REMARKS TO THE INTERNATIONAL PLATFORM ASSOCIATION

AUGUST 2, 1973

Mrs. Longworth, Mr. Thomas, Mr. Roosevelt, ladies and
gentlemen:

I am deeply grateful for the honor you have bestowed upon me
this evening. It represents something of an encouragement at a time
when we in Government are not exactly overwhelmed by expressions
of approbation. More importantly, the award bears the name of a man
-- Theodore Roosevelt -- whom I have, both as an historian and public
servant, admired above most others in our nation's history.

You have flattered me, as well, by seating me next to one of
the great ladies of our time, Mrs. Alice Roosevelt Longworth. Mrs.
Longworth, who has brought grace and dignity to two already renowned
names in American political history, is one of that handful of people
who makes living in Washington a worthwhile experience. Her presence
here adds luster to the occasion and does honor to us all.

Last week, while I was preparing my remarks for this evening,
I spent some time looking for an appropriate Roosevelt quote. One
particularly struck a responsive chord, since I had not too many weeks
before returned from the latest of my seemingly unending sessions with

2

Le Duc Tho. In 1905, during his mediation of the Russo-Japanese War, the President confided to a friend:

> "Dealing with senators is at times excellent training for the temper, but upon my word dealing with these peace envoys has been an even tougher job. To be polite and sympathetic and patient in explaining for the hundredth time something perfectly obvious, when I really want to give utterance to whoops of rage and jump up and knock their heads together -- well, all I can hope is that the self-repression will be ultimately good for my character."

When I read that passage I felt closer to Teddy Roosevelt than ever before. How often I, like he, was tempted to explode in "whoops of rage and jump up and knock heads together." I can only hope that my character, too, has been improved by self-repression -- though many of my colleagues would question whether self-repression is my most distinctive trait.

However, given the temper of the times I do not want to seem disrespectful of the Senate. So let me say for the record that I have never encountered a member of the Upper House who has tested my temper. So one of two things must have changed since Teddy Roosevelt's time; either the nature of Senators or the veracity and courage of public officials. I will let you choose which.

3

[N]

In a more serious vein, something that Theodore Roosevelt once said contains the essence of the idea I would like to place before you this evening. In an 1899 speech in Chicago he said:

> "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

That statement epitomizes the essence and strength of this nation.

In 1893 the great historian Turner worte an essay about the significance of the frontier in American history. He argued that the disappearance of the frontier would have a profound *affect* on the American mentality. He was premature. To be sure, the frontier disappeared, in the physical sense, in Teddy Roosevelt's life-time. But its psychology has remained.

*American urge of the* The term "frontier" is, in itself, interesting. In Europe, frontier has always indicated something permanent and sacrosanct -- in effect, a barrier. In America it connoted something constantly shifting. In Europe the frontier repelled; in America it beckoned. In Europe the frontier was a physical state; in America it was an emotional commitment -- it implied a belief that greatness is an idea before it can become a reality; that man fulfills himself by striving. This experience of a common challenge was one of the reasons why we never erected the social, economic

[N]

4

and political barriers that afflicted so many other nations with
permanent and irreconcilable internal division.

Our experience led us to look upon ourselves and what we did
as a nation as having universal meaning -- a relevance that extended
beyond national boundaries to encompass the well-being of all mankind.
America was not itself unless it had a meaning beyond itself. This is
why Americans have always seen their role in the world as the outward
manifestation, if I may use an ecclesiastical term, of an inward state
of grace. Foreign policy was not the esoteric exercise of one man nor
the reflection of one group or one party; it was an expression of the
collective spirit and common aspirations of the entire nation.
the and the collective spirit

It is in that context -- the belief that foreign policy is, and
must be, the expression of a national and not a partisan purpose -- that
I gratefully accept this award tonight.

What is so striking as we look back at the America of Theodore
Roosevelt's time is the feeling of self-confidence, the sense of optimism,
we displayed as we went about our business, foreign and domestic. Both
self-confidence and optimism are far less in evidence today. The con-
sensus that sustained our international participation is in danger of
being exhausted. It must be restored.

5

A series of tragic events over the past decade has contributed to our current uncertainty. A young, dynamic and popular President assassinated; his brother, and a great civil rights leader murdered; Lyndon Johnson returned to office by an overwhelming majority, only to see that vast majority steadily eroded; ever greater involvement in a war which we seemed for too long unable to win or to end; riots and civil disobedience on a massive scale. And the present ordeal of the whole nation is too obvious to require commentary.

The impact of this decade of tragedy and trauma has been profound. We are tired of turmoil and exhausted by effort. The once apparent reservoir of faith in our ability to do, and of confidence that the future would be better than the past, has been seriously taxed. Yet our children will not judge us by the magnitude of our ordeal, but only by the adequacy of the response. If history teaches nothing else, it makes clear that no great nation can afford to pass by the moment when, in Teddy Roosevelt's words "mighty things must be dared." Once the opportunity is past, no rationalization or self-justification will bring it back.

The United States, in my view, faces such an historic moment. That moment exists for us as a people, not as partisans of any particular

6

cause. The consequences of failure will be borne not by this
Administration, but by its successors in the decades to come, not
by our contemporaries but by future generations.

Over the past four years major changes have been registered
in this nation's international relationships.

-- We have ended the war in Southeast Asia. We now seek to create conditions of stability and accommodation to enable political competition to replace the bloodshed and hatred which for over a generation have torn Indochina.

-- We are building a new relationship with an old adversary --
the People's Republic of China. The hostility of two decades
has been eased, normal relations are approaching, and for
the first time since the end of World War II all great nations
have become full participants in the international system.

-- We have worked persistently to resolve by negotiation many
of the political issues which have made our relationship with
the Soviet Union contentious, and which for so long threatened
world peace. Even more importantly, the very process of
negotiation, over a wide range of issues, has created the
possibility of a strong and lasting mutual interest in peace
and cooperation.

[N]

7

We are embarked upon reinvigorating traditional friendships with our closest friends and allies in the Atlantic Community and with Japan. It is a journey which we hope will end not simply in a repetition of familiar liturgies but in a new recognition that what unites a community of free nations far transcends the secondary issues that divide us.

