The State of the Union 2003: A Pro-American Foreign Policy

by | Jan 29, 2003

In this year’s State of the Union address, it was said by many that President Bush would have to clearly make the case for war with Iraq before the American people to answer the fears of a wavering public. In the President’s speech before the nation, that case was made. The President outlined Iraq’s failure […]

In this year’s State of the Union address, it was said by many that President Bush would have to clearly make the case for war with Iraq before the American people to answer the fears of a wavering public. In the President’s speech before the nation, that case was made. The President outlined Iraq’s failure to account for and eliminate its weapons of mass destruction. The President outlined how Iraq’s defiance threatens the peace and safety of the world. Yet most significantly, the President outlined a declaration, not to Iraq, but to the rest of the world: America will act without the United Nations if it must in order to de-fang Iraq.

“We will consult, but let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people, and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him,” said the President.

Those are brave words–perhaps the bravest words to be spoken by an American president in many principle-starved years. In one sentence, the President has reasserted that the security of America comes first, before the opinion of the UN.

As we observed last year, if on the eve of American independence, the founders had asked the world’s permission before they revolted against the English crown America would not exist as it does today. Yet today, in the name of “engagement,” it is commonly held that America must genuflect before the opinion of a less than free and envious world.

Yet it is not the place of the world to approve or disapprove of a just nation acting to protect the freedom and security of its people against a ruthless tyrant. While the Iraqi situation is certainly a crisis, the true crises existed within America’s own soul: would the government posses the moral courage to stand alone against world opinion if necessary? Before tonight, the President’s answer to that question was in doubt. Tonight, President Bush gave the first indication that America still possesses the courage befitting a free people.

For all the faults and contradictions we find with President Bush’s domestic agenda, we are heartened by the first real glimpse of bravery we have seen in many months in the President’s foreign policy agenda. We only hope that the President’s brave words are met with equally brave deeds.

Nicholas Provenzo is founder and Chairman of the Center for the Advancement of Capitalism.

The views expressed above represent those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors and publishers of Capitalism Magazine. Capitalism Magazine sometimes publishes articles we disagree with because we think the article provides information, or a contrasting point of view, that may be of value to our readers.

Have a comment?

Post your response in our Capitalism Community on X.

Related articles

Are the Democrats betraying Israel?

Are the Democrats betraying Israel?

Both Biden and his predecessor, President Barack Obama, promised that they had Israel’s back, but it now appears that they are painting a target on its back at a time of its greatest vulnerability.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pin It on Pinterest