A New Transatlantic Agenda in a Changing World

Apr 14, 2008, 01:00 ET from German Embassy

    WASHINGTON, April 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a
 speech by Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs at
 the "Conference on Germany in the Modern World" at Harvard University, 12
 April 2008:
 
 
 
     Professor Maier,
 
     Mr. Dietsch,
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     Thank you very much for your very kind introduction. It is indeed an
 honor to address this distinguished audience.
 
 
 
     I had always hoped to be invited to Harvard some day. That it should
 happen when the Red Sox are playing the Yankees is of course an additional
 privilege. You may be asking yourself what a soccer fan is doing at a
 baseball game? Well, a Foreign Minister must by definition be open to the
 unexpected and new. After all: this is a conference on "Modern Germany."
 
 
 
     I hope it is not too shocking if I admit to you here at Harvard that I
 have just come from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Sounds
 almost blasphemic, doesn't it? There I witnessed the announcement by MIT
 and the German Fraunhofer Gesellschaft of a new ambitious partnership in
 information exchange and applied research on climate and energy security.
 
 
 
     You might be wondering: is that really part of the job description of a
 Foreign Minister?
 
 
 
     I would argue it only shows how times have changed. Again: modern
 Germany!
 
 
 
     Certainly the classic foreign policy topics still dominate our news and
 our minds. Increasingly, however, Foreign Ministers are finding their
 plates full of new issues - climate change, energy security, hunger,
 protection against pandemics, better control of capital markets. In that
 sense, this morning's event at "the other place down the road" - like the
 topics of this Harvard conference - are very much symptomatic of the way
 foreign policy has developed over the last few years.
 
 
 
     This ever growing list reminds me of the feeling you get when you buy a
 new shirt and try to find all the pins holding it together: there is always
 one more than you think.
 
 
 
     But first of all let me say this: A German Foreign Minister cannot
 address Harvard University without having at least two great transatlantic
 speeches in his mind.
 
 
 
     There is, of course, the famous speech by George Marshall some sixty
 years ago in which he announced the plan that became a hallmark of American
 statecraft.
 
 
 
     The second speech is by Chancellor Willy Brandt. He came to Harvard in
 1972 to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Marshall Plan, and
 established the German Marshall Fund of the United States - as our Thank
 You Gift to America. The German Marshall Fund became a key multiplier of
 networks of friends between Germans, Europeans and Americans.
 
 
 
     It was here at Harvard that Willy Brandt said that the Marshall Plan,
 America's generosity and political vision stand for one of the most
 fortunate moments of history of the 20th century.
 
 
 
     I suggest we keep this in mind when we ask ourselves: Do we still
 matter to one another today? And will we do so in the future?
 
 
 
     To all skeptics let me say up-front: this question is a bit like the
 Atlantic itself. It comes and goes in waves.
 
 
 
     To start with, no other relationship in the world rests on such a solid
 foundation: the U.S. and the EU are each other's number one partner. For
 the past 60 years the transatlantic relationship has been the world's
 transformative partnership. America's relationship with Europe - more than
 with any other part of the world - enables both of us to achieve goals that
 neither of us could achieve alone.
 
 
 
     This is what makes the transatlantic relationship unique: when we
 agree, we are the core of any effective global coalition; when we disagree,
 no global coalition is likely to be effective.
 
 
 
     Just a few facts: transatlantic trade and investment outnumber all
 similar relationships by a wide margin. Four trillion dollars a year in
 commercial sales. Over this decade, U.S. companies invested three times
 more in Germany than in China. The Euro became one of the world's strongest
 currencies - as all of you sadly find out when traveling to Europe these
 days.
 
 
 
     Politically too, Europe has moved. The Lisbon reform treaty greatly
 improves EU decision-making. It will make Europe an even more capable
 partner for America.
 