We found a world so accustomed to the ubiquity of the Cold War that even the most routine business of peaceful relations among nations was carried on in the shadow of global confrontation. Fundamental problems persist; but they are no longer so pervasive that they dominate the conduct of all international relations. The history of the Post-War era has been a never-ending effort to maintain peace through crisis management. The structure of peace we envisage would, instead, be sustained by a growing realization on the part of all nations that they have a stake in stability and that this stability is ensured by acting from a sense of justice and with moderation. The world is beginning to sense that its purposes need not be the captive of its fears, that they can be shaped by its hopes and dreams.

But these are only beginnings, not accomplished facts. Whether the shoots that have been planted will mature will depend in large measure upon how we conduct ourselves as a nation over the course of the next decade. And what we are ten years hence depends upon what we do today, next week, and in the months that follow.

8

Our influence for good or ill will be measured by the world's judgment of our constancy and self-confidence. Our foreign policy will mean little if other nations see our actions as sporadic initiatives of a small group reflecting no coherent national purpose or consensus. No foreign policy -- no matter how ingenious -- has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a few and carried in the hearts of none.

Foreign policy must not become an alibi or a distraction from domestic ills. But, equally, domestic problems must not be used as an excuse for abandoning our international responsibilities. There can be no moratorium in the quest for a peaceful world. And as we pursue that quest we will need to draw upon the country's best minds, no matter what their ~~partisan~~ political persuasion -- not on a bipartisan but on a nonpartisan basis. Especially at this moment of necessary self-examination, we must also reaffirm the basis of our national unity.

For the spirit and vitality that Teddy Roosevelt represented still run deep in America. Roosevelt did not insist on moral perfection before action, because he knew that to do so would mean that we would achieve neither perfection nor action. But, equally, he never forgot that we had to strive for moral greatness, for it alone made action worthwhile.

As someone who came to this country as a refugee from totalitarianism, I have a special feeling for what America can still mean to the world, and how a withdrawal of America from the world would deprive mankind of

[Y]

AUGUST 2, 1973

I am deeply grateful for the honor you have bestowed upon me
this evening, not only because it represents something of an encouragement
at a time when we in Government are not exactly overwhelmed by expressions
of approbation but also and more importantly because the award bears
the name of a man -- Theodore Roosevelt -- whom I have, both as
historian and practicing official, admired above most others in our nation's
history.

You have flattered me, as well, by seating me next to one of
the great women of our time, Mrs. Alice Roosevelt Longworth. Mrs.
Longworth, who has brought grace and dignity to two already great names
in American political history, is one of that handful of people who makes
living in Washington a worthwhile experience. Her presence here tonight
adds luster to the occasion and does honor to us all.

2

When I read that passage I felt closer to Teddy Roosevelt than ever before. How often I, like he, was tempted to explode in "whoops of rage and jump up and knock....heads together." I, like he, can only hope that my character has been improved by self-repression---though my staff would question that I have done more than sublimate my feelings.

On only one point would I take issue with President Roosevelt. I fail to understand his reference to Senators. In some 4 1/2 years in Government I have yet to encounter one member of the Upper House who has in any way tested my temper. Either the Senate has changed or the sincerity of public officials. I will let you choose which.

In a more serious vein, something that Theodore Roosevelt once said -- something quintessentially American and Rooseveltian -- contains the essence of the idea I would like to place before you this evening. In an 1899 speech in Chicago he said:

3

That statement epitomizes the spirit and strength of this nation. It is the spirit that has led us to seek new challenges rather than old comforts. The growth of America has been identified with the existing of the Frontier. And this term is in itself interesting. In Europe the term has always indicated something permanent and sacrosanct; in America it connoted something constantly shifting. In Europe the Frontier was a physical state; in America it was an emotional commitment; that greatness is an idea before it can become a reality; that man fulfils himself by striving. This common experience brought Americans together in common enterprise, and kept us from erecting the social, economic, and political barriers that brought so many other nations into permanent and irreconcilable division. It led us to look upon ourselves and what we did as a nation as having universal meaning -- a relevance that transcended national boundaries to encompass the well-being of all mankind. America was not itself unless it had a meaning beyond itself.

The frontier disappeared in the physical sense in Teddy Roosevelt's day. But its psychology remained with us for many decades. Americans have always seen their foreign policy as the outward manifestation, if I may use an ecclesiastical term, of an inward state of grace. As such,

4

[N]

foreign policy was an expression of the collective worth as well as the
entire nation, not the product of one man, one group of men, or one
party.

It is in that context -- the belief that foreign policy is, and must
be, the expression of the national purpose -- that I gratefully accept
this award tonight.

What is so striking as we look back at the America of
Theodore Roosevelt's time is the feeling of self-confidence, the sense
of permanence, we displayed as we went about our business, foreign
and domestic. Both that self-confidence and that sense of permanence
are far less in evidence today. Both must be regained.

A series of tragic events over the course of the past decade
has contributed its part to our current sense of uncertainty. A young
and popular President assassinated; his brother, and a great civil
rights leader murdered; Lyndon Johnson returned to office by an over-
whelming majority, only to see that vast majority dissipated within little
more than a year; ever greater involvement in a war we were apparently
unable to win or to end; riots and civil disobedience on a massive scale.
And today we face a great domestic judgment in specific acts of govern-
ment.

The impact of this decade of tragedy and trauma on some
Americans -- including many in my own academic profession -- is deeply
-- profound disturbing. It has become quite the fashion to debunk and deride --
often with a vengeance -- the spirit which Teddy Roosevelt so uniquely
personified. But in the process, the once apparently inexhaustable reservoir

5

[N]

of simple faith in our ability to do, and of confidence that the future
will be better than the past, has been seriously taxed.

What we as a people have gone through over the past decade would
have tested the spirit of any nation. And yet our children will not
judge us by the magnitude of the challenge only by the adequacy of the
response.

