the image of India in American minds. No community in American history has achieved as much success in as short a time span as Indian-Americans. From a bridge between our two societies, you could become a veritable highway for the flow of ideas, technology and capital. You embody the knowledge partnership between us, whose broadening will surely make Indo-US ties one of the principal relationships of the world.
I thank you for all that you have done, individually and together, for India. Your support and your talents are necessary for our continued progress. I believe that the 21st century will be a global one, belonging to global citizens. It will a century of freedom, of democracy, of multi-culturalism and of knowledge. These are the very values you represent, values that we admire. Through your commitment and efforts, India and the Indo-US partnership will grow together.”
from the website of the Indian government Prime Minister's Office
■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■
U.S.-Japan Economic Relations: Never Better (Minister-Counselor Zumwalt in Kyushu)
February 25, 2005 Kagoshima
Good afternoon. It's an honor to address you today in Kagoshima, an area that, from the Bakumatsu period onward has contributed to building modern Japan. Ever since I studied Japanese history in college, I have wanted to visit the home of Saigo Takamori, so I very much appreciate your invitation today. Last night I tasted some authentic Kagoshima shochu, and learned that this delicious beverage enjoys considerable popularity across the whole of Japan. I have to say that I look forward to enjoying some "kuro buta" tonight for dinner. Kagoshima has been an important point of contact between Japan and Korea, China, Southeast Asia and the West - especially due to the early and eager adopters of Western technology in the "Satsuma-han." This flexible way of thinking will be needed to sustain Japan's place as a global leader in the 21st century.
When many Japanese people think about U.S.-Japan economic relations, they think of the United States applying gaiatsu to open Japan's markets to foreign goods and investment. While there might have been some truth to this image in the 1990s, this view has become outdated, as bilateral economic relations are now healthy and constructive. Many U.S. companies that used to be on the outside are now major investors in Japan. In 2004, U.S. companies invested roughly 200 billion yen in Japan, including household names like Kodak and Wal-Mart. In 2004, Toys R Us opened its 150th store in Japan, and Starbucks has over 30 coffee shops in Kyushu alone. Indeed over 70 U.S. firms have a physical presence in Kyushu.
Of course, like all relationships, U.S.-Japan economic ties still experience rough spots. Although Japan has made great strides in opening its economy to outside capital and ideas, some market access concerns remain. One pressing trade issue is beef. As I'm sure you are aware, Japan banned all imports of U.S. beef in December 2003 following the discovery of a single BSE-infected cow in Washington State. Since that time, the United States has devoted great efforts to address Japanese technical concerns. In October of 2004 our governments agreed on a road map to resume beef trade.
The simple fact is that U.S. beef is safe. The beef we want to sell to Japan is the same as that enjoyed by over 280 million Americans. Not one of these persons has contracted the human form of the disease from eating this beef. The time has come for us to resolve this issue, which will damage other aspects of our bilateral relationship if it is allowed to fester.
But despite this (hopefully) temporary problem, U.S. interest in the Japanese economy now includes many diverse issues, and our highest economic priority remains to advance shared interests of both countries and the world.
The United States and Japan have different cultures, different geographies, different histories, and we fought a ferocious war that ended only 60 years ago. Yet U.S.-Japan relations - symbolized by President Bush and Prime Minister Koizumi's close friendship - are both strong and stable economically, politically, and geo-strategically. The growing economic relationship between the world's two largest national economies is contributing to the health of the regional and global economy. We are your second-largest export market, and you are our fourth. This holds true in spite of Japan's low economic growth in the 1990s and significant changes in trade and investment patterns in the East Asia-Pacific region.
Media reporting has given much attention in recent weeks to the news that Japan's 2004 trade with China exceeded Japan's trade with the U.S. for the first time. This news is an impressive indicator of China's emergence as a major trading nation, but it would be wrong to conclude that Japan's economic relationship with the United States is losing importance. These trade numbers do not reflect the maturity of the U.S.-Japan economic relationship, nor the history of investment flows. An increasingly significant volume of goods and services is provided by Japanese investors in the United States and by U.S. investors in Japan. The total Japanese investment stock in the U.S. stood at $150 billion in 2002, while U.S. investment stock in Japan was $30.2 billion.
Right here in Kyushu, you have several well-known cases of U.S. investment. In Miyazaki, Ripplewood's 2001 acquisition of the Seagaia resort complex has helped to turn it around and preserve a key source of jobs. In Fukuoka, Colony Capital last year acquired ownership from Daiei Inc. of the Fukuoka Dome and neighboring Sea Hawk Hotel and Mall, thus injecting hundreds of millions of dollars into the local economy. Colony Capital is investing aggressively to refurbish the hotel and expand the shopping mall. By bringing in JAL to manage the hotel and by forming a strong partnership with Softbank, the new owner of the baseball team, Colony is expanding the resort's customer base and promoting it as a year-round resort destination. These efforts will contribute significantly to the Kyushu economy.
In spite of momentous changes in the world over the past 60 years - the end of the Cold War, the emergence of China as a major world actor, and the growing threat of terrorism - our political relationship has also endured and thrived. This partnership and friendship have remained strong because the United States and Japan share common values, and these common values help our friendship withstand changes that might otherwise affect our relationship. Among our common values are our belief in democracy, our desire to promote human rights, and our conviction that the market economy is the most efficient way of organizing our economies in order to promote growth. And also, we share a belief that it is in our mutual interest to promote sustainable economic growth throughout the world. So these shared values underpin our interests, as the world's two largest economies, to protect and strengthen the world order.
What impresses me even more than the strong economic and political ties between our two nations is the remarkable people-to-people relationship. Americans and Japanese are fascinated and positively influenced by each other. There was a time when this cultural appeal was mostly one way, a time when Katherine Hepburn and Gary Cooper appeared on Kagoshima movie screens, Disneyland in your children's imaginations, and McDonalds hamburgers on your lunch menus. Now the culture flows both ways. On a typical day, an American might drive to work in a Japanese car, eat sushi for lunch, and cheer Hideki Matsui or Ichiro in a Major League baseball game. Student exchanges - such as the one I went on as a high school student - flourish as never before. Since 1993, approximately 500,000 Japanese have studied in the United States, and we are eager to host even more. In that same time, about 25,000 American students have come to Japan.
U.S.-Japan relations are strong - indeed they have never been better. The warm friendship between President Bush and Prime Minister Koizumi symbolizes this relationship. Americans regard Prime Minister Koizumi as a dynamic, forward-thinking leader who is willing to accept Japan's role as a great power in the world. His commitment to carry through his crucial economic reform package is not only admirable and a benefit to Japan but, perhaps even more important, it will help restore the economy as a global engine for growth. Prime Minister Koizumi has, through active foreign diplomacy, cemented Japan's role as a powerful actor on the world stage.
Our combined economic size means that U.S.-Japan relationship matters to others.
I have explained why U.S.-Japan relations have remained durable and strong. But why does this matter for people outside the United States and Japan? The importance of our relationship to the world can be explained by our size and influence. Our two countries are world leaders - economically, politically, culturally, and militarily. So the fact that we have such a strong relationship is very important, not only to us, but to the entire world, because as the world's two most prosperous and successful societies, the world looks to the United States and Japan for leadership.
Economically, the U.S. and Japan together account for 42% of the world's gross domestic product, which is as big as the 18 next largest economies combined. Our two nations account for about one-quarter of all world trade. Japanese and American companies file about 60% of all patents in the world each year; we make almost 40% of the world's automobiles and account for about half of all money spent on research and development worldwide.
As the world's largest economies, we work together as a positive force to influence world events constructively. We do this in China, where our business communities strive to strengthen China's intellectual property regime and the rule of law, and also in Africa, where we are strengthening the public health system. We are working together to resolve the threats emanating from the Korean peninsula. We stand side by side in the war on terrorism, through activities such as stemming the flow of terrorist assets in the international banking system. From our perspective, Japan is truly a valued partner in shaping the world economic order.
