## Introductory Remarks
by
Dr. Henry A. Kissinger

President, Mrs. Aznar, Oscar, and Secretary General, ladies and gentlemen. It is a great honor for me to be able to speak on this occasion. I have had the privilege of knowing President Aznar in the period before he took over the government of Spain, and I have admired his conduct in government and the role he has played since. It is also a pleasure for me to be able to be here with the Secretary General, who has known his vicissitudes. All of us have respected the dignity, dedication and thoughtfulness with which he has conducted his office. It is a great privilege for us that you have given this evening to this occasion.

Now many years ago, we gave a dinner at our house for the then Mayor of Barcelona, who was a Socialist, and later became Deputy Prime Minister of Spain. He said, "We in Spain are going to have two big crises. The first crisis came when the Socialists won the election. Would we be permitted to govern?" He said, "The second crisis is going to come when we lose an election. Will we permit our successors to govern?" Well, his successor is with us tonight, and he governed with extraordinary ability. The economic growth of Spain and the tremendous economic and political contributions Spain played internationally occurred importantly during his presidency. President Aznar was in office during a very critical period in Atlantic relations.

Spain is like really no other European country. It was at the frontiers of western civilization for all of its history. Except for England, it had a closer relationship across the Atlantic for more of its history than any other European country. While not every aspect of Spanish history was conducted with delicacy, I have always been moved by the tremendous act of faith that was required for small groups of people to create these great empires in South America and to conduct their various expeditions. In retrospect, one does not have to agree with every one of the measures they took, but

I am always moved by the dedication, the faith and the courage displayed throughout Spanish history. Nancy and I visited Toledo and saw the flag of the Battle of Lepanto in what was the hospital for the wounded. It was a decisive event in Western history; we found it a deeply moving experience. And indeed, wherever one travels in Spain, one encounters these tremendous monuments to faith so characteristic of so heroic a people.

All of this has produced a quality for Spain that is somewhat different from some of the other Western European nations, with some exceptions. The idea of the state was invented in Europe. The concept of sovereignty evolved in Europe, and it evolved because the European peoples learned from the Thirty Years War. Enormous suffering and tragedy occur when ideology, or in that case, religion, becomes the dominant force, and for several hundred years the European nations conducted their affairs with the lessons of that period. But many of them no longer believe in the state. In the process of shedding sovereignty, they no longer have the support for the kind of policy of sacrifice that Europe conducted throughout much of its history. So they are caught between their past, which they are trying to shed, and their future, which they have not yet reached.

I mention all of this because Spanish history is different. The tragedies in Spain occurred not due to conflict of Spain with other nations, but due to the conflict of Spain internally, so that there is still a sense of commitment to international order that is unique in many respects in Western Europe. I say all of this because, during the presidency of President Aznar, the Western world was challenged in a series of profound crises: the challenge of terrorism; the challenge of proliferation; and the challenge in the alteration of the international system, whose center of gravity moved from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Every one of these changes alone would have been a tremendous upheaval. To deal with them together was a big task for the peoples and for the leaders.

I don't want to repeat the debates of the last years, especially not before a New York audience, which nearly convinced me that Senator John Kerry would carry forty-nine states during the election. But I will make one fundamental point. The real challenge we face across the Atlantic is whether a group of nations with comparable histories and comparable convictions can deal with these problems on a basis of parallel objectives, or whether they will go back to a kind of foreign policy in which the strongest nation is balanced by a group of smaller nations, which was more or less characteristic of European foreign policy in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. In our century, this would be a disaster. We have to deal with pri-

vate groups that can do damage heretofore characteristic of states yet operate from the territory of states. And we must deal with the problem of proliferation, which should be discussed from the point of view of what kind of world are we going to live in if many countries get into a position to threaten nuclear war and to spread nuclear technology. At the same time, we must deal with a shift of the center of power in the world from Europe to Asia.

President Aznar's important contribution was that he understood the transatlantic common destiny. And he stood by decisions that were highly unpopular in his country in the name of common purposes and a common vision. It is interesting to observe that the notion that one could base policy on a West European coalition that would systematically oppose the United States is being abandoned by its erstwhile advocates. A great leader acts on the basis of assumptions he cannot prove while he acts. It is a lonely road, but all great events have been somebody's vision before they became a reality. And having known President Aznar now for many decades and having seen his efforts, I want to thank him, as an American, not only for what he did for his country, important and inspiring as it is, but above all for the Atlantic relationship. Indeed, a great deal will depend on whether, in the challenges that must be met, we will act together or whether we will repeat Europe's historic tragedy of emphasizing the immediate rivalries and working for immediate gain.