6

[N]

If history teaches us nothing else, it makes clear that when the moment comes, in Teddy Roosevelt's words, "to dare mighty things" no nation can afford to pass that moment by. No amount of internal debate, no paroxysm of self-doubt or self-criticism will keep opportunity in suspension. And once the opportunity is past, no amount of rationalization or self-justification will bring it back again.

The United States face, in my view, such an historic moment. And we face that moment as a people, not as partisans of any particular cause. The consequences of failure will be borne not by this Administration but by its successors in the decades to come. How we meet history's challenge will have a lasting effect on the lives of all of us -- not just those who happen, for a time, to hold the reins of government.

Over the past four years some major changes have been registered in this nation's relationships with others:

- We have ended a war in Southeast Asia. We now seek to create conditions which will convince all parties that recourse to future bloodshed can bear no fruit as adequate as the rewards of peaceful competition and development.

- We have developed a new understanding with an old adversary -- the People's Republic of China. The tangible results of our understandings with that great nation are

7

important not because of their still modest scale, but
because we have at last put behind us much of the mutual
distrust and antagonism built up over more than two decades.

-- We have worked hard to resolve by negotiation many of the substantive differences that have for so long plagued us in our dealings with the Soviet Union, and for so long threatened world peace. But equally important, through the very process of negotiation, we -- and I think the Soviets as well -- have developed a much better appreciation of the other's preceptions and motivations.

-- We are embarked upon a new journey with our Western European allies and Japan. This is a journey we hope will end not simply in a reaffirmation of old ties, but rather in a new declaration of interdependence -- a recognition that what binds us as a community of free nations far transcends the essentially secondary issues that divide us.

We found a world so accustomed to the ubiquity of the Cold War that even the most routine business of peaceful relations among nations could not escape the shadow of global confrontation. Today that confrontation casts a much shorter shadow. Fundamental problems persist; but they are no longer so acute that they need interfere with the pursuit by all nations of the goals of peace and prosperity. The rigidity that we

8

[N]

found has been replaced, in part, by a mild sense of confidence that our ambitions need not be the captive of our fears about the future.

Where we have not succeeded in removing all the hurdles to a truly lasting peace, we have at least sketched -- for ourselves and our adversaries -- the outline of a code of conduct by which we can prevent the remaining hurdles from becoming immovable and insurmountable.

We now have good reason to hope that our blueprint for stability -- while still clearly in need of improvement -- can provide the basis for the establishment of an international structure capable of containing even the most serious disturbances.

But these are only beginnings, not accomplished facts. Whether they will reach fruition will depend in large measure upon how we conduct ourselves as a nation over the course of the next decade. And what we are ten years hence, depends upon what we do today, next week, and in the next year. Other countries will judge us by our steadiness, our ability to make meaningful undertakings. Our foreign policy will mean little if other nations see our policies as transitory whims with little institutional or popular support. No foreign policy -- no matter how ingenious or well-intentioned -- has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a few and carried in the hearts of none.

Of course, foreign policy cannot be the alibi for domestic failings. But it does mean that as we purge ourselves of our errors we must

9

[N]

do our utmost to preserve those goals which unify all Americans and
which if not achieved mortgage the futures of all of us. There can
be no moratorium in the quest for a peaceful world. And in this quest
we will need to draw upon the country's best minds, no matter what
their partisan political persuasion -- not on a bipartisan but on a
nonpartisan basis.

Only in this manner can we recapture the spirit and optimism of
Teddy Roosevelt. For that spirit, that vitality, still run deep in the
American soul, if we can but find the key to free it once again.
He did not insist on moral perfection before action because he knew if
we did this we would achieve neither perfection nor action. He did
know that we had to strive for moral greatness for it alone made
action worthwhile.

It would be idle to deny that today we are not a happy nation.
But we still have a great opportunity. As someone who came to this country
as a refugee from totalitarianism I know perhaps better than many what
America can still mean to the world and how a withdrawal of America
from the world would deprive mankind of hope and purpose. This is
why we are confident that we will recapture the spirit of adventure that
Teddy Roosevelt represented and that once more America will be the
country that dares and strives mightily on frontiers that are set by
our faith and our morality.

8:15 a.m.

AUGUST 2, 1973

I am deeply grateful for the honor you have bestowed upon me this evening, not only because it represents something of an encouragement at a time when we in Government are not exactly overwhelmed by expressions of approbation, but also, and more importantly, because the award bears the name of a man -- Theodore Roosevelt -- whom I have, both as historian and practicing official, admired above most others in our nation's history.

You have flattered me, as well, by seating me next to one of the great women of our time, Mrs. Alice Roosevelt Longworth. Mrs. Longworth, who has brought grace and dignity to two already renowned names in American political history, is one of that handful of people who makes living in Washington a worthwhile experience. Her presence here tonight adds luster to the occasion and does honor to us all.

8:15 a.m.

AUGUST 2, 1973

I am deeply grateful for the honor you have bestowed upon me this evening, not only because it represents something of an encouragement at a time when we in Government are not exactly overwhelmed by expressions of approbation, but also, and more importantly, because the award bears the name of a man -- Theodore Roosevelt -- whom I have, both as a historian and as a practicing official, admired above most others in our nation's history.

Last week, while I was preparing my remarks for this evening, I spent some time looking for an appropriate Roosevelt quote. One in particular struck a responsive chord, since I had not too many weeks before returned from the latest of my seemingly unending sessions with

[Y]

2

> When I read that passage I felt closer to Teddy Roosevelt than ever before. How often I, like he, was tempted to explode in "whoops of rage and jump up and knock....heads together." I, like he, can only hope that my character has been improved by self-repression---though ~~my staff~~ would question that I have done more than sublimate my feelings.

On only one point would I take issue with President Roosevelt. I fail to understand his reference to Senators. In some 4 1/2 years in Government I have yet to encounter one member of the Upper House who has in any way tested my temper. Either the Senate or the charity of public officials has changed. I will let you choose which.

