On the Brink of Disaster |
Previous | 1 of 4 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
ON THE BRINK OF DISASTER Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, in accordance with the unanimous-consent agreement previously entered into, I believe this is an appropriate time for the clerk to read the speech prepared for delivery today by the distinguished Senator from Arkansas [Mr. FULBRIGHT]. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will read the speech prepared by the Senator from Arkansas. The legislative clerk read Mr. Fulbright's speech, as follows: Mr. President, at this moment no one knows whether the United States military forces in Lebanon will be plunged deeper into the Middle East or whether an opportunity will arise in the near future to withdraw them. Certainly, it is the expressed hope of the executive branch, and I am sure the unspoken hope of most Americans, that these forces will be able to leave the area promptly. While they are still there, they deserve our support. The decision which put them into the Middle East was not theirs to make, though they will bear the brunt of any drastic consequences which may stem from it. The safety of the men in the Middle East is our primary concern at the moment; but if we limit our concern to considerations of the moment, we will not really solve anything. We must look at the basic causes of our troops being in Lebanon. When we do that, we find that our present trouble in the Middle East is merely symptomatic of a much more serious malady. The truth is. Mr. President, that our foreign policy is inadequate, outmoded, and misdirected. It is based in part on A false conception of our real, long-term national interests and in part on an erroneous appraisal of the state of the world in which we live. Worse, it reflects a dangerous apathy and a quite incomprehensible unwillingness to look facts in the face. We should put off no longer a complete reconsideration and reorientation of our foreign policy. We have already waited far too long. Time and again we have put things off. Time and again we have drifted until circumstances reached an intolerable state, and then we have rushed to the brink. This time we have even put one foot over the brink. There we dangle, waiting and wondering what will come next. We are now looking squarely into the abyss of war, a war which we do not seek and which can only have the most catastrophic consequences for ell humanity. But the issue of peace or war is only one of our problems. Equally troublesome—and a good deal more complicated—are the questions of what our long-term position in the world is going to be and of what specific kind of world we think would best serve our long-term interests. It is no answer to say we want to live at peace in a free, peaceful, and secure world, That is a hope which we all share, but it is only a hope: it is not a policy. My fear, Mr. President, is that, if we continue as we have been and are, we will lose so much ground diplomatically, politically, and economically that the question of a shooting war will really become irrelevant. Before our remaining toeholds pro, it is time that we stop to look at where we are. Even more important, it is time to ask ourselves how we have gotten into this predicament. Only the blindest of optimism would interpret our international position as a secure one. The fact is that we are in trouble, very deep trouble, regardless of what happens next in the Middle East. The exposed position we now occupy in that area is only one reflection of that trouble. A year ago we had another reflection of it, when the Soviet Union launched the first of the sputniks. That event told us what many already knew, but what this Government chose to ignore. It told us that there had grown up elsewhere in the world a capacity for scientific, intellectual, and technical achievements, which if it had not already done so would soon surpass our own. This had happened in a country and under a system which was hostile to our own and to the freedom which we cherish. It upset the basic assumption upon which our defense had rested since World War II, the assumption of our ability to maintain a substantial scientific and technical supremacy in this country. The launching of the first sputnik shocked us, Mr. President, into a momentary confrontation with reality. Some of us recognized that for years this Nation had wallowed in a kind of fool's paradise in jolly and supercilious complacency while elsewhere others of more serious bent of mind had worked. There was a realization that we had seriously neglected education. There was a realization that others had labored while we had loafed. The reformation was momentary. The smug and apathetic tendencies of our leadership soon spread to the rest of the Nation. On the one hand, there was a disposition to live with the fact that our scientific leadership was either gone or going fast: on the other hand, there was the delusion that perhaps the sputnik was not very important—a bauble. I believe somebody called it. After all, we still had the Strategic Air Command and intercontinental missiles and perhaps even a shot at the moon on the way. So we went back to business as usual and pleasure as usual. Then a few weeks ago. events occurred in Latin America to remind us of the precariousness of our position in the world. There, in an area with which we had once enjoyed a most cordial, friendly, and intimate association: in this area regarded as safe, above all others, a symbolic explosion occurred, no less startling in its impact on the Nation than the first sputnik. A few years back, a former Vice President had been greeted with almost hysterical approval in Latin America. The present- Vice President was spat upon and stoned. This, too, was a measure of how far we had fallen. This. too. gave us cause to think. What had we done? After all. this outburst of resentment and fury was directed at something besides Mr. Nixon as a person. Once again, for a brief time, we
Object Description
Title | On the Brink of Disaster |
Abstract | Speech by Fulbright outlining how short-sighted American foreign policy is damaging to both American interests and image abroad. |
Creator | Fulbright, J. William |
Date | August 6, 1958 |
Audience of Speech | United States Senate |
Institution Where Speech Was Given | United States Senate |
City and State | Washington, D.C. |
Subject |
Foreign Policy International Relations Communism Middle East Policy Latin America |
Item Location | J. William Fulbright Papers (MS F956 144, Series 71, Box 13, File 28) |
Rights | Please contact Special Collections for information on copyright. |
Digital Publisher | University of Arkansas Libraries |
Series Title | A Calm Voice in a Strident World: Senator J.W. Fulbright Speaks |