So, Mr. President, as I said, every great leader had to walk a lonely path and is always subject to unpredictable accidents. But history is not determined by accidents but by inspiration, and it is for this reason that I want to thank Oscar for giving me an opportunity to pay tribute to a leader whom I have respected and admired for many decades.

"The Future of Transatlantic Relations"

José María Aznar

I should begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to Queen Sofía Spanish
Institute. Since the medal was first awarded, back in 1978, it has paid trib-
ute to those who have worked to promote the friendship that exists
between the United States and Spain.

I am not sure that I am worthy of such an honor, but I can certainly tell you that I firmly believe in the friendship between our two nations, the United States and Spain. I can also tell you that throughout my entire political career, whatever the level of responsibility I have enjoyed, I have always worked to strengthen and enhance this friendship.

Thus, it is a great honor for me to receive tonight the Queen Sofía Spanish
Institute Gold Medal. In addition to this high honor, I also consider
myself privileged to receive such kind words from Dr. Kissinger, a man I
have always respected and admired. And if, to all of this, we add the fact
that I am able to share the occasion with so many good friends as I see
here tonight, then you will understand that my happiness is complete.

Dearest Friends,

I am an atlanticist. That's not a secret. And I'm so because I'm a Spaniard, and the history of Spain, my own history, cannot be explained without taking into consideration the Atlantic dimension of Spain. Needless to say, the history of Europe, equally, can not be understood if we were to take out its Atlantic dimensions as some in Europe would like to do nowadays.

The Atlantic, the Americas, made a permanent mark in Spain.

But there is something more than the past in my mind. We share the
same principles of freedom and democracy. For the first time in many

decades, Spain and the US were on the same wavelength, tuned to the frequency of liberty.

When I was in government I worked to ensure that Spain and the United States would become special allies. I worked for this aim alongside a Democratic President and alongside a Republican President.

And let me be frank, as President of the Government in Spain. I always felt the friendship of America. I cannot speak for other people, but my personal experience has been that when we most needed it, our American friends have always responded to our call with generosity and courage.

That explains, in part, why during my years in office I worked hard to ensure that Spain and the United States benefited equally from our strong relationship.

I did so because I believe that Spain, as indeed the whole of Europe, is better protected when relations between my country and the United States are far-reaching and sincere, something sometimes forgotten too easily.

I did so because we, Spain and the United States, have a common enemy, terrorism, and a common goal, to prevail over terror. And terrorism will be defeated sooner if we work together. Our special relationship was bad news for the terrorists, for all terrorists. As it was good news for all those who wish to live in freedom, here in New York, in Bilbao or in Baghdad.

I did so because, though the history of our two nations is different, we also have common interests. In Latin America our joint concern is that freedom, democracy and the State based on the rule of law should set down firm roots. Helping to maintain strong institutions through the region was an action better undertaken jointly.

I did so because this alliance could also serve to create economic opportunities and jobs. The vigorous nature of Spanish companies enables them to compete in the largest and most dynamic market in the world. Spain has also proven to be an attractive destination for investors who seek a stable and trustworthy environment in which to create jobs.

And I did so because, as leader of a country, Spain, that under my direction was firmly anchored into the Western community, I always believed that when America and Europe worked together, the outcome was a better World. On the contrary, when Europe and the United States went sep-

arate ways, history shows that things did not go particularly well.

For all these reasons I have always worked towards achieving a special
alliance between the United States and Spain. And I have to say that look-
ing back, I do really see that the results were worth to pursuing.

As you all know, as promised, I voluntarily left the Government after two
full terms. And believe me, it is much more difficult to leave office than
to get to it, particularly if you do so voluntarily. Well, when I left, almost a
year ago, the bilateral relations between Spain and the States were excel-
lent and ever more promising. Paradoxically, the transatlantic relationship
was just emerging from probably its most intense and deep crisis ever
experienced in all its history.

Military intervention in Iraq has been blamed for this, but in my opinion
the Iraqi crisis was just a trigger, not the root cause of the Atlantic's diver-
gent views. The same could be said about George W. Bush's personality, a
much discussed subject among many in Europe. But as Dr. Kissinger has
repeatedly said, this is a misreading of reality. The problems between
Europe and America go deeper than personalities. Actually, the drift
between the two sides of the Atlantic has to do with the changes in the
strategic environment, including the fact that the US is the only super-
power on Earth.

