Goodbye (Teil 9)

Heute geht es um die Rede, die George W. Bush am 1. Juni 2002 in der Militärakademie West Point für die Aschlussklasse 2002 gehalten hat. Dieser Rede wurde seinerzeit nicht viel Beachtung geschenkt. Heute erkennt man sie als eine der Reden, in denen Bush maßgeblich sein Denken und seine Außenpolitik nach dem 11. September 2001 formuliert hat. Die Rede von West Point ist quasi als Fortsetzung der Rede vor dem Kongress vom 20. September 2001 zu sehen.

Eineinhalb Monate arbeiteten Bush und seine Berater an der Rede. In ihr formulierte Bush einen der Hauptpfeiler dessen, was die Bush-Doktrin genannt wird: Das Recht auf und die Notwendigkeit von Präventivschlägen im Krieg gegen den Terror. Im Buch "Rebel-in-Chief" von Fred Barnes erklärt Condoleezza Rice: "There are certain kinds of threats that are undeterrable. Since terrorists have nothing to lose, they don't have a territory that they defend. They don't have the attributes of a state, which is what you use to deter people. You had to go to a doctrine that says we will get them before they get us."

Es ist der Teil von Bushs Krieg gegen den Terror und des "post-9/11-thinking", dessen Notwendigkeit gerade außerhalb der USA nur Wenige erkannt haben. Letztendlich formulierte Bush in West Point das, was weniger als ein Jahr später im Irak zur praktischen Anwendung kam. Mit dieser Rede und seiner Bush-Doktrin zeigte George W. Bush einmal mehr, dass er aus dem 11. September die richtigen Lehren gezogen hatte und verstanden hatte, wie der Terrorismus bekämpft werden musste. In den folgenden Jahren war er damit leider ziemlich alleine. Die Ausnahmen sind im letzten Teil der Goodbye-Reihe aufgeführt.



Die wichtigsten Auszüge:

"You [die Abschlussklasse] will wear the uniform of a great and unique country. America has no empire to extend or utopia to establish. We wish for others only what we wish for ourselves -- safety from violence, the rewards of liberty, and the hope for a better life. In defending the peace, we face a threat with no precedent. Enemies in the past needed great armies and great industrial capabilities to endanger the American people and our nation. The attacks of September the 11th required a few hundred thousand dollars in the hands of a few dozen evil and deluded men. All of the chaos and suffering they caused came at much less than the cost of a single tank. The dangers have not passed. This government and the American people are on watch, we are ready, because we know the terrorists have more money and more men and more plans.

[...]

For much of the last century, America's defense relied on the Cold War doctrines of deterrence and containment. In some cases, those strategies still apply. But new threats also require new thinking. Deterrence -- the promise of massive retaliation against nations -- means nothing against shadowy terrorist networks with no nation or citizens to defend. Containment is not possible when unbalanced dictators with weapons of mass destruction can deliver those weapons on missiles or secretly provide them to terrorist allies. We cannot defend America and our friends by hoping for the best. We cannot put our faith in the word of tyrants, who solemnly sign non-proliferation treaties, and then systemically break them. If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long.

Homeland defense and missile defense are part of stronger security, and they're essential priorities for America. Yet the war on terror will not be won on the defensive. We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans, and confront the worst threats before they emerge. In the world we have entered, the only path to safety is the path of action. And this nation will act. [...] Our security will require a military that must be ready to strike at a moment's notice in any dark corner of the world. And our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives."


Den moralisch Indifferenten, die nicht zwischen richtig und falsch unterscheiden können, gab Bush auch gleich noch was mit auf den Weg:

"Some worry that it is somehow undiplomatic or impolite to speak the language of right and wrong. I disagree. Different circumstances require different methods, but not different moralities. Moral truth is the same in every culture, in every time, and in every place. Targeting innocent civilians for murder is always and everywhere wrong. Brutality against women is always and everywhere wrong. There can be no neutrality between justice and cruelty, between the innocent and the guilty. We are in a conflict between good and evil, and America will call evil by its name. By confronting evil and lawless regimes, we do not create a problem, we reveal a problem. And we will lead the world in opposing it."