The United States and Japan are linked in shared grief over the loss of life and property from the recent earthquake and tsunami in the Indian Ocean. In a shared spirit of compassion and responsibility, we are leading an unprecedented international effort to help those affected by this tragedy rebuild their societies. Japan disbursed the remarkable amount of $500 million in grant aid to the affected countries within a matter of weeks. U.S. forces based in Japan were also able to provide logistical support to the Japanese relief effort, by ferrying Japanese food and other supplies to Thailand for distribution throughout the region. We are looking forward to continuing to work closely together in reconstructing the affected countries and in developing a tsunami early warning system in the Indian Ocean.
As this example illustrates, our combined efforts matter because we rank as the world's two largest aid donors. Together we give nearly 40% of all assistance to the developing world, and when you include private sector giving, non-government organization funding, peace-keeping efforts, and military relief, the number leaps dramatically.
Japan has been Iraq's second-largest aid donor and continues to provide critical reconstruction and humanitarian assistance. In November, the Japanese Government increased grant aid to Iraq from $1.5 billion to $1.9 billion, and it has already disbursed around $1.3 billion in grant aid for electricity, water, hospitals, police and fire brigade training, education and other areas. Japan has also pledged to contribute a total of $5 billion for Iraqi reconstruction through 2007, including the $1.9 billion in grant aid. Japan also agreed to forgive 80% if Iraq's bilateral debt to Japan, a vital step to putting Iraq's economy on the road to sustainable growth.
Japan has also been one of Afghanistan's most reliable and generous donors, contributing nearly $1 billion in reconstruction assistance since 2002. $800 million of the pledge has already been disbursed. We are working together to build a road that will link up Afghanistan's many regions and help forge a sense of nationhood. In this way our economic assistance programs provide hope to the Afghan people and enhance the prospects for peace and stability.
We have also been among the principal players in trying to realize a peaceful settlement to ethnic conflict in Sri Lanka, where we are offering economic assistance to convince the two warring parties to seek a peaceful solution to a twenty year old conflict.
Another major area of collaboration is in health, especially in the fight against infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and polio. The USAID-Japan Partnership for Global Health is focused on human capacity building, education, and disease prevention, and USAID and the GOJ are partnering or exploring cooperation in over 30 countries in various regions. The United States and Japan are also close partners on the board of the Global Fund to Fight AIDs, Tuberculosis and Malaria, to which Japan has pledged $260 million.
Because the U.S. and Japan work so effectively on so many development issues, we are especially concerned that between 2000 and 2003, Japanese ODA declined 30% while the American budget for overseas assistance grew by about 50% from $10 billion to $16 billion.
As two great trading nations, the United States and Japan share common interests in promoting global trade liberalization. At present, Japan is focusing its trade liberalization efforts on the creation of a network of bilateral Free Trade Areas (FTAs) with Asian and Latin American countries. We hope this effort will lead to open, high-quality agreements that contribute to the liberalization of the world trading system as a whole. But we also need to work together toward a positive outcome for the Doha multilateral trade negotiations. For it is in this multilateral forum that we can achieve the biggest gains to the world economy. The ultimate goal is a better global trade system that is open, transparent and efficient, benefiting rich and poor countries alike.
Finally, as the two largest economies in the Asia-Pacific region, we can work together in APEC - a group of 21 economies in the region - to advance regional prosperity and security. Our collaboration is critical to the success of APEC. The 21 leaders who meet each year for the APEC forum represent about 40% of the world's population, almost 50% of world trade, nearly 60% of global economic output. So when APEC leaders achieve a consensus, it carries a lot of weight. But achieving consensus among 21 diverse economies is not always easy. That's why it is so important for the U.S. and Japan to work together in APEC.
Historically, APEC's work has focused on facilitating regional trade, investment and economic growth. The vision adopted by APEC leaders in 1994 of free and open trade and investment throughout the region is powerful. Japan played an important role as host of APEC in 1995 when APEC leaders adopted the Osaka Action Agenda to transform that vision into reality. The greatest successes to date have been in reducing business transaction costs by cutting red tape, embracing automation, harmonizing standards, and eliminating unnecessary barriers to trade.
This year the U.S. looks forward to working very closely with Japan to improve the protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights. This work will position APEC economies to lead the world in innovation, while reducing the flow of counterfeit and pirated goods, which can threaten not only people's economic welfare but also their health and safety.