Because America is too much of a superpower and Europeans are, if I
may say so, superpowerless, many people in Europe as well as here in the
United States, believe the Atlantic relationship is no longer valuable. That
it is a thing of the past, something we should congratulate ourselves to
have had, but irrelevant for facing the future. Let me be clear, I strongly
disagree with them.

I have always said that a vibrant transatlantic relationship is vital for the
Western world. Even more for the Europeans themselves, unwilling to
look directly into the problems, and unable to defend themselves from the
dark forces of History, whether ethnic cleansing in the Balkans or Islamic
terrorism anywhere.

And I always fought those who tried to deepen the distance between the
two sides of the Atlantic.

These were the days when I was in office. Now the responsibility to keep
the transatlantic flame alive lies in other hands. I remain committed, but

my responsibilities are now of a different kind. I talk, I write and I teach.
And I also encourage others as I always did.

But even from a distance, I can see that many difficult problems lie ahead.
I'm convinced that if we were able to join forces and act together, prob-
lems like the stabilization of Iraq; the fight against terror; the transforma-
tion of the broader Middle East, moving ahead with the peace process
between Israelis and Palestinians; thwarting proliferation and the nuclear
ambitions of Iran; promoting strong institutions in Latin America; or
fighting against poverty in the world, could be better dealt with.

It is not an easy agenda. It is even more complex if we bear in mind that
we should also reform many institutions, like the UN, at the same time.

Unfortunately the chances that President Bush in his coming visit to
Europe will find a cooperative and constructive attitude from the Allies,
are small. Even if the excellent result of the elections in Iraq last Sunday
has changed the rhetoric in Europe a bit, President Bush's idea of expand-
ing democracy and fighting tyranny seems to have little appeal there.
America has become a force for change, while Europeans tend to favor the
status quo.

If we want to preserve the Atlantic relationship we must understand two
parallel things: September 11th changed the way Americans saw the
World; but at the same time, September 11th also changed the way
Europeans perceived the US.

Whether the US president must reach out to the Europeans, or the
Europeans must adjust to the new realities of power is an open discus-
sion.

I believe nobody has a magic solution today. Though I also believe that
many have the power to make things worse. That, I call the power of the
wrong ideas.

I do agree with those who fight to strengthen the Atlantic link, and I think
those who try time after time to undermine this possibility are wrong.

I do agree with those that seek a strong Europe, an Atlantic Europe, and I
believe that those who think of Europe as a counterweight to America, are
wrong.

I do agree with those who believe that western values are universal, and that everyone everywhere could enjoy them; and I think that those without values and defeatist attitudes are wrong.

I do agree with those who wish to see the Iraqi people free and prosperous, and I think that those who prefer to see America's nose in the mud of humiliation are wrong.

I do agree with those who actively fight terrorism, helping their allies, and showing solidarity when needed; and I think that those who look for appeasement, accommodation, or withdrawal from the fight are wrong.

I do agree with those who look directly into the problems, and are willing to try to solve them, and I think that those who let the problems grow, in order to say there are no solutions to them, are wrong.

Dear friends,

At the beginning of my words I declared myself a convinced atlanticist. I'm an atlanticist. A few months before the military intervention in Iraq, I was asked by a journalist whether I was going to support President Bush's policy to remove Saddam Hussein from power. I replied to him: "If you are asking me to choose between President Bush and Saddam, my choice is clear. I choose President Bush." I did the same with President Clinton in 1998. It was not a decision made on partisan grounds or personal feelings. It was a rational choice between freedom and tyranny, between justice and injustice, between morality and selfishness, between security and vulnerability.

One of the most remarkable things I experienced in my eight years in government was to see the emergence of a new national ambition in Spain, a new feeling about the role Spain should play in the international arena. Overcoming years, decades, almost centuries of isolationism and inward looking, being willing and able to be among the serious and powerful countries, was something more than satisfactory.

Spain met its date with History. Arrived on time to the right place and with the right friends, assuming its responsibilities. Proud as a nation and without any complex when facing the World.

Unfortunately I cannot tell you that a Spain fully in charge of its international responsibilities can be taken for granted today.

Nonetheless, I do believe Spain should be a country with a sense of ambi-
tion. It is an old nation that preserves a considerable sense of vitality. It
can and must work towards strengthening and consolidating the Atlantic
relationship, including Latin America, which is its greatest honor and
greatest responsibility.

