thumbnail of Toward a new world; A new foreign policy for the United States, part one
Hide -
This transcript was received from a third party and/or generated by a computer. Its accuracy has not been verified. If this transcript has significant errors that should be corrected, let us know, so we can add it to FIX IT+.
The. Institute on world affairs. The Institute on world affairs held each year on the San Diego State campus brings together statesmen scholars military leaders and businessmen from all over the world. The purpose of this institute is the understanding of the problems and challenges that they command gained through knowledge and discussion. This year's theme runs toward a new world and here to introduce this session speaker is Professor Minos generalis director of the Institute. We pursued this thing in the evening session of the. Analysis of the Institute on world affairs themed Todal world. With an inquiry into. The future of foreign policy for the United States a new foreign policy. For the United States. Few other people who are competent to analyze a problem of this sort. With
what one might call a degree of expertise. It is for this reason that we are particularly gratified to see the thing and having to back it up podium an old friend. And participant in the Institute on world affairs Dr. Hans Morgan. He's a man who I'm sure for all of you needs no introduction. A man who might be considered in his own right the dean of political scientists within the field of international relations in this country. Whose knowledge and ability we have great admiration and respect. It is therefore with great pleasure as well as with honor that I introduce to you once more my good friend and colleague Dr. Hans Mark. Sure. I. Move move move because it's anonymous and ladies and gentlemen.
It is hotly and little. To this state. As we have long since feeling. Good today to a lesser extent. That says something essentially along. With the foreign policy. Of the United States. Who snored partisan. Nor do they are connected to the disapproval. Of the policy. Kind of feeling. Most of us has. And which I think is justified. And yes. It is sedation. If on earth behind this kind of motion and almost instinctive response. I think one science basic fact. Is that the foreign policy of the United States. In its basic
principles. In its basic intellect modes of thought and action. Out of tune. With the conditions. I'll stick contempt. For you came put it in a somewhat different. And say. She United States is the foreign policy of the United States is essentially obsolete. In U.S. foreign policy option ited States as we know it today. Ross created essentially. Almost exactly 20 years ago. During his famous 15 weeks off this spring of 1947. When the policy of containment. So most of. That two months have been. Put. Into practice. And essentially. They fund ideological justifications and rationalizations. Based continue to
push you towards policies. Because. 20 years ago. But it's an open question and you see this question I want to discuss with you tonight. With us so. Polish. Food. Today. I think one can show. The world take stand and go right to extend. They are no longer fooled. By it I sing one set of. 2 5 8 popular me. Privately in the US. The first hour of elation is with us. