210. Editorial Note
On October 19, 1984, Secretary of State George Shultz delivered an address before the Los Angeles World Affairs Council. In his introductory remarks, Shultz asserted that “the next 4 years have the potential to be an era of unparalleled opportunity, creativity, and achievement in American foreign policy.” He explained this was due to “a new national consensus” within the United States and an agenda that held “great promise for positive accomplishments abroad.” Continuing, Shultz stated: “For much of the last 15 years, American society has been deeply divided over foreign policy. This period of bitter division, I believe, is coming to an end.
“We all know that Vietnam took its toll on what used to be called the post-war consensus on foreign policy. Our two political parties still express very divergent views on international issues. But the American people no longer are as divided as that suggests—or as they once were.
“Just as President Reagan has reshaped the national discussion of government’s role in our economic life, so, too, in foreign policy there is a growing majority behind some basic truths: realism about the Soviet Union, appreciation of the need for a strong defense, solidarity with allies and friends, and willingness to engage our adversaries in serious efforts to solve political problems, reduce arms, and lessen the risk of war. Most important, there is a new patriotism, a new pride in our country, a new faith in its capacity to do good.
“Restoring the people’s confidence in American leadership has been perhaps the President’s most important goal in foreign policy. Yes, we have rebuilt our military strength; yes, we have put our economy back on the path of sustained growth without inflation; yes, we have [Page 910] conducted a vigorous diplomacy to help solve international problems. But these achievements reflect and reinforce something even more fundamental: our people’s renewed self-confidence about their country’s role and future in the world. The United States is a very different country than it was 5 or 10 years ago—and our allies and our adversaries both know it.
“And we are engaged for the long term. Foreign policy is not just a day-to-day enterprise. The headlines provide a daily drama, but effective policy requires a vision of the future, a sense of strategy, consistency, and perseverance, and the results can only be judged over time. Our well-being as a country depends not on this or that episode or meeting or agreement. It depends rather on the structural conditions of the international system that help determine whether we are fundamentally secure, whether the world economy is sound, and whether the forces of freedom and democracy are gaining ground.
“In the last 4 years, this country has been rebuilding and restoring its strategic position in the world for the long term. And we have launched a patient and realistic diplomacy that promises long-term results. That is why I believe the foreign policy agenda for the coming years is filled with opportunities. It is an agenda on which the American people can unite, because it accords with our highest ideals. It is an agenda that can reinforce the national unity that is itself my most important reason for optimism about the future.
“It is an agenda that starts in our own neighborhood. Some say good fences make good neighbors. I say: to have good friends, one must be a good friend. That accounts for the unprecedented attention we have devoted to our relations with Canada and Mexico. I spent the first 2 days of this week in Toronto meeting with Canadian External Affairs Minister Joe Clark, in accord with our agreement with Canada to hold at least four such meetings a year. With Mexican Foreign Minister Sepulveda, I have met 12 times in the past 18 months, most recently in Mexico just last week. Mexico and Canada were the first countries on our agenda when we came into office, and we will continue these regular encounters with firm friends. They have strengthened our relations.”
Shultz devoted the remainder of his address to discussing East-West relations and arms control; the strengthening of alliances; the promotion of peaceful settlements of regional conflicts; the reinvigoration of the international economic system; the emergence of “new dimensions of international concern”; and the promotion of human rights and democracy. Concluding his address, Shultz stressed: “Therefore, as we look around and look ahead, there are many reasons for optimism about the state of the world and the future of our foreign policy. The structure of the global system is sound, stable, and secure. The trends [Page 911] are positive in many ways. Our adversaries are burdened; the democracies are united and recovering their vitality. The United States is strong and once against comfortable with its role of leadership. Today, time is on freedom’s side.
“Next year, we will celebrate the 40th anniversary of the end of World War II. In the immediate postwar period, the United States faced a series of unprecedented new challenges and responded with an extraordinary burst of bipartisan creativity and energy: the Marshall Plan, the Greek-Turkish aid program, the North Atlantic Alliance, the Food for Peace program, and other initiatives. We changed the world, for the better. In the 1960s and 1970s, this bipartisan spirit deteriorated, and we paid a price for it.
“The challenges we face today are very different from the postwar years but just as great. I can assure you that a major goal of President Reagan in a second term will be to summon again that spirit of bipartisan cooperation. It will be time for a reaffirmation of unity. Our two parties must come together as Americans, and the Executive and Congress must work together as partners.
“Let us reforge a national consensus on foreign policy that will sustain America’s leadership in the world over the long-term future. In unity, we all know, there is strength. And there is no limit to what a free and united people can accomplish if it sets its sights high and faces the future with confidence.” (Department of State Bulletin, December 1984, pages 5–6, 10)