[Y]

3

It is the spirit that has led us to seek new challenges rather than old comforts. The growth of America has been identified with the existence of the Frontier -- a term that is, in itself, interesting. In Europe, the frontier has always indicated something permanent and sacrosanct. In America it connoted something constantly shifting. In Europe the frontier was a physical state; in America it was an emotional commitment -- a belief that greatness is an idea before it becomes a reality; that man fulfils himself by striving. This common experience kept us from erecting the social, economic, and political barriers that brought so many other nations into permanent and irreconcilable division. It led us to look upon ourselves and what we did as a nation as having universal meaning -- a relevance that transcended national boundaries to encompass the well-being of all mankind. America was not itself unless it had a meaning beyond itself.

[V]

The frontier disappeared, in the physical sense, in Teddy Roosevelt's day. But its psychology remained with us for many decades. Americans have always seen their foreign policy as the outward manifestation, if I may use an ecclesiastical term, of an inward state of grace. As such, foreign policy was an expression of the collective spirit as well as the will of the entire nation, not the product of one man, one group of men, or one party. It is in that context -- the belief that foreign policy is, and must be, the expression of a national and not a partisan purpose -- that I gratefully accept this award tonight.

What is so striking as we look back at the America of Theodore Roosevelt's time is the feeling of self-confidence, the sense of optimism, we displayed as we went about our business, foreign and domestic. Both that self-confidence and that sense of permanence are far less in evidence today. Both must be regained.

A series of tragic events over the course of the past decade has contributed its part to our current sense of uncertainty. A young, dynamic and popular President assassinated; his brother, and a great civil rights leader murdered; Lyndon Johnson returned to office by an overwhelming majority, only to see that vast majority dissipated within little more than a year; ever greater involvement in a war we were seemed for the most apparently unable to win or to end; riots and civil disobedience on a

[4]

massive scale. And the agony of our present ordeal for all participants
is to observe & require commentary,
requires no restatement.

The impact of this decade of tragedy and trauma on some
Americans is deeply profound. It has become quite the fashion to
debunk and deride -- often with a vengeance -- the spirit Teddy Roosevelt
so uniquely personified. But in the process, the once apparently
inexhaustable reservoir of simple faith in our ability to do, and of
confidence that the future would be better than the past, has been seriously
taxed.

We are tired and we need a rest. We would like to enjoy
the current tranquillity without further effort.

And yet our children will not judge us by the magnitude of the
challenge, but, rather, by the adequacy of the response.

6

[Y]

Now If history teaches nothing else, it makes clear that when the moment comes, in Teddy Roosevelt's words, "to dare mighty things" great nation can afford to pass that moment by. No amount of internal debate, no paroxysm of self-doubt or self-criticism, can keep opportunity in suspension. And once the opportunity is past, no amount of rationalization or self-justification will bring it back again.

The United States faces, in my view, such an historic moment. And we face that moment as a people, not as partisans of any particular cause. The consequences of failure will be borne not by this Administration, but by its successors in the decades to come. How we meet history's challenge will have a lasting effect on the lives of all of us -- not just or even primarily by those who happen, for a time, to exercise the responsibilities of government.

Over the past four years major changes have been registered in this nation's relationships with others:

- We have ended a war in Southeast Asia. We now seek to create conditions which will convince all parties that recourse to political competition is necessary to future bloodshed can bear no fruit as worthwhile as the rewards of peaceful competition and development.

This appears to be the People's Republic of China.

[Y]

10

Only in this manner can we recapture the spirit and optimism of
Teddy Roosevelt. For that spirit, that vitality, still run deep in the
American soul. Roosevelt did not insist on moral perfection before
action, because he knew that to do so would mean that we would
achieve neither perfection nor action. But, equally, he never forgot
that we had to strive for moral greatness, for it alone made action
worthwhile.

It would be idle to deny that today we are not a happy nation.
But we still have a great opportunity. As someone who came to this
country as a refugee from totalitarianism, I know -- perhaps better
than many -- what America can still mean to the world, and how a
withdrawal of America from the world would deprive mankind of hope
and purpose. This is why I am confident that we will recapture the
spirit of adventure that Teddy Roosevelt so completely represented,
and that once more America will be the country that dares and strives
mightily on frontiers that are set by our faith and our morality.

[LC]

Henry:

I feel uncomfortable with this speech because it is a sermon that glosses over our problems. I guess the occasion demands something like that, but I think it does you an injustice. Don't get me wrong: I think the sentiments are laudable.

But I think what Henry Kissinger somewhere, sometime must tell the country is precisely that we have got to sort out our national purpose (page 4). A coalition of forces in the 40s and 50s and into the 60s turned the spirit of the frontier -- not altogether accurately described on page 3 --into an international mission. The coalition has been fractured and the mission became distorted. Nixon (and you) tried to redefine the mission and to rebuild a viable coalition to sustain it. The effort is stalled and if it remains that way the redefinition that will occur later in the decade may bring disaster to all of us and the world. I just don't think you can, will or should get away with a call for an America"that dares and strives mightily on frontiers that are set by our faith and our morality" (p. 10), when this country is tearing itself apart about the definition of its faith and morality.

But I guess it's another speech on another occasion.

So I just suggest you change the words "deeply profound" on page 5 to either "deep" or "profound" and drop the pleonasm. And change "blueprint" on page 8 to "concept".

Sonnenfeldt.

[LC]

"... there are several eminent statesmen at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue whom I would gladly lend to the Russian Government, if they care to expend them as bodyguards for Grand Dukes wherever there is a likelihood of dynamite bombs being exploded."

8:15 a.m.

AUGUST 2, 1973

2

3

It is the spirit that has led us to seek new challenges rather than old comforts. The growth of America has been identified with the existence of the Frontier -- a term that is, in itself, interesting. In Europe, frontier has always indicated something permanent and sacrosanct; in America it connoted something constantly shifting. In Europe the frontier was a physical state; in America it was an emotional commitment -- a belief that greatness is an idea before it becomes a reality; that man fulfils himself by striving. This common experience kept us from erecting the social, economic, and political barriers that brought so many other nations into permanent and irreconcilable division. It led us to look upon ourselves and what we did as a nation as having universal meaning -- a relevance that transcended national boundaries to encompass the well-being of all mankind. America was not itself unless it had a meaning beyond itself.