 
 
     Our partnership and our friendship remain strong. But today we are
 facing a whole range of new issues. We are seeing the rapid emergence of
 new powers and new problems, whilst the Western nations are not always in
 top shape to cope: economic slowdown, questioning U.S. global leadership,
 political uncertainties also in Europe. New opportunities have appeared,
 but so have new threats. September 11th was the most obvious proof of this.
 
 
 
     The clarity of the bi-polar world - reliable yet cynical as it was -
 belongs to the past. Cold war concepts such as "bloc building" or
 "containment" are gone, too. Instead, a new global complexity dominates the
 picture.
 
 
 
     Our partnership must adjust and transform to address these new global
 opportunities and challenges. Our military alliance remains essential. But
 in today's world, security can neither be ensured by hard power alone nor
 by any nation alone.
 
 
 
     Only together do we have a chance to tackle the most pressing
 challenges of mankind: scarce resources, people left behind by
 globalization, changing relations in Asia, dealing with political Islam, or
 fighting terrorism.
 
 
 
     No single nation can solve these problems on its own - not even the
 most powerful, not even the United States. Particularly here at Harvard we
 should recall the wisdom and the achievements of U.S. post war diplomacy
 which focused on building lasting partnerships.
 
 
 
     "Smart power" - as Joe Nye so appropriately called it - is the synonym
 for what we need today: new concepts, a revitalized alliance and
 particularly renewed American leadership in the world.
 
 
 
     "Smart power" is George Marshall's vision in a nutshell. "Smart power"
 is the key to serving America's interests, to serving Europe's interests
 and - I would argue - to serving the world's interests. To use "smart
 power," America - with its global reach - needs allies, and Europe - for
 its global contributions - needs America.
 
 
 
     In that sense, to redesign the transatlantic agenda for a global age,
 let me look at three main elements for our common future:
 
 
 
     -- a more sustainable world
 
     -- a safer world
 
     -- a more just and open world.
 
 
 
     In all three areas, I see "modern Germany" and "modern Europe" as
 America's ideal partner:
 
 
 
     First: creating opportunities for a more sustainable world.
 
 
 
     Climate change and energy security are the keywords here - topics which
 directly determine whether we can live safely in tomorrow's world.
 
 
 
     Here, the U.S. and Europe can and must be pioneers. We are among the
 most innovative economies; we have top technology, top researchers, top
 universities; we have the two most integrated markets worldwide. Together,
 we must turn the tide and jointly tackle the twin challenges of climate
 change and energy security.
 
 
 
     We have already started: in 2007 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
 and I set up an EU-U.S. technology initiative in order to intensify
 research cooperation and to trigger energy innovation.
 
 
 
     Later last year, the International Carbon Action Partnership was
 launched to harmonize and finally link regional emissions trading systems.
 On my trip to California last summer, I found in Governor Schwarzenegger a
 strong partner for this initiative.
 
 
 
     ICAP turned into a very active cooperation framework between the EU and
 its members, several U.S. states - including Massachusetts - and countries
 from the Pacific. New Zealand and Australia have joined. Japan has
 expressed interest. Amazing what we can do when we work together.
 
 
 
     My vision is a "transatlantic climate bridge" that brings together
 like-minded people and institutions here and in Europe. The "MIT Fraunhofer
 Center for Sustainable Energy Systems" launched this morning is an
 excellent example of joint action. Of course there are lots of
 opportunities for Harvard, too, to help build the bridge - every
 bridge-builder is highly welcome.
 
 
 
     Element number two: seeking opportunities for a safer world.
 
 
 
     The new world order - or disorder, for that matter - sets one very
 clear task: we must define security much more broadly than we have ever
 done before.
 
 
 
     We must strengthen common global awareness of ever increasing
 interdependence - and therefore of the constantly increasing need for more
 cooperation.
 
 
 
     In this context, I am convinced George Marshall would be pleased to see
 how Europe turned his Harvard vision into a success story. European
 unification and enlargement, so generously assisted by the United States,
 is the greatest single European achievement in the interest of peace since
 the treaty of Westphalia. America and Europe share a key interest in
 continuing this process and in locking in what has been achieved so far.
 