APEC leaders have also supported the process of global trade liberalization, for example by calling for a swift return to the WTO negotiating table in 2003. APEC leaders will again have an opportunity to give a boost to the WTO process when they meet in Pusan, Korea, in November, a few weeks before the world's trade ministers gather in Hong Kong for an important round of WTO negotiations. In addition to political support by APEC leaders, trade negotiators from APEC economies have developed specific proposals to advance the WTO agenda in areas like customs facilitation and reducing tariffs on information technology products.
APEC also is making progress on developing common approaches to negotiating bilateral and regional free trade agreements, to ensure that such agreements are comprehensive, consistent with the WTO, and truly trade liberalizing. This work is particularly important to ensure that the many existing and new agreements in the Asia-Pacific region serve not as stumbling blocks but as building blocks to achieve APEC's trade and investment goals.
In recent years, APEC leaders have also emphasized security, recognizing that free and open trade and investment cannot be achieved if it makes our societies less safe. The U.S. and Japan are collaborating very closely in APEC to strengthen export control systems in other APEC economies. This work will facilitate the flow of goods to legitimate end users while preventing illicit trafficking in weapons of mass destruction, their delivery systems, and related items. We also are working together to enhance safety of regional ports and to develop guidelines for keeping dangerous weapons like shoulder mounted missiles from terrorists.
To briefly review the points I tried to make today: U.S.-Japan relations are very strong, they are enduring, and that strength and endurance stems from our shared values and shared interests. Our combined size of nearly one half of the world's GDP means that working together we wield influence, and can tackle difficult problems together and in multilateral and regional organizations. We can work together to advance our common interests and global welfare in a wide number of fields including foreign assistance, global trade liberalization and in APEC.
You here in the Kyushu have an important role to play in this. You have a long history stemming from before the Meiji Restoration advocating for reform and change. I would encourage you to continue to exercise your "naiatsu" and promote policies in Tokyo that will enable Japan to continue working with the United States to advance our shared interests.
from the website of the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo
■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■ □ ■
The Presidential Inaugural Speech
January 20, 2005
Vice President Cheney, Mr. Chief Justice, President Carter, President Bush, President Clinton, reverend clergy, distinguished guests, fellow citizens:
On this day, prescribed by law and marked by ceremony, we celebrate the durable wisdom of our Constitution, and recall the deep commitments that unite our country. I am grateful for the honor of this hour, mindful of the consequential times in which we live, and determined to fulfill the oath that I have sworn and you have witnessed.
At this second gathering, our duties are defined not by the words I use, but by the history we have seen together. For a half century, America defended our own freedom by standing watch on distant borders. After the shipwreck of communism came years of relative quiet, years of repose, years of sabbatical - and then there came a day of fire.
We have seen our vulnerability - and we have seen its deepest source. For as long as whole regions of the world simmer in resentment and tyranny - prone to ideologies that feed hatred and excuse murder - violence will gather, and multiply in destructive power, and cross the most defended borders, and raise a mortal threat. There is only one force of history that can break the reign of hatred and resentment, and expose the pretensions of tyrants, and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is the force of human freedom.
We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world.
America's vital interests and our deepest beliefs are now one. From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our Nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time.
This is not primarily the task of arms, though we will defend ourselves and our friends by force of arms when necessary. Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen, and defended by citizens, and sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. And when the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own freedom, and make their own way.
The great objective of ending tyranny is the concentrated work of generations. The difficulty of the task is no excuse for avoiding it. America's influence is not unlimited, but fortunately for the oppressed, America's influence is considerable, and we will use it confidently in freedom's cause.
We will persistently clarify the choice before every ruler and every nation: The moral choice between oppression, which is always wrong, and freedom, which is eternally right. America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.
We will encourage reform in other governments by making clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people. America's belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed. In the long run, there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty.
Some, I know, have questioned the global appeal of liberty - though this time in history, four decades defined by the swiftest advance of freedom ever seen, is an odd time for doubt. Americans, of all people, should never be surprised by the power of our ideals. Eventually, the call of freedom comes to every mind and every soul. We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do not accept the possibility of permanent slavery. Liberty will come to those who love it.
The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it."