[Y]

4

5

[N]

massive scale. And the agony of our present ordeal for all participants
requires no restatement.

6

If history teaches nothing else, it makes clear that when the moment comes, in Teddy Roosevelt's words, "to dare mighty things" no nation can afford to pass that moment by. No amount of internal debate, no paroxysm of self-doubt or self-criticism, will keep opportunity in suspension. And once the opportunity is past, no amount of rationalization or self-justification will bring it back again.

- We have ended a war in Southeast Asia. We now seek to create conditions which will convince all parties that recourse to future bloodshed can bear no fruit as worthwhile as the rewards of peaceful competition and development.

[N]

7

-- We have worked hard to resolve by negotiation many of the substantive differences that have for so long plagued us in our dealings with the Soviet Union, and for so long threatened world peace. But equally important, through the very process of negotiation, we -- and I think the Soviets as well -- have developed a much better appreciation of the other's perceptions and motivations.

-- We are embarked upon reinvigorating traditional friendships with our Western European allies and Japan. It is a journey we hope will end not simply in a new affirmation of old ties, but rather in a new declaration of interdependence -- a recognition that what binds us as a community of free nations far transcends the essentially secondary issues that divide us.

We found a world so accustomed to the ubiquity of the Cold War
that even the most routine business of peaceful relations among nations
could not escape the shadow of global confrontation. Today that confronta-
tion casts a much shorter shadow. Fundamental problems persist; but
they are no longer so acute that the lasting pursuit by all nations of

8

[Y]

the goals of peace and prosperity becomes a realistic prospect. The rigidity that we found has been replaced, in part, by a sense of confidence that our ambitions need not be the captive of our fears about the future.

Where we have not succeeded in removing all the hurdles to a truly lasting peace, we have at least sketched -- for ourselves and our adversaries -- the outline of a code of conduct by which we can prevent the remaining hurdles from becoming immovable and insurmountable. We now have reason to hope that our blueprint for stability -- while still clearly in need of improvement -- can provide the basis for the establishment of an international structure capable of containing serious disturbances. The history of the Post-War era is one of constant effort to maintain peace through crisis management. The structure of peace we now seek would, instead, be sustained by its own inherent quality of permanence -- a structure in which the major participants recognize their stake in the maintenance of peace and act from a sense of justice.

But these are only beginnings, not accomplished facts. The end of American engagement in armed conflict brings with it the temptation to take for granted the new conditions of stability, to believe that this stability can be enjoyed without a positive involvement on our part. Should we succumb to this temptation, we risk doing fatal damage to the still tender shoots which have grown from our efforts. Whether these

9

shoots will mature will depend in large measure upon how we conduct
ourselves as a nation over the course of the next decade. And what
we are ten years hence, depends upon what we do today, next week,
and in the years that follow. Other countries will judge us by our
steadiness, our ability to make meaningful undertakings from self-
confidence. Our foreign policy will mean little if other nations see
our actions as transitory whims with little institutional or popular
support. No foreign policy -- no matter how ingenious or well-
intentioned -- has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a
few and carried in the hearts of none.

Foreign policy cannot become an alibi for domestic wrongdoing.
But, equally, domestic failings must not be used as an issue for escaping
from our international responsibilities. In the 1920's, we were isolationists
because we thought we were too good for the rest of the world. Today we
stand in danger of turning isolationist because we fear that we are not
good enough. Either course is disastrous. As we purge ourselves of our
errors we must preserve those goals which unify all America and
which, if not achieved, mortgage the futures of all of us. There can be
no moratorium in the quest for a peaceful world. And as we pursue
that quest we will need to draw upon the country's best minds, no matter
what their partisan political persuasion -- not on a bipartisan but on a
nonpartisan basis.

10

8:15 a.m.

AUGUST 2, 1973

2

3

[N]

4

[N]

5

6

The United States faces, in my view, such an historic moment. And we face that moment as a people, not as partisans of any particular cause. The consequences of failure will be borne not by this Administration, but by its successors in the decades to come. How we meet history's challenge will have a lasting effect on the lives of all of us -- not just or even primarily those who happen, for a time, to exercise the responsibilities of government.

[N]

7

We found a world so accustomed to the ubiquity of the Cold War that even the most routine business of peaceful relations among nations could not escape the shadow of global confrontation. Today that confrontation casts a much shorter shadow. Fundamental problems persist; but they are no longer so acute as the lasting pursuit by all nations of

8

[Y]

the goals of peace and prosperity have become a realistic prospect. The rigidity that we found has been replaced, in part, by a sense of confidence that our ambitions need not be the captive of our fears about the future.

9

[N]

shoots will mature will depend in large measure upon how we conduct
ourselves as a nation over the course of the next decade. And what
we are ten years hence, depends upon what we do today, next week,
and in the years that follow. Other countries will judge us by our
steadiness, our ability to make meaningful undertakings *with* self-
confidence. Our foreign policy will mean little if other nations see
our actions as transitory whims with little institutional or popular
support. No foreign policy -- no matter how ingenious or well-
intentioned -- has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a
few and carried in the hearts of none.

Foreign policy cannot become an alibi for domestic wrongdoing.
But, equally, domestic failings must not be used as an *excuse* for escaping
from our international responsibilities. In the 1920's, we were isolationists
because we thought we were too good for the rest of the world. Today we
stand in danger of turning isolationist because we fear that we are not
good enough. Either course is disastrous. As we purge ourselves of our
errors we must preserve those goals which unify all America and
which, if not achieved, mortgage the futures of all of us. There can be
no moratorium in the quest for a peaceful world. And as we pursue
that quest we will need to draw upon the country's best minds, no matter
what their partisan political persuasion -- not on a bipartisan but on a
nonpartisan basis.

10

8:15 a.m.

AUGUST 2, 1973

2

[N]

3

[N]

4

The frontier disappeared, in the physical sense, in Teddy
Roosevelt's day. But its psychology remained with us for many decades.
Americans have always seen their foreign policy as the outward
manifestation, ~~if I may use an ecclesiastical term~~, of an inward state
of grace. As such, foreign policy was an expression of the collective
spirit ~~as well as~~ the will of the entire nation, not the product of one
man, one group of men, or one party. It is in that context -- the belief
that foreign policy is, ~~and must be~~, the expression of a national and not
a partisan purpose -- that I gratefully accept this award tonight.