Description
Title | On the Brink of Disaster |
Abstract | Speech by Fulbright outlining how short-sighted American foreign policy is damaging to both American interests and image abroad. |
Creator | Fulbright, J. William |
Date | August 6, 1958 |
Audience of Speech | United States Senate |
Institution Where Speech Was Given | United States Senate |
City and State | Washington, D.C. |
Subject |
Foreign Policy International Relations Communism Middle East Policy Latin America |
Transcript | ON THE BRINK OF DISASTER Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, in accordance with the unanimous-consent agreement previously entered into, I believe this is an appropriate time for the clerk to read the speech prepared for delivery today by the distinguished Senator from Arkansas [Mr. FULBRIGHT]. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will read the speech prepared by the Senator from Arkansas. The legislative clerk read Mr. Fulbright's speech, as follows: Mr. President, at this moment no one knows whether the United States military forces in Lebanon will be plunged deeper into the Middle East or whether an opportunity will arise in the near future to withdraw them. Certainly, it is the expressed hope of the executive branch, and I am sure the unspoken hope of most Americans, that these forces will be able to leave the area promptly. While they are still there, they deserve our support. The decision which put them into the Middle East was not theirs to make, though they will bear the brunt of any drastic consequences which may stem from it. The safety of the men in the Middle East is our primary concern at the moment; but if we limit our concern to considerations of the moment, we will not really solve anything. We must look at the basic causes of our troops being in Lebanon. When we do that, we find that our present trouble in the Middle East is merely symptomatic of a much more serious malady. The truth is. Mr. President, that our foreign policy is inadequate, outmoded, and misdirected. It is based in part on A false conception of our real, long-term national interests and in part on an erroneous appraisal of the state of the world in which we live. Worse, it reflects a dangerous apathy and a quite incomprehensible unwillingness to look facts in the face. We should put off no longer a complete reconsideration and reorientation of our foreign policy. We have already waited far too long. Time and again we have put things off. Time and again we have drifted until circumstances reached an intolerable state, and then we have rushed to the brink. This time we have even put one foot over the brink. There we dangle, waiting and wondering what will come next. We are now looking squarely into the abyss of war, a war which we do not seek and which can only have the most catastrophic consequences for ell humanity. But the issue of peace or war is only one of our problems. Equally troublesome—and a good deal more complicated—are the questions of what our long-term position in the world is going to be and of what specific kind of world we think would best serve our long-term interests. It is no answer to say we want to live at peace in a free, peaceful, and secure world, That is a hope which we all share, but it is only a hope: it is not a policy. My fear, Mr. President, is that, if we continue as we have been and are, we will lose so much ground diplomatically, politically, and economically that the question of a shooting war will really become irrelevant. Before our remaining toeholds pro, it is time that we stop to look at where we are. Even more important, it is time to ask ourselves how we have gotten into this predicament. Only the blindest of optimism would interpret our international position as a secure one. The fact is that we are in trouble, very deep trouble, regardless of what happens next in the Middle East. The exposed position we now occupy in that area is only one reflection of that trouble. A year ago we had another reflection of it, when the Soviet Union launched the first of the sputniks. That event told us what many already knew, but what this Government chose to ignore. It told us that there had grown up elsewhere in the world a capacity for scientific, intellectual, and technical achievements, which if it had not already done so would soon surpass our own. This had happened in a country and under a system which was hostile to our own and to the freedom which we cherish. It upset the basic assumption upon which our defense had rested since World War II, the assumption of our ability to maintain a substantial scientific and technical supremacy in this country. The launching of the first sputnik shocked us, Mr. President, into a momentary confrontation with reality. Some of us recognized that for years this Nation had wallowed in a kind of fool's paradise in jolly and supercilious complacency while elsewhere others of more serious bent of mind had worked. There was a realization that we had seriously neglected education. There was a realization that others had labored while we had loafed. The reformation was momentary. The smug and apathetic tendencies of our leadership soon spread to the rest of the Nation. On the one hand, there was a disposition to live with the fact that our scientific leadership was either gone or going fast: on the other hand, there was the delusion that perhaps the sputnik was not very important—a bauble. I believe somebody called it. After all, we still had the Strategic Air Command and intercontinental missiles and perhaps even a shot at the moon on the way. So we went back to business as usual and pleasure as usual. Then a few weeks ago. events occurred in Latin America to remind us of the precariousness of our position in the world. There, in an area with which we had once enjoyed a most cordial, friendly, and intimate association: in this area regarded as safe, above all others, a symbolic explosion occurred, no less startling in its impact on the Nation than the first sputnik. A few years back, a former Vice President had been greeted with almost hysterical approval in Latin America. The present- Vice President was spat upon and stoned. This, too, was a measure of how far we had fallen. This. too. gave us cause to think. What had we done? After all. this outburst of resentment and fury was directed at something besides Mr. Nixon as a person. Once again, for a brief time, we |
Item Location | J. William Fulbright Papers (MS F956 144, Series 71, Box 13, File 28) |
Rights | Please contact Special Collections for information on copyright. |
Digital Publisher | University of Arkansas Libraries |
Series Title | A Calm Voice in a Strident World: Senator J.W. Fulbright Speaks |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for On the Brink of Disaster