I would like to see my country working loyally alongside its allies to defeat terrorism and secure the victory of freedom, promoting economic reforms in Europe, opening up and liberalizing the market to create new opportunities. The Hispanic phenomenon in the United States is a development of colossal proportions, one that can be used to unite the two sides of the Atlantic around the principles of freedom, democracy and human rights, but also expressed in the Spanish language. I am convinced that this will be the best future for us all.

To summarize, I would like to see Spain moving in the right direction, not being left on the side of History because of profoundly mistaken political decisions.

As for me, even though I now stand outside the political arena, I shall con-
tinue to brandish ideas as the best means of ensuring that the task of con-
solidating the principles of freedom and individual rights, and that friend-
ship between the two sides of the Atlantic and a strong and positive role
for Spain is successfully achieved.

I don't think I need to elaborate much more on this. Therefore I'll end my
words here.

Thank you very much.

Board of Directors 2005

Oscar de la Renta, Chairman

Fernando Aleu, M.D., Chairman Emeritus

Valentín Fuster, M.D., Ph.D., Vice-Chairman

Ms. Martha T. Muse, Vice-Chairman

Inmaculada de Habsburgo, President & CEO

David L. Askren, Treasurer

Lester Nelson, Secretary & Counsel

H.R.H. Doña Pilar de Borbón

John Brademas, Ph.D.

Douglas Buxton, M.D., Ph.D.

Santiago Calatrava, Ph.D.

Assunta Carballeira

Carlos Cordón- Cardó, M.D., Ph.D.

J. Pepe Fanjul

Hon. Amalia Lacroze de Fortabat

Hon. Richard Gardner

Antonio Garrigues Walker

Brigitte Gerney

Reinaldo Herrera

Nancy Kissinger

Gonzalo de Las Heras

Hon. José Lladó Fernández-Urrutia

Francisco A. Lorenzo

Edward Malefakis, Ph.D.

Alberto C. Mariaca

Kenneth Maxwell, Ph.D.

George B. Moore

Luis G. Nogales

Carroll Petrie

Carmen R. de Piniés

Hon. Julio Mario Santo Domingo

Joy Ubiña

Joseph A. Unanue

Jean Herrick Van Waveren

## Queen Sofía Spanish Institute

Queen Sofía Spanish Institute was founded in 1954 as a center to promote greater awareness and understanding of the culture of the Spanish-speaking world in the United States. Since that time, the Institute has sought to further that goal through a variety of programs. These programs focus on particular aspects of Spanish culture, past and present, and its influence in the Americas. The Corporate and Public Affairs Program provides a forum in which businessmen, scientists, economists, politicians and journalists from the United States, Latin America and Spain meet to exchange information and views. The many lectures and symposia hosted by the Institute enhance awareness of particular elements of Spanish history, literature and language, while the art exhibitions in the galleries display the varied visual arts traditions of Spain. The Class Program offers all levels of Spanish language instruction and specialized courses in business, medicine and law. The Education and Outreach Program teaches public school children about Spanish culture through lectures on history and art.

Once a year, The Gold Medal Gala awards are given to outstanding individuals from Spain, the United States and Latin America who have played a significant role in strengthening the relationship between the Spanish-speaking world and the United States.

The Institute is funded by individual and corporate membership, donations, foundation grants, the Gold Medal Gala and an Endowment Fund. Members take an active part in all programs and their interest and support is essential to the continuing vitality of the organization.

Queen Sofía Spanish Institute is located at 684 Park Avenue in a McKim, Mead & White landmark building donated by Margaret Rockefeller Strong de Larraín, Marquesa de Cuevas.

Transcription draft of the Introductory Remarks
by
Dr. Henry Kissinger
of
H.E. José María Aznar

February 4, 2005

2

3

European country. While not every aspect of Spanish history was conducted
with delicacy, I have always been moved by the tremendous act of faith that
was required for small groups of people to create these great empires in
South America and to conduct their various expeditions. In retrospect, one
does not have to agree with every one of the measures they took, but I am
always moved by the dedication, the faith and the courage displayed
throughout Spanish history. Nancy and I visited Toledo and saw the flag of
the Battle of Lepanto in what was the hospital for the wounded; it was a
decisive event in Western history; we found it a deeply moving experience.
And indeed, wherever one travels in Spain, one encounters these tremendous
monuments to faith so characteristic of so heroic a people.