5

[Y]

6

If history teaches nothing else, it makes clear that when the moment comes, in Teddy Roosevelt's words, "to dare mighty things" no nation can afford to pass that moment by. No amount of internal debate, no paroxysm of self-doubt or self-criticism, will keep opportunity at bay or suspend it. And once the opportunity is past, no amount of rationalization or self-justification will bring it back again.

The United States faces a new challenge in my view, such as a historic moment. We must face this challenge now. And we face that moment as a people, not as partisans of any particular cause. The consequences of failure will be borne not by this Administration, but by its successors in the decades to come. How we meet history's challenge will have a lasting effect on the lives of all of us -- not just *this* generation by those who happen, for a time, to exercise the responsibilities of government.

[N]

7

important not because of their still modest scale, but
because we have at last put behind us much of the mutual
distrust and antagonism built up over more than two decades,

-- We have worked hard to resolve by negotiation many of the substantive differences that have for so long plagued us in our dealings with the Soviet Union, and for so long threatened world peace. But equally important, through the very process of negotiation, we — and I think the Soviets as well — have developed a much better appreciation of the other's perceptions and motivations.

We found a world so accustomed to the ubiquity of the Cold War that even the most routine business of peaceful relations among nations could not escape the shadow of global confrontation. Today that confrontation casts a much shorter shadow. Fundamental problems persist; but they are no longer so acute that the *lasting* pursuit by all nations of

8

Where we have not succeeded in removing all the hurdles to a truly lasting peace, we have at least sketched out for ourselves and our adversaries the outline of a code of conduct by which we can prevent the remaining hurdles from becoming immovable and insurmountable. We now have reason to hope that our blueprint for stability -- while still clearly in need of improvement -- can provide the basis for the establishment of an international structure capable of containing serious disturbances. The history of the Post-War era is one of constant effort to maintain peace through crisis management. The structure of peace we now seek would, instead, be sustained by its own inherent quality of permanence -- a structure in which the major participants recognize their stake in the maintenance of peace and act from a sense of justice.

9

10

1:08 p.m.

LYJ

AUGUST 2, 1973

I am deeply grateful for the honor you have bestowed upon me this evening, not only because it represents something of an encouragement at a time when we in Government are not exactly overwhelmed by expressions of approbation, but also, and more importantly, because the award bears the name of a man -- Theodore Roosevelt -- whom I have, both as an historian and public servant, admired above most others in our nation's history.

You have flattered me, as well, by seating me next to one of the great women of our time, Mrs. Alice Roosevelt Longworth. Mrs. Longworth, who has brought grace and dignity to two already renowned names in American political history, is one of that handful of people who makes living in Washington a worthwhile experience. Her presence here adds luster to the occasion and does honor to us all.

[N]

2

When I read that passage I felt closer to Teddy Roosevelt than ever before. How often I, like he, was tempted to explode in "whoops of rage and jump up and knock heads together." I can only hope that my character, too, has been improved by self-repression -- though many of my colleagues would question self-repression is my most distinctive trait.

3

[N]

That statement epitomizes the essence and strength of this nation. In 1893 the great historian Turner wrote an essay about the significance of the frontier in American history. He agreed that the disappearance of the frontier would have a profound affect on the American mentality. He was premature. To be sure, the frontier disappeared, in the physical sense, in Teddy Roosevelt's life-time. But its psychology has remained. The term "frontier" is, in itself, interesting. In Europe, frontier has always indicated something permanent and sacrosanct -- a barrier in effect. In America it connoted something constantly shifting. In Europe the frontier repelled; in America it beckoned. In Europe the frontier was a physical state; in America it was an emotional commitment -- it implied a belief that greatness is an idea before it can become a reality; that man fulfills himself by striving. This experience of a common challenge was one of the reasons why we never erected the social, economic,

[N]

4

What is so striking as we look back at the America of Theodore
Roosevelt's time is the feeling of self-confidence, the sense of optimism,
we displayed as we went about our business, foreign and domestic. Both --
self-confidence and optimism are far less in evidence today. The
consensus that sustained our international participation is in danger of
being exhausted. It must be restored.

5

The impact of this decade of tragedy and trauma has been profound. We are tired of turmoil and exhausted by effort. The once apparent reservoir of faith in our ability to do, and of confidence that the future would be better than the past, has been seriously taxed. Yet our children will not judge us by the magnitude of our suffering, but only by the adequacy of the response. If history teaches nothing else, it makes clear that no great nation can afford to pass by the moment when, in Teddy Roosevelt's words "mighty things must be dared." No internal debate, no paroxysm of self-doubt or self-criticism, can hold events in suspension. And once the opportunity is past, no rationalization or self-justification will bring it back.

[N]

6

The United States, in my view, faces such an historic moment. That moment exists for us as a people, not as partisans of any particular cause. The consequences of failure will be borne not by this Administration, but by its successors in the decades to come, not by our contemporaries but by future generations.

[N]

7

Soviet Union contentious, and which for so long threatened
world peace. Even more importantly, the very process
of negotiation, over a wide range of issues has created the
possibility of a strong and lasting mutual interest in peace
and cooperation.

-- We are embarked upon reinvigorating traditional friendships
with our closest friends and allies in the Atlantic Community
and with Japan. It is a journey which we hope will end not
simply in a repetition of familiar liturgies but in a new recognition
that what unites a community of free nations far transcends
the secondary issues that divide us.

We found a world so accustomed to the ubiquity of the Cold War
that even the most routine business of peaceful relations among nations
was carried on in the shadow of global confrontation. Fundamental
problems persist; but they are no longer so pervasive that they dominate
the conduct of all international relations. The history of the Post-War
era has been a never-ending effort to maintain peace through crisis
management. The structure of peace we envisage would, instead, be
sustained by a growing realization by all nations that they have a stake
in stability and that this stability is ensured by acting from a sense of
justice and with moderation. The world is beginning to sense that its
purposes need not be the captive of its fears, that they can be shaped by
its hopes and dreams.