 
 
     As each and every U.S. President since Truman has stated: a strong EU
 is in America's interest. The more unified the Europeans are, the more they
 are able to act as global partners.
 
 
 
     Europe's way of projecting stability reaches far beyond its current
 boundaries. This will continue - through further EU enlargement, policies
 towards the EU neighborhood, and strategic partnerships.
 
 
 
     Of course, the EU's ability to project stability is interlinked with
 the efforts of NATO. EU and NATO are working closely together to stabilize
 the Balkans, especially Kosovo. And NATO's Bucharest summit last week
 reaffirmed that the door remains open to those willing and able to join.
 
 
 
     A safer world also means that America and Europe must engage with
 Russia.
 
 
 
     Both the NATO-Russia summit and the subsequent meeting between
 Presidents Bush and Putin have shown that we all, Europeans and Americans,
 share a vital, strategic interest in keeping Russia as an active,
 constructive partner.
 
 
 
     Last weekend, my wife and I spent two very nice days at the country
 home of my Polish colleague and his American wife. On Russia, we personally
 have had very different experiences; from those we draw very similar
 conclusions.
 
 
 
     Without Russia's cooperation, many pressing issues we are facing around
 the world will be harder to resolve - Iran, the Middle East, arms control -
 are just a few examples.
 
 
 
     Should we turn a blind eye to shortcomings in Russia's political
 system? Of course not. But I am deeply convinced that change towards a more
 democratic and pluralistic society in Russia will come through dialogue and
 engagement, not through confrontation and containment.
 
 
 
     That is why we should hold the incoming Russian President to his
 remarkable words about "placing freedom in all its manifestations at the
 heart of government actions."
 
 
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     Modern Germany's and Europe's responsibilities do not end at Europe's
 borders. As a nation and as a continent in an ever more interdependent
 world - and as a partner of America - we must do all that we can to tackle
 the world's problems.
 
 
 
     Helping to overcome the conflicts in the Middle East is a top priority.
 Two weeks ago I stood with half of the German cabinet and our colleagues
 from the Israeli government at Yad Vashem. This was a deeply touching and
 emotional moment. This historic meeting demonstrated once again Germany's
 firm commitment to Israel. It is for precisely this reason that we actively
 engage also with the Palestinians and Israel's other neighbors in the
 region. We continue to work towards a two-state solution, allowing Israelis
 and Palestinians to live peacefully side-by-side in secure and
 internationally recognized borders.
 
 
 
     Afghanistan is another case in point. Germany stands firm by its
 commitments to NATO. We have assumed responsibility together. And together
 we will bring our mission to a successful conclusion.
 
 
 
     I know that your conference discussed whether Germany is "boxing below
 its weight class." Whatever your verdict may have been, I am sure it was
 fair - taking into account the long way Germany has come over the last ten
 years: zero troops on stabilization missions in 1998; over 7200 now - the
 largest contingent in Kosovo and the third largest in Afghanistan.
 Obviously some would like us to do more. But let me assure you: this is a
 quantum leap for us - for both policy-makers and the wider German public.
 We have stretched ourselves quite a bit. Our resources are not unlimited.
 But we remain firmly committed - politically, and with our highly
 professional troops on the ground.
 
 
 
     Creating a safer world also means doing much more on arms control. Last
 week in Bucharest, NATO for the first time in quite a while mentioned arms
 control prominently in the communique. Now our words must be followed by
 action. We must not allow the disarmament architecture that has been set up
 over the last decades to collapse.
 
 
 
     The West should take the initiative - with the U.S. front and center.
 
 
 
     At this year's Munich Security Conference I asked for support for a
 determined effort on the Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is a strong link
 between the nuclear powers' willingness to disarm and the willingness of
 the non-nuclear states not to build up their arsenals.
 
 
 
     This is why Germany is so intensively engaged - together with the U.S.
 and the other P5 countries - in trying to prevent Iran from acquiring a
 nuclear weapons capability. Smart diplomacy has successfully brought about
 three unanimous UN resolutions, sending via sanctions a clear signal to
 Tehran. At the same time, our offer of generous cooperation with Iran stays
 on the table, should Tehran change course. Germany is determined to
 continue this dual-track approach with others.
 
 
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     I have talked about a sustainable world, a safer world. But if we
 proclaim these visions for our new transatlantic global agenda, we must add
 a third element as a vital ingredient: a more open and just world.
 
 
 
     It is true: our values as democracies, the openness of our societies
 and our economies remain the foundation of our success. Together we stand
 for the rule of law and respect for human rights - at home and abroad, and
 especially in the fight against terrorism.
 
 
 
     We also share a major interest in further advancing a rules-based
 system of open global trade through the reduction of barriers to trade and
 investment - amongst ourselves and with the rest of the world. This is a
 core transatlantic project.
 
 
 
     But let's not deceive ourselves: America - and Europe - are currently
 involved in a serious debate and process of soul searching as to how much
 openness we can afford. But we are not the only ones - everybody in the
 world wants to profit from globalization and to have a fair share of the
 cake. Together we must find balanced solutions to these conflicting
 political strategies. The question "What's in it for me?" is a legitimate
 one. We must sit down together and work on convincing answers; otherwise,
 economic differences and despair will increase. Even more fundamentally, a
 growing number of people in the world will question the benefits of
 globalization. And not only that: they will question whether the values we
 cherish and want to spread have any meaning for them and their daily lives.
 
 
 
     In Europe and in the United States, there are siren songs of
 protectionism coming from left, right and center. I see this with great
 concern. As we all know: siren songs are very tempting - and very
 dangerous.
 
 
 
     On the contrary, cooperation pays off, politically and in the bank
 accounts of the people. This is the right course: engagement, dialogue,
 institution building, global governance.
 
 
 
     We see a litmus test as we speak: how do we deal with the current
 financial crisis triggered by neglect of credit risks and market
 complexities? It requires swift political action - nationally and
 internationally - within the G7 and the EU, and this weekend at the IMF and
 World Bank meetings in Washington, too.
 
 
 
     On a broader scale, globalization with all its benefits and challenges
 needs rules and regulation - like it or not. This is the only way to break
 the divide between winners and losers. We need to see these efforts through
 - together. In the long run, everybody at home and abroad must profit from
 globalization, otherwise we risk a serious backlash that undermines the
 case for market solutions and free trade in our societies and casts the
 political foundations of our democracies into question.
 
 
 
     We must enable the key institutions to provide effective global
 governance. Global governance must be good governance! Global governance
 must also be just governance - probably a home truth at John Rawls' alma
 mater.
 
 
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     "Do transatlantic relations still matter?" - that was my question at
 the outset. Can we make a difference together? Without interfering in your
 current election campaign: let me just say - yes, we can!
 
 
 
     I have tried to give you some of the reasons why I think we can. In
 this new world - 60 years after George Marshall's speech - perhaps more so
 than ever. Yes, different circumstances require new concepts and new
 leadership. But one truth remains: together, we as transatlantic partners
 and friends - the United States, Canada and Europe with modern Germany at
 its heart - together we can make our world a more sustainable, a safer, a
 more just and open place!
 
 
 
     We should continue this discussion. Berlin would be a good place to do
 so. I am glad to see how Harvard (and others) are making good use of this
 vibrant city as an intellectual hub for America in Europe. How about
 "effective multilateralism" as the next subject? After all: it is - as I
 have read - all about "making the Europeans more effective and the U.S.
 more multilateral."
 
 
 
     That's nicely put. Let's do it.
 
 
 
     Thank you very much!
 
 
 
 
 

SOURCE German Embassy
    WASHINGTON, April 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following is a
 speech by Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs at
 the "Conference on Germany in the Modern World" at Harvard University, 12
 April 2008:
 
 
 
     Professor Maier,
 
     Mr. Dietsch,
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     Thank you very much for your very kind introduction. It is indeed an
 honor to address this distinguished audience.
 
 
 
     I had always hoped to be invited to Harvard some day. That it should
 happen when the Red Sox are playing the Yankees is of course an additional
 privilege. You may be asking yourself what a soccer fan is doing at a
 baseball game? Well, a Foreign Minister must by definition be open to the
 unexpected and new. After all: this is a conference on "Modern Germany."
 
 
 
     I hope it is not too shocking if I admit to you here at Harvard that I
 have just come from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Sounds
 almost blasphemic, doesn't it? There I witnessed the announcement by MIT
 and the German Fraunhofer Gesellschaft of a new ambitious partnership in
 information exchange and applied research on climate and energy security.
 
 
 
     You might be wondering: is that really part of the job description of a
 Foreign Minister?
 
 
 
     I would argue it only shows how times have changed. Again: modern
 Germany!
 
 
 
     Certainly the classic foreign policy topics still dominate our news and
 our minds. Increasingly, however, Foreign Ministers are finding their
 plates full of new issues - climate change, energy security, hunger,
 protection against pandemics, better control of capital markets. In that
 sense, this morning's event at "the other place down the road" - like the
 topics of this Harvard conference - are very much symptomatic of the way
 foreign policy has developed over the last few years.
 
 
 
     This ever growing list reminds me of the feeling you get when you buy a
 new shirt and try to find all the pins holding it together: there is always
 one more than you think.
 
 
 
     But first of all let me say this: A German Foreign Minister cannot
 address Harvard University without having at least two great transatlantic
 speeches in his mind.
 
 
 
     There is, of course, the famous speech by George Marshall some sixty
 years ago in which he announced the plan that became a hallmark of American
 statecraft.
 
 
 
     The second speech is by Chancellor Willy Brandt. He came to Harvard in
 1972 to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Marshall Plan, and
 established the German Marshall Fund of the United States - as our Thank
 You Gift to America. The German Marshall Fund became a key multiplier of
 networks of friends between Germans, Europeans and Americans.
 
 
 
     It was here at Harvard that Willy Brandt said that the Marshall Plan,
 America's generosity and political vision stand for one of the most
 fortunate moments of history of the 20th century.
 
 
 
     I suggest we keep this in mind when we ask ourselves: Do we still
 matter to one another today? And will we do so in the future?
 
 
 
     To all skeptics let me say up-front: this question is a bit like the
 Atlantic itself. It comes and goes in waves.
 
 
 
     To start with, no other relationship in the world rests on such a solid
 foundation: the U.S. and the EU are each other's number one partner. For
 the past 60 years the transatlantic relationship has been the world's
 transformative partnership. America's relationship with Europe - more than
 with any other part of the world - enables both of us to achieve goals that
 neither of us could achieve alone.
 
 
 
     This is what makes the transatlantic relationship unique: when we
 agree, we are the core of any effective global coalition; when we disagree,
 no global coalition is likely to be effective.
 
 
 
     Just a few facts: transatlantic trade and investment outnumber all
 similar relationships by a wide margin. Four trillion dollars a year in
 commercial sales. Over this decade, U.S. companies invested three times
 more in Germany than in China. The Euro became one of the world's strongest
 currencies - as all of you sadly find out when traveling to Europe these
 days.
 
 
 
     Politically too, Europe has moved. The Lisbon reform treaty greatly
 improves EU decision-making. It will make Europe an even more capable
 partner for America.
 
 
 
     Our partnership and our friendship remain strong. But today we are
 facing a whole range of new issues. We are seeing the rapid emergence of
 new powers and new problems, whilst the Western nations are not always in
 top shape to cope: economic slowdown, questioning U.S. global leadership,
 political uncertainties also in Europe. New opportunities have appeared,
 but so have new threats. September 11th was the most obvious proof of this.
 