4

evolved in Europe, and it evolved because the European peoples learned
from the Thirty Years' War. Enormous suffering and tragedy occur when
ideology, or in that case, religion, becomes the dominant force, and for
several hundred years the European nations conducted their affairs with the
lessons of that period. But many of them no longer believe in the state. In the
process of shedding sovereignty, they no longer have the support for the
kind of policy of sacrifice that Europe conducted throughout much of its
history. So they are caught between their past, which they are trying to shed,
and their future, which they have not yet reached.

I mention all of this because Spanish history is different. The tragedies
in Spain occurred not due to conflict of Spain with other nations, but due to
the conflict of Spain internally, so that there is still a sense of commitment to
international order that is unique in many respects in Western Europe. I say
all of this because, during the presidency of President Aznar, the western

5

world was challenged in a series of profound crises: the challenge of terrorism, the challenge of proliferation, and the challenge in the alteration of the international system, whose center of gravity moved from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Every one of these changes alone would have been a tremendous upheaval. To deal with them together was a big task for the peoples and for the leaders.

I don't want to repeat the debates of the last years, especially not before a New York audience, which nearly convinced me that Senator John Kerry would carry 49 states during the election. But I will make one fundamental point. The real challenge we face across the Atlantic is whether a group of nations with comparable histories and comparable convictions can deal with these problems on a basis of parallel objectives, or whether they will go back to a kind of foreign policy in which the strongest nation is balanced by a group of smaller nations, which was more or less

6

characteristic of European foreign policy in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries. In our century, this would be a disaster. We have to deal with
private groups that can do damage heretofore characteristic of states, yet
operate from the territory of states. And we must deal with the problem of
proliferation, which should be discussed from the point of view of what kind
of world are we going to live in, if many countries get into a position to
threaten nuclear war and to spread nuclear technology. At the same time, we
must deal with a shift of the center of power in the world from Europe to
Asia.

President Aznar's important contribution was that he understood the
transatlantic common destiny. And he stood by decisions that were highly
unpopular in his country in the name of common purposes and a common
vision. It is interesting to observe that the notion that one could base policy
on a West-European coalition that would systematically oppose the United

7

States is being abandoned by its erstwhile advocates. A great leader acts on
the basis of assumptions he cannot prove while he acts. It is a lonely road,
but all great events have been somebody's vision before they became a
reality. And having known President Aznar now for many decades and
having seen his efforts, I want to thank him as an American, not only for
what he did for his country, important and inspiring as it is, but above all for
the Atlantic relationship. Indeed, a great deal will depend on whether, in the
challenges that must be met, we will act together or whether we will repeat
Europe's historic tragedy of emphasizing the immediate rivalries and
working for immediate gain.

With light edits [x]
and HAK edits

Friday, February 4, 2005

President, Mrs. Aznar, Oscar, and Secretary General, ladies and
gentlemen. It is a great honor for me to be able to speak on this occasion. I
have had the privilege of knowing President Aznar in the period before he
took over the government of Spain, and I have admired his conduct in
government and the role he has played since. It is also a pleasure for me to
be able to be here with the Secretary General, who has known his
vicissitudes and all of us have respected the dignity and dedication and
thoughtfulness with which he has conducted his office. It is a great privilege
for us that you have given this evening to this occasion.

2

Now many years ago, we gave a dinner at our house for the then
Mayor of Barcelona, who was a Socialist and later became Deputy Prime
Minister of Spain and he said, we in Spain are going to have two big crises.

The first crisis came when the Socialists won the election. Would we be
permitted to govern? He said the second crisis is going to come when we
be permitted

be permitted
to govern? Well, his
successor is with us tonight, who governed with extraordinary ability. The
economic growth of Spain and the tremendous economic and political
contributions Spain played internationally occurred importantly in his
presidency and President Aznar was in office during a very critical period in
Atlantic relations.

Spain is a country like really no other European country. I mean it was
at the frontiers of western civilization for all of its history. Except for
England, it had a closer relationship across the Atlantic for more of its

3

history than any other European country, and while not every aspect of Spanish history was conducted with delicacy that is favored in academic seminars, one has to be well I have always been, moved by the tremendous act of faith that was required for small groups of people to go to these great empires in South America and to conduct their various expeditions. In

retrospect, one does not have to agree with every one of the measures, but I am always moved by simply what it says about the dedication and the faith. Nancy and I were in

Spain once, and on many occasions, and we visited Toledo and to see the battle flag of the Battle of Lepanto in what was the hospital for the wounded; it was a decisive event in Western history; me that is always to me a deeply moving experience. And indeed, going found it one encounter wherever one travels in Spain, to see these tremendous monuments to faith

and dedication that are so characteristic of so heroic a people, is quite remarkable.