The leaders of governments with long habits of control need to know: To serve your people you must learn to trust them. Start on this journey of progress and justice, and America will walk at your side.
And all the allies of the United States can know: we honor your friendship, we rely on your counsel, and we depend on your help. Division among free nations is a primary goal of freedom's enemies. The concerted effort of free nations to promote democracy is a prelude to our enemies' defeat.
From all of you, I have asked patience in the hard task of securing America, which you have granted in good measure. Our country has accepted obligations that are difficult to fulfill, and would be dishonorable to abandon. Yet because we have acted in the great liberating tradition of this nation, tens of millions have achieved their freedom. And as hope kindles hope, millions more will find it. By our efforts, we have lit a fire as well - a fire in the minds of men. It warms those who feel its power, it burns those who fight its progress, and one day this untamed fire of freedom will reach the darkest corners of our world.
A few Americans have accepted the hardest duties in this cause - in the quiet work of intelligence and diplomacy ... the idealistic work of helping raise up free governments ... the dangerous and necessary work of fighting our enemies. Some have shown their devotion to our country in deaths that honored their whole lives - and we will always honor their names and their sacrifice.
All Americans have witnessed this idealism, and some for the first time. I ask our youngest citizens to believe the evidence of your eyes. You have seen duty and allegiance in the determined faces of our soldiers. You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs. Make the choice to serve in a cause larger than your wants, larger than yourself - and in your days you will add not just to the wealth of our country, but to its character.
America has need of idealism and courage, because we have essential work at home - the unfinished work of American freedom. In a world moving toward liberty, we are determined to show the meaning and promise of liberty.
In America's ideal of freedom, citizens find the dignity and security of economic independence, instead of laboring on the edge of subsistence. This is the broader definition of liberty that motivated the Homestead Act, the Social Security Act, and the G.I. Bill of Rights. And now we will extend this vision by reforming great institutions to serve the needs of our time. To give every American a stake in the promise and future of our country, we will bring the highest standards to our schools, and build an ownership society. We will widen the ownership of homes and businesses, retirement savings and health insurance - preparing our people for the challenges of life in a free society. By making every citizen an agent of his or her own destiny, we will give our fellow Americans greater freedom from want and fear, and make our society more prosperous and just and equal.
In America's ideal of freedom, the public interest depends on private character - on integrity, and tolerance toward others, and the rule of conscience in our own lives. Self-government relies, in the end, on the governing of the self. That edifice of character is built in families, supported by communities with standards, and sustained in our national life by the truths of Sinai, the Sermon on the Mount, the words of the Koran, and the varied faiths of our people. Americans move forward in every generation by reaffirming all that is good and true that came before - ideals of justice and conduct that are the same yesterday, today, and forever.
In America's ideal of freedom, the exercise of rights is ennobled by service, and mercy, and a heart for the weak. Liberty for all does not mean independence from one another. Our nation relies on men and women who look after a neighbor and surround the lost with love. Americans, at our best, value the life we see in one another, and must always remember that even the unwanted have worth. And our country must abandon all the habits of racism, because we cannot carry the message of freedom and the baggage of bigotry at the same time.
From the perspective of a single day, including this day of dedication, the issues and questions before our country are many. From the viewpoint of centuries, the questions that come to us are narrowed and few. Did our generation advance the cause of freedom? And did our character bring credit to that cause?
These questions that judge us also unite us, because Americans of every party and background, Americans by choice and by birth, are bound to one another in the cause of freedom. We have known divisions, which must be healed to move forward in great purposes - and I will strive in good faith to heal them. Yet those divisions do not define America. We felt the unity and fellowship of our nation when freedom came under attack, and our response came like a single hand over a single heart. And we can feel that same unity and pride whenever America acts for good, and the victims of disaster are given hope, and the unjust encounter justice, and the captives are set free.
We go forward with complete confidence in the eventual triumph of freedom. Not because history runs on the wheels of inevitability; it is human choices that move events. Not because we consider ourselves a chosen nation; God moves and chooses as He wills. We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. When our Founders declared a new order of the ages; when soldiers died in wave upon wave for a union based on liberty; when citizens marched in peaceful outrage under the banner "Freedom Now" - they were acting on an ancient hope that is meant to be fulfilled. History has an ebb and flow of justice, but history also has a visible direction, set by liberty and the Author of Liberty.