8

Foreign policy cannot become an alibi or distraction from domestic
ills. But, equally, domestic problems must not be used as an excuse
for abandoning our international responsibilities. There can be no
moratorium in the quest for a peaceful world. And as we pursue that
quest we will need to draw upon the country's best minds, no matter
what their partisan political persuasion -- not on a bipartisan but on a
nonpartisan basis. Especially at this moment of self-examination, we
must also reaffirm the basis of our national unity.

9

As someone who came to this country as a refugee from totalitarianism,
I have a special feeling for what America can still mean to the world, and
how a withdrawal of America from the world would deprive mankind of
hope and purpose. This is why I pray that we will recapture the spirit
that Teddy Roosevelt so well represented, and that once more a generation
of Americans will be prepared to "enjoy and suffer much" and will strive
mightily on frontiers that are set by our common purposes.

AUGUST 2, 1973

[N]

2

On only one point would I take issue with President Roosevelt. I fail to understand his reference to Senators. In some 4 1/2 years in Government I have yet to encounter one member of the Upper House who has in any way tested my temper. Either the Senate has changed or the sincerity of public officials I will let you choose which.

3

[N]

"Far better it is to dare might things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

It is the spirit that has led us to seek new challenges rather than old comforts. The growth of America has been identified with the existence of the Frontier, ~~that~~ and this term is, in itself, interesting. In Europe, the frontier term has always indicated something permanent and sacrosanct; in America it connoted something constantly shifting. In Europe the Frontier was a physical state; in America it was an emotional commitment that greatness is an idea before it can become a reality; that man fulfils himself by striving. ~~Our~~ this common experience brought Americans together in common enterprise, and kept us from erecting the social, economic, and political barriers that brought so many other nations into permanent and irreconcilable division. It led us to look upon ourselves and what we did as a nation as having universal meaning -- a relevance that transcended national boundaries to encompass the well-being of all mankind. America was not itself unless it had a meaning beyond itself.

4

[Y]

foreign policy was an expression of the collective spirit, worth as well as, the will of the entire nation, not the product of one man, one group of men, or one party.

A series of tragic events over the course of the past decade has contributed its part to our current sense of uncertainty. A young and popular President assassinated; his brother, and a great civil rights leader murdered; Lyndon Johnson returned to office by an overwhelming majority, only to see that vast majority dissipated within little more than a year; ever greater involvement in a war we were apparently unable to win or to end; riots and civil disobedience on a massive scale.

And today we face a great domestic judgment in specific acts of government, for all participants requires no further comment.

The impact of this decade of tragedy and trauma on some Americans -- including many in my own academic profession -- is deeply disturbing. It has become quite the fashion to debunk and deride -- often with a vengeance -- the spirit which Teddy Roosevelt so uniquely personified. But in the process, the once apparently inexhaustable reservoir

[Y]

5

of simple faith in our ability to do, and of confidence that the future
would be better than the past, has been seriously taxed.

What we as a people have gone through over the past decade would
have tested the spirit of any nation. And yet our children will not
judge us by the magnitude of the challenge, but, rather, by the adequacy of the
response.

We are tired and we need a rest. We would like to enjoy the current tranquillity without further effort. What seemed utopian only a few years ago is now real.

[N]

6

If history teaches us nothing else, it makes clear that when the moment comes, in Teddy Roosevelt's words, "to dare mighty things" no nation can afford to pass that moment by. No amount of internal debate, no paroxysm of self-doubt or self-criticism, will keep opportunity in suspension. And once the opportunity is past, no amount of rationalization or self-justification will bring it back again.

The United States faces, in my view, such an historic moment. And we face that moment as a people, not as partisans of any particular cause. The consequences of failure will be borne not by this Administration, but by its successors in the decades to come. How we meet history's challenge will have a lasting effect on the lives of all of us -- *not just those who happen, for a time, to hold the reins of government.*

- We have ended a war in Southeast Asia. We now seek to create conditions which will convince all parties that recourse to future bloodshed. can bear no fruit as long as the rewards of peaceful competition and development.

8

[Y]

Where we have not succeeded in removing all the hurdles to a truly
lasting peace, we have at least sketched -- for ourselves and our adversaries --
the outline of a code of conduct by which we can prevent the remaining
hurdles from becoming immovable and insurmountable. We now have good
reason to hope that our blueprint for stability -- while still clearly in
need of improvement -- can provide the basis for the establishment of an
international structure capable of containing even the most serious distur-
bances. The history of the Post-War era is one of constant effort to
maintain peace through crisis management. The structure of peace we
now seek would, instead, be sustained by its own inherent quality of permanence --
a structure in which the major participants recognize their stake in the maintenance
of peace and act with a spontaneous sense of justice.

But these are only beginnings, not accomplished facts. The end of
American engagement in armed conflict brings with it the temptation to
take for granted the new conditions of stability, to believe that this stability
can be enjoyed without our positive involvement on our part.
Should we succumb to
this temptation, we risk doing fatal damage to the still green shoots which
have grown from our efforts. Whether these shoots will mature will
depend in large measure upon how we conduct ourselves as

a nation over the course of the next decade. And what we are ten years
hence, depends upon what we do today, next week, and in the next years.

Other countries will judge us by our steadiness, our ability to make
meaningful undertakings, our self-confidence.
Our foreign policy will mean little if other
nations see our policies as transitory whims with little institutional or
popular support. No foreign policy -- no matter how ingenious or well-
intentioned -- has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a
few and carried in the hearts of none.

Of course, foreign policy cannot be the alibi for domestic failings.
equity, domestic failings must be used into an equity.
But it does mean that as we purge ourselves of our errors we must
for snaring from our international reputation.

[Y]

9

do our utmost to preserve those goals which unify all Americans and which, if not achieved, mortgage the futures of all of us. There can

be no moratorium in the quest for a peaceful world. And in this quest we will need to draw upon the country's best minds, no matter what their partisan political persuasion -- not on a bipartisan but on a nonpartisan basis.