4

The idea of the state was invented in Europe. The concept of sovereignty evolved in Europe, and it evolved because the European peoples learned from the Thirty Years' War. The enormous suffering and tragedies that occur when ideology, or in that case religion, becomes the dominant force, and for several hundred years, the European nations conducted their affairs with the lessons of that period. But many of them no longer believe in the state. In the process of shedding sovereignty, they no longer have the support for the kind of policy that Europe conducted throughout much of its history. So they are caught between their past, which they are trying to shed, and their future, which they have not yet reached.

5

all of this because during the presidency of President Aznar, the western
world was challenged in a series of profound crises: the challenge of
terrorism; the challenge of proliferation; and the challenge in the alteration
of the international system, whose center of gravity moved from the Atlantic
to the Pacific. Every one of these changes alone would have been a
tremendous upheaval. To deal with them together was a big task for the
peoples and for the leaders.

In the last years there have been intense disputes, and I don't want to repeat the arguments in this respect, especially not before a New York audience, which nearly convinced me that Kerry would carry 49 states. But I will make one fundamental point. The real challenge we face across the Atlantic is whether a group of nations with comparable history and comparable convictions can deal with these problems on a basis of parallel objectives, or whether they will go back to a kind of foreign policy

6

[LY]

in which the strongest nation is assaulted by a group of smaller nations,

which was more or less characteristic of European foreign policy in the 18th

In one century this would be aLOT different. We are 5 times less safe, but with... and 19th centuries. When we look at the problem of terrorism, where private

groups can do damage that used to be confined to states, but they are not
organized like states and they operate from the territory of states, so at the
~~yet~~
decals with the
and are mind

problem of proliferation, which is often discussed in terms of the quality of
the government that is proliferating, but really should be discussed from the
point of view of what kind of world are we going to live in, if any more
~~many~~

~~29 the same time we must deal with~~
technology. And when we look at a shift of the balance of power in the
century

slifting from
~~29 the same time we must deal with~~
world of the nature that is taking place between Europe and Asia, in 1871,
when Germany was unified, this really said, this is a bigger event than the
French Revolution, but the rise of China is a bigger event by far than the
emergence of Germany.

7

[Y]

So, the important contribution that President Aznar made for
the German-axis contribution was that he understood that even with the first of these problems, we had a common destiny, and that he stood by decisions that were highly unpopular in his country, in the name of common purposes and a common vision. And it is interesting for me to observe that the notion that one could base policy on a West-European coalition that would systematically oppose the United States is being rejected by the components of this coalition during the war. It is also not speaking anymore in the same way as he did two years ago. But the difference in a great contribution is this: statesmen with public usually learns only from experience. The leader has to act on the basis of assumptions he cannot prove while he acts. It is a lonely road, but all great events have been somebody's vision before they became a reality. And having known President Aznar now for many decades and having seen his

8

efforts not only
I want to thank him as an American for what he did for his country,
^ as it is

which is always an important and inspiring country, but above all for the

Indeed,
Atlantic relationship because a great deal will depend on whether in the
challenges that must be met we will act together or whether we will repeat

Europe's
the historic tragedy of Europe of emphasizing the immediate rivalries and
^ working for immediate gain.

So Mr. President, as I said, every great leader had to walk a lonely
path and is always subject to unpredictable accidents. But history is not
determined by accidents but by inspiration, and it is for this reason that I
want to thank Oscar for giving me an opportunity to pay tribute to a leader

whom
that I have respected and admired for many decades.

With light edits

by

Dr. Henry Kissinger

of

H.E. José María Aznar

Friday, February 4, 2005

2

Now many years ago, we gave a dinner at our house for the then Mayor of Barcelona, who was a Socialist and later became Deputy Prime Minister of Spain, and he said, "we in Spain are going to have two big crises."

The first crisis came when the Socialists won the election. Would we be permitted to govern? He said the second crisis is going to come when we lose an election. Will our successors be permitted to govern? Well, his successor is with us tonight, who governed with extraordinary ability. The economic growth of Spain and the tremendous economic and political contributions Spain played internationally occurred importantly in his presidency, and President Aznar was in office during a very critical period in Atlantic relations.