 
 
     The clarity of the bi-polar world - reliable yet cynical as it was -
 belongs to the past. Cold war concepts such as "bloc building" or
 "containment" are gone, too. Instead, a new global complexity dominates the
 picture.
 
 
 
     Our partnership must adjust and transform to address these new global
 opportunities and challenges. Our military alliance remains essential. But
 in today's world, security can neither be ensured by hard power alone nor
 by any nation alone.
 
 
 
     Only together do we have a chance to tackle the most pressing
 challenges of mankind: scarce resources, people left behind by
 globalization, changing relations in Asia, dealing with political Islam, or
 fighting terrorism.
 
 
 
     No single nation can solve these problems on its own - not even the
 most powerful, not even the United States. Particularly here at Harvard we
 should recall the wisdom and the achievements of U.S. post war diplomacy
 which focused on building lasting partnerships.
 
 
 
     "Smart power" - as Joe Nye so appropriately called it - is the synonym
 for what we need today: new concepts, a revitalized alliance and
 particularly renewed American leadership in the world.
 
 
 
     "Smart power" is George Marshall's vision in a nutshell. "Smart power"
 is the key to serving America's interests, to serving Europe's interests
 and - I would argue - to serving the world's interests. To use "smart
 power," America - with its global reach - needs allies, and Europe - for
 its global contributions - needs America.
 
 
 
     In that sense, to redesign the transatlantic agenda for a global age,
 let me look at three main elements for our common future:
 
 
 
     -- a more sustainable world
 
     -- a safer world
 
     -- a more just and open world.
 
 
 
     In all three areas, I see "modern Germany" and "modern Europe" as
 America's ideal partner:
 
 
 
     First: creating opportunities for a more sustainable world.
 
 
 
     Climate change and energy security are the keywords here - topics which
 directly determine whether we can live safely in tomorrow's world.
 
 
 
     Here, the U.S. and Europe can and must be pioneers. We are among the
 most innovative economies; we have top technology, top researchers, top
 universities; we have the two most integrated markets worldwide. Together,
 we must turn the tide and jointly tackle the twin challenges of climate
 change and energy security.
 
 
 
     We have already started: in 2007 Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice
 and I set up an EU-U.S. technology initiative in order to intensify
 research cooperation and to trigger energy innovation.
 
 
 
     Later last year, the International Carbon Action Partnership was
 launched to harmonize and finally link regional emissions trading systems.
 On my trip to California last summer, I found in Governor Schwarzenegger a
 strong partner for this initiative.
 
 
 
     ICAP turned into a very active cooperation framework between the EU and
 its members, several U.S. states - including Massachusetts - and countries
 from the Pacific. New Zealand and Australia have joined. Japan has
 expressed interest. Amazing what we can do when we work together.
 
 
 
     My vision is a "transatlantic climate bridge" that brings together
 like-minded people and institutions here and in Europe. The "MIT Fraunhofer
 Center for Sustainable Energy Systems" launched this morning is an
 excellent example of joint action. Of course there are lots of
 opportunities for Harvard, too, to help build the bridge - every
 bridge-builder is highly welcome.
 
 
 
     Element number two: seeking opportunities for a safer world.
 
 
 
     The new world order - or disorder, for that matter - sets one very
 clear task: we must define security much more broadly than we have ever
 done before.
 
 
 
     We must strengthen common global awareness of ever increasing
 interdependence - and therefore of the constantly increasing need for more
 cooperation.
 
 
 
     In this context, I am convinced George Marshall would be pleased to see
 how Europe turned his Harvard vision into a success story. European
 unification and enlargement, so generously assisted by the United States,
 is the greatest single European achievement in the interest of peace since
 the treaty of Westphalia. America and Europe share a key interest in
 continuing this process and in locking in what has been achieved so far.
 