When the Declaration of Independence was first read in public and the Liberty Bell was sounded in celebration, a witness said, "It rang as if it meant something." In our time it means something still. America, in this young century, proclaims liberty throughout all the world, and to all the inhabitants thereof. Renewed in our strength - tested, but not weary - we are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom.
Inaugural Addresses of the Presidents of the United States. 1989.
John F. Kennedy
Friday, January 20, 1961
Ｊ．Ｆ ケネディ 大統領就任演説
"Heavy snow fell the night before the inauguration, but thoughts about cancelling the plans were overruled. The election of 1960 had been close, and the Democratic Senator from Massachusetts was eager to gather support for his agenda. He attended Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Georgetown that morning before joining President Eisenhower to travel to the Capitol. The Congress had extended the East Front, and the inaugural platform spanned the new addition. The oath of office was administered by Chief Justice Earl Warren. Robert Frost read one of his poems at the ceremony.
Vice President Johnson, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chief Justice, President Eisenhower, Vice President Nixon, President Truman, reverend clergy, fellow citizens, we observe today not a victory of party, but a celebration of freedom—symbolizing an end, as well as a beginning—signifying renewal, as well as change. For I have sworn before you and Almighty God the same solemn oath our forebears prescribed nearly a century and three quarters ago.
The world is very different now. For man holds in his mortal hands the power to abolish all forms of human poverty and all forms of human life. And yet the same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe—the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.
We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans—born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage—and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.
Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do—for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.
To those new States whom we welcome to the ranks of the free, we pledge our word that one form of colonial control shall not have passed away merely to be replaced by a far more iron tyranny. We shall not always expect to find them supporting our view. But we shall always hope to find them strongly supporting their own freedom—and to remember that, in the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.
To those peoples in the huts and villages across the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required—not because the Communists may be doing it, not because we seek their votes, but because it is right. If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.
To our sister republics south of our border, we offer a special pledge—to convert our good words into good deeds—in a new alliance for progress—to assist free men and free governments in casting off the chains of poverty. But this peaceful revolution of hope cannot become the prey of hostile powers. Let all our neighbors know that we shall join with them to oppose aggression or subversion anywhere in the Americas. And let every other power know that this Hemisphere intends to remain the master of its own house.
To that world assembly of sovereign states, the United Nations, our last best hope in an age where the instruments of war have far outpaced the instruments of peace, we renew our pledge of support—to prevent it from becoming merely a forum for invective—to strengthen its shield of the new and the weak—and to enlarge the area in which its writ may run.
Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction.
But neither can two great and powerful groups of nations take comfort from our present course—both sides overburdened by the cost of modern weapons, both rightly alarmed by the steady spread of the deadly atom, yet both racing to alter that uncertain balance of terror that stays the hand of mankind's final war.
So let us begin anew—remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate.
Let both sides, for the first time, formulate serious and precise proposals for the inspection and control of arms—and bring the absolute power to destroy other nations under the absolute control of all nations.
Let both sides seek to invoke the wonders of science instead of its terrors. Together let us explore the stars, conquer the deserts, eradicate disease, tap the ocean depths, and encourage the arts and commerce.
And if a beachhead of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavor, not a new balance of power, but a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved.
All this will not be finished in the first 100 days. Nor will it be finished in the first 1,000 days, nor in the life of this Administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet. But let us begin.
In your hands, my fellow citizens, more than in mine, will rest the final success or failure of our course. Since this country was founded, each generation of Americans has been summoned to give testimony to its national loyalty. The graves of young Americans who answered the call to service surround the globe.
Now the trumpet summons us again—not as a call to bear arms, though arms we need; not as a call to battle, though embattled we are—but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"—a struggle against the common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself.
In the long history of the world, only a few generations have been granted the role of defending freedom in its hour of maximum danger. I do not shrink from this responsibility—I welcome it. I do not believe that any of us would exchange places with any other people or any other generation. The energy, the faith, the devotion which we bring to this endeavor will light our country and all who serve it—and the glow from that fire can truly light the world.
Finally, whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own.