Spain is a country like really no other European country. I mean, it was at the frontiers of western civilization for all of its history. Except for England, it had a closer relationship across the Atlantic for more of its

3

history than any other European country, and while not every aspect of
Spanish history was conducted with a delicacy that is favored in academic
seminars, one has to be, well, I have always been, moved by the tremendous
act of faith that was required for small groups of people to go to these great
empires in South America and to conduct their various expeditions. In
retrospect, one does not have to agree with every one of the measures, but
simply what it says about the dedication and the faith. Nancy and I were in
Spain once, and on many occasions, and we visited Toledo and saw the
battle flag of the Battle of Lepanto in what was the hospital for the wounded;
that is always to me a deeply moving experience. And indeed, going
wherever one travels in Spain, to see these tremendous monuments to faith
and dedication that are so characteristic of so heroic a people, is quite remarkable.

In the last years there have been intense disputes, and I don't want to
repeat the arguments in this respect, especially not before a New York
audience, which nearly convinced me that Kerry would carry 49 states, But I
will make one fundamental point. The real challenge we face across the
Atlantic is whether a group of nations with incomparable history and
incomparable convictions can deal with these problems on a basis of
parallel objectives, or whether they will go back to a kind of foreign policy

6

which was more or less characteristic of European foreign policy in the 18th
and 19th centuries. When we look at the problem of terrorism, where private

groups can do damage that used to be confined to states, but they are not
organized like states yet and they operate from the territory of states, or at the

countries get into a position to threaten nuclear war and to spread nuclear
technology. And when we look at a shift of the balance of power in the

emergence of Germany.

Could
you
clarify?

7

So, the important contribution that President Aznar made for
Americans was that he understood that, even with the first of these problems,
we had a common destiny, and that he stood by decisions that were highly
unpopular in his country, in the name of common purposes and a common
vision. And it is interesting for me to observe that the notion that one could
base policy on a West-European coalition that would systematically oppose
during the United States is being rejected by the components of this coalition on the
visit of Secretary Rice in Europe, when certainly the German Chancellor is
not speaking anymore in the same way as he did two years ago. But the
difference in a great contribution is this: a statesman with public usually
learns only from experience. The leader has to act on the basis of
assumptions he cannot prove while he acts. It is a lonely road, but all great
events have been somebody's vision before they became a reality. And
having known President Aznar now for many decades and having seen his

8

not only growth, I want to thank him as an American for what he did for his country, which is always an important and inspiring country, but above all for the

Europe's the historic tragedy of Europe of emphasizing the immediate rivalries and working for immediate gain.

by

Dr. Henry Kissinger

of

H.E. José María Aznar, former Prime Minister of Spain

Friday, February 4, 2005

Now many years ago, we gave a dinner at our house for the then Mayor of Barcelona, who was a Socialist and later became Deputy Prime Minister of Spain and he said, we in Spain are going to have two big crises. The first crisis came when the Socialists won the election. Would we be permitted to govern? He said the second crisis is going to come when we lose an election. Will our successors be permitted to govern? Well, his successor is with us tonight, who governed with extraordinary ability. The economic growth of Spain and the tremendous economic and political contributions Spain played internationally occurred importantly in his presidency and President Aznar was in office during a very critical period in Atlantic relations.

Spain is a country like really no other European country. I mean it was at the frontiers of western civilization for all of its history. Except for England. It had a closer relationship across the Atlantic for more of its history than any other European country, and while not every aspect of Spanish history was conducted with a delicacy that is favored in academic seminars, one has to be, well I have always been, moved by the tremendous act of faith that was required for small groups of people to go to these great empires in South America and to conduct their various expeditions. In retrospect, one does not have to agree with every one of the measures, but simply what it says about the dedication and the faith. Nancy and I were in Spain once, and on many occasions, and we visited Toledo and to see the battle flag of the Battle of Lepanto in what was the hospital for the wounded, that is always to me a deeply moving experience. And indeed, going wherever one travels in Spain, to see these tremendous monuments to faith and dedication that are so characteristic of so heroic a people.