 
 
     As each and every U.S. President since Truman has stated: a strong EU
 is in America's interest. The more unified the Europeans are, the more they
 are able to act as global partners.
 
 
 
     Europe's way of projecting stability reaches far beyond its current
 boundaries. This will continue - through further EU enlargement, policies
 towards the EU neighborhood, and strategic partnerships.
 
 
 
     Of course, the EU's ability to project stability is interlinked with
 the efforts of NATO. EU and NATO are working closely together to stabilize
 the Balkans, especially Kosovo. And NATO's Bucharest summit last week
 reaffirmed that the door remains open to those willing and able to join.
 
 
 
     A safer world also means that America and Europe must engage with
 Russia.
 
 
 
     Both the NATO-Russia summit and the subsequent meeting between
 Presidents Bush and Putin have shown that we all, Europeans and Americans,
 share a vital, strategic interest in keeping Russia as an active,
 constructive partner.
 
 
 
     Last weekend, my wife and I spent two very nice days at the country
 home of my Polish colleague and his American wife. On Russia, we personally
 have had very different experiences; from those we draw very similar
 conclusions.
 
 
 
     Without Russia's cooperation, many pressing issues we are facing around
 the world will be harder to resolve - Iran, the Middle East, arms control -
 are just a few examples.
 
 
 
     Should we turn a blind eye to shortcomings in Russia's political
 system? Of course not. But I am deeply convinced that change towards a more
 democratic and pluralistic society in Russia will come through dialogue and
 engagement, not through confrontation and containment.
 
 
 
     That is why we should hold the incoming Russian President to his
 remarkable words about "placing freedom in all its manifestations at the
 heart of government actions."
 
 
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     Modern Germany's and Europe's responsibilities do not end at Europe's
 borders. As a nation and as a continent in an ever more interdependent
 world - and as a partner of America - we must do all that we can to tackle
 the world's problems.
 
 
 
     Helping to overcome the conflicts in the Middle East is a top priority.
 Two weeks ago I stood with half of the German cabinet and our colleagues
 from the Israeli government at Yad Vashem. This was a deeply touching and
 emotional moment. This historic meeting demonstrated once again Germany's
 firm commitment to Israel. It is for precisely this reason that we actively
 engage also with the Palestinians and Israel's other neighbors in the
 region. We continue to work towards a two-state solution, allowing Israelis
 and Palestinians to live peacefully side-by-side in secure and
 internationally recognized borders.
 
 
 
     Afghanistan is another case in point. Germany stands firm by its
 commitments to NATO. We have assumed responsibility together. And together
 we will bring our mission to a successful conclusion.
 
 
 
     I know that your conference discussed whether Germany is "boxing below
 its weight class." Whatever your verdict may have been, I am sure it was
 fair - taking into account the long way Germany has come over the last ten
 years: zero troops on stabilization missions in 1998; over 7200 now - the
 largest contingent in Kosovo and the third largest in Afghanistan.
 Obviously some would like us to do more. But let me assure you: this is a
 quantum leap for us - for both policy-makers and the wider German public.
 We have stretched ourselves quite a bit. Our resources are not unlimited.
 But we remain firmly committed - politically, and with our highly
 professional troops on the ground.
 
 
 
     Creating a safer world also means doing much more on arms control. Last
 week in Bucharest, NATO for the first time in quite a while mentioned arms
 control prominently in the communique. Now our words must be followed by
 action. We must not allow the disarmament architecture that has been set up
 over the last decades to collapse.
 
 
 
     The West should take the initiative - with the U.S. front and center.
 
 
 
     At this year's Munich Security Conference I asked for support for a
 determined effort on the Non-Proliferation Treaty. There is a strong link
 between the nuclear powers' willingness to disarm and the willingness of
 the non-nuclear states not to build up their arsenals.
 