He did not insist on moral perfection before action, because he knew if that

know that we had to strive for moral greatness, for it alone made
action worthwhile.

But we still have a great opportunity. As someone who came to this country as a refugee from totalitarianism, I know, perhaps better than many, what America can still mean to the world, and how a withdrawal of America from the world would deprive mankind of hope and purpose. This is

why we are confident that we will recapture the spirit of adventure that
Teddy Roosevelt represented, and that once more America will be the
country that dares and strives mightily on frontiers that are set by
our faith and our morality.

AUGUST 2, 1973

You have flatttered me, as well, by seating me next to one of the great women of our time, Mrs. Alice Roosevelt Longworth. Mrs. Longworth, who has brought grace and dignity to two already renowned names in American political history, is one of that handful of people who makes living in Washington a worthwhile experience. Her presence here tonight adds luster to the occasion and does honor to us all.

2

When I read that passage I felt closer to Teddy Roosevelt than ever before. How often I, like he, was tempted to explode in "whoops of rage and jump up and knock heads together." I, like he, can only hope that my character has been improved by self-repression--though many of my colleagues would question whether self-repression is my most distinctive trait.

However, given the temper of the times I do not want to seem disrespectful of the Senate. So let me say for the record -- and in the ecumenical spirit so characteristic of the place where I work -- that I have never encountered a member of the Upper House who has tested my temper. So one of two things must have changed since Teddy Roosevelt's time; either the nature of Senators or the sincerity and courage of public officials. I will let you choose which.

3

In a more serious vein, something that Theodore Roosevelt once said -- *something quintessentially American and Rooseveltian* -- contains the essence of the idea I would like to place before you this evening.

It is the spirit that has led us to seek new challenges rather than old comforts. The growth of America has been identified with the existence of the Frontier, a term that is, in itself, interesting. In Europe, frontier has always indicated something permanent and sacrosanct -- a barrier in effect. In Europe the frontier repelled; in America it beckoned. In America it connoted something constantly shifting. In Europe the frontier was a physical state; in America it was an emotional commitment -- implied in a belief that greatness is an idea before it becomes a reality; that man

fulfills himself by striving. This common experience, kept us from erecting the social, economic, and political barriers that brought so many other nations into permanent and irreconcilable internal division.

It led us to look upon ourselves and what we did as a nation as having universal meaning -- a relevance that beyond national boundaries encompassed the well-being of all mankind. America was not itself unless it had a meaning beyond itself.

4

[Y]

In 1909 the great historian Turner wrote an essay about the disappearance of the frontier and the impact of this event on the American mentality. He was premature. To be sure, the frontier disappeared, in the physical sense, in Teddy Roosevelt's day. But its psychology has remained with us. Americans have always seen their foreign policy as the outward manifestation, if I may use an ecclesiastical term, of an inward state of grace. Foreign policy was therefore an expression of the collective spirit and common aspirations of the entire nation, not the product of one man, one group of men, or one party.

What is so striking as we look back at the America of Theodore Roosevelt's time is the feeling of self-confidence, the sense of optimism, we displayed as we went about our business, foreign and domestic. Both self-confidence and optimism are far less in evidence today. The consensus that sustained our international relations is in danger of being shattered. It must be regained.

A series of tragic events over the course of the past decade has contributed to our current uncertainty. A young, dynamic and popular President assassinated; his brother, and a great civil rights

[Y]

7

-- We are embarked upon reinvigorating traditional friendships
with our closest friends and allies in Europe and with
Japan. It is a journey we hope will end not simply in a
repetition of familiar liturgies but in a new recognition
that what unites a community of free nations far transcends
the secondary issues that divide us.

We found a world so accustomed to the ubiquity of the Cold War
that even the most routine business of peaceful relations among nations
was carried on in the shadow of global confrontation. Fundamental
problems persist; but they are no longer so pervasive that the pursuit by
the conduct of all international relations all nations of the goals of peace and prosperity becomes the dominant
opportunity. The history of the Post-War era has been a constant effort
to maintain peace through crisis management. The structure of peace
we envisage would, instead, be sustained by the recognition of the
major participants that they have a stake in stability and that they must
be enshrined by acting from a sense of justice and with moderation. The world is beginning
to sense that our purposes need not be the captive of our fears, that they
can be shaped by our hopes and dreams.

8

But these are only beginnings, not accomplished facts. The end of American engagement in armed conflict brings with it the temptation to take for granted the new conditions of stability, to believe that this stability can be enjoyed without a positive involvement or major effort. This is an illusion. Should we succumb to this temptation, we risk the collapse of what has been achieved. Whether the shoots that have been planted will mature will depend in large measure upon how we conduct ourselves as a nation over the course of the next decade. And what we are ten years hence, depends upon what we do today, next week, and in the years that follow.

9

Other countries will judge us by our steadiness. Our influence or ill will be measured by the world's judgment of our constancy and self-confidence. Our foreign policy will mean little if other nations see our actions as sporadic initiatives of a small group reflecting no coherent national purpose or consensus. No foreign policy -- no matter how ingenious -- has any chance of success if it is born in the minds of a few and carried in the hearts of none.

Foreign policy cannot become an alibi or distraction from domestic ills. But, equally, domestic problems must not be used as an excuse for abandoning our international responsibilities. There can be no moratorium in the quest for a peaceful world. And as we pursue that quest we will need to draw upon the country's best minds, no matter what their partisan political persuasion -- not on a bipartisan but on a nonpartisan basis. Especially at this moment, as we self-examination, search our national soul, we must also reaffirm the basis of our national unity.

It would be idle to deny that today we are not a happy nation. But we still have a great opportunity which if we fail to grasp it would be an

[Y]

10

even greater tragedy than our present agonies. As someone who came to this country as a refugee from totalitarianism, I have a special feeling for what America can still mean to the world, and how a withdrawal of America from the world would deprive mankind of hope and purpose. This is why I am confident that we will recapture the spirit that Teddy Roosevelt so well represented, and that once more a generation of Americans will be the country that dares and strives mightily on frontiers that are set by our common purposes.