All of this has produced a quality for Spain that is somewhat different from some of the other Western European nations, with some exceptions. The idea of the state was invented in Europe. The concept of sovereignty evolved in Europe, and it evolved because the European peoples learned from the Thirty Years' War. The enormous suffering and tragedies that occur when ideology, or in that case religion, becomes the dominant force and for several hundred years, the European nations conducted their affairs with the lessons of that period. But many of them no longer believe in the state. In the process of shedding sovereignty, they no longer have the support for the kind of policy that Europe conducted throughout much of its history. So they are

I mention all of this because Spanish history is different. The tragedies in Spain occurred not due to conflict of Spain with other nations, but due to the conflict of Spain internally, so that there is still a sense of commitment to international order that is unique in many respects in Western Europe. I say all of this because during the presidency of President Aznar, the western world was challenged in a series of profound crises: the challenge of terrorism, the challenge of proliferation, and the challenge in the alteration of the international system, whose center of gravity moved from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Every one of these changes alone would have been a tremendous upheaval. To deal with them together was a big task for the peoples and for the leaders.

In the last years there have been intense disputes, and I don't want to repeat the arguments in this respect, especially not before a New York audience, which nearly convinced me that Kerry would carry 49 states. But I will make one fundamental point. The real challenge we face across the Atlantic is whether a group of nations with incomparable history, and incomparable convictions, can deal with these problems on a basis of parallel objectives, or whether they will go back to a kind of foreign policy in which the strongest nation is assaulted by a group of smaller nations, which was more or less characteristic of European foreign policy in the 18th and 19th centuries. When we look at the problem of terrorism, where private groups can do damage that used to be confined to states, but they are not organized like states and they operate from the territory of states, or at the problem of proliferation, which is often discussed in terms of the quality of the government that is proliferating, but really should be discussed from the point of view of what kind of world are we going to live in, if any more countries get into a position to threaten nuclear war and to spread nuclear technology. And when we look at a shift of the balance of power in the world of the nature that is taking place between Europe and Asia, in 1871, when Germany was unified, this really said, this is a bigger event than the French Revolution, but the rise of China is a bigger event by far than the emergence of Germany.

So, the important contribution that President Aznar made for Americans was that he understood that even with the first of these problems we had a common destiny, and that he stood by decisions that were highly unpopular in his country, in the name of common purposes and a common vision. And it is interesting for me to observe that the notion that one could base policy on a West-European coalition that would systematically oppose the United States is being rejected by the components of this coalition on the visit of Secretary Rice in Europe, when certainly the German Chancellor is not speaking anymore in the same way as he did two years ago. But the difference in a great contribution is this: statesmen with public usually learns only from experience. The leader has to act on the basis of assumptions he cannot prove while he acts. It is a lonely road but all great events have been somebody's vision before they became a reality. And having known President Aznar now for many decades and having seen his growth, I want to thank him as an American for what he did for his country, which is always an important and inspiring country, but above all for the Atlantic relationship, because a great deal will depend on whether in the challenges that must be met we will act together or whether we will repeat the historic tragedy of Europe of emphasizing the immediate rivalries and working for immediate gain.

So Mr. President, as I said, every great leader had to walk a lonely path and is always subject to unpredictable accidents. But history is not determined by accidents but by inspiration, and it is for this reason that I want to thank Oscar for giving me an opportunity to pay tribute to a leader that I have respected and admired for many decades.

QUEEN SOFÍA
SPANISH INSTITUTE
NEW YORK

MAR 08 2005

March 2, 2005

Dr. Henry Kissinger
350 Park Avenue #26th Floor
New York, NY 10022

Dear Henry:

I want to thank you for coming to the Institute this past February 4th to so marvelously introduce our guest speaker, President José María Aznar. It was truly wonderful to have you and Nancy with us.

Your statement was superb. You traced some of the key factors of Spain's history that differentiated it from other European nations and people, and lucidly pointed out the major international contributions of José María Aznar during his presidency, contributions based on a strong sense of commitment for international order.

President Aznar's presentation was also inspiring and all the comments we have heard have been absolutely enthusiastic about the content of the presentations. Everyone thought that it was a very special evening with your presence, the Aznar family and a group of good friends of Spain and America.

We thought that it would be wonderful to publish your words and President Aznar's as a booklet that we could send to members and friends of the Institute, as "Occasional Papers from Queen Sofía Spanish Institute". We would like to ask for your permission and President Aznar's, to whom we are also writing. If you both agree, do let me know if you would like to receive a transcript of your introduction for editing.

With warmest regards,

Sincerely,

Oscar de la Renta
Chairman

Inmaculada de Habsburgo
President

QUEEN SOFÍA SPANISH INSTITUTE | 684 Park Avenue | New York, New York 10021 | T 212 628 0420 | F 212 734 4177
www.queensofiaspanishinstitute.org