 
 
     This is why Germany is so intensively engaged - together with the U.S.
 and the other P5 countries - in trying to prevent Iran from acquiring a
 nuclear weapons capability. Smart diplomacy has successfully brought about
 three unanimous UN resolutions, sending via sanctions a clear signal to
 Tehran. At the same time, our offer of generous cooperation with Iran stays
 on the table, should Tehran change course. Germany is determined to
 continue this dual-track approach with others.
 
 
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     I have talked about a sustainable world, a safer world. But if we
 proclaim these visions for our new transatlantic global agenda, we must add
 a third element as a vital ingredient: a more open and just world.
 
 
 
     It is true: our values as democracies, the openness of our societies
 and our economies remain the foundation of our success. Together we stand
 for the rule of law and respect for human rights - at home and abroad, and
 especially in the fight against terrorism.
 
 
 
     We also share a major interest in further advancing a rules-based
 system of open global trade through the reduction of barriers to trade and
 investment - amongst ourselves and with the rest of the world. This is a
 core transatlantic project.
 
 
 
     But let's not deceive ourselves: America - and Europe - are currently
 involved in a serious debate and process of soul searching as to how much
 openness we can afford. But we are not the only ones - everybody in the
 world wants to profit from globalization and to have a fair share of the
 cake. Together we must find balanced solutions to these conflicting
 political strategies. The question "What's in it for me?" is a legitimate
 one. We must sit down together and work on convincing answers; otherwise,
 economic differences and despair will increase. Even more fundamentally, a
 growing number of people in the world will question the benefits of
 globalization. And not only that: they will question whether the values we
 cherish and want to spread have any meaning for them and their daily lives.
 
 
 
     In Europe and in the United States, there are siren songs of
 protectionism coming from left, right and center. I see this with great
 concern. As we all know: siren songs are very tempting - and very
 dangerous.
 
 
 
     On the contrary, cooperation pays off, politically and in the bank
 accounts of the people. This is the right course: engagement, dialogue,
 institution building, global governance.
 
 
 
     We see a litmus test as we speak: how do we deal with the current
 financial crisis triggered by neglect of credit risks and market
 complexities? It requires swift political action - nationally and
 internationally - within the G7 and the EU, and this weekend at the IMF and
 World Bank meetings in Washington, too.
 
 
 
     On a broader scale, globalization with all its benefits and challenges
 needs rules and regulation - like it or not. This is the only way to break
 the divide between winners and losers. We need to see these efforts through
 - together. In the long run, everybody at home and abroad must profit from
 globalization, otherwise we risk a serious backlash that undermines the
 case for market solutions and free trade in our societies and casts the
 political foundations of our democracies into question.
 
 
 
     We must enable the key institutions to provide effective global
 governance. Global governance must be good governance! Global governance
 must also be just governance - probably a home truth at John Rawls' alma
 mater.
 
 
 
     Ladies and Gentlemen,
 
 
 
     "Do transatlantic relations still matter?" - that was my question at
 the outset. Can we make a difference together? Without interfering in your
 current election campaign: let me just say - yes, we can!
 
 
 
     I have tried to give you some of the reasons why I think we can. In
 this new world - 60 years after George Marshall's speech - perhaps more so
 than ever. Yes, different circumstances require new concepts and new
 leadership. But one truth remains: together, we as transatlantic partners
 and friends - the United States, Canada and Europe with modern Germany at
 its heart - together we can make our world a more sustainable, a safer, a
 more just and open place!
 
 
 
     We should continue this discussion. Berlin would be a good place to do
 so. I am glad to see how Harvard (and others) are making good use of this
 vibrant city as an intellectual hub for America in Europe. How about
 "effective multilateralism" as the next subject? After all: it is - as I
 have read - all about "making the Europeans more effective and the U.S.
 more multilateral."
 
 
 
     That's nicely put. Let's do it.
 
 
 
     Thank you very much!
 
 
 
 
 SOURCE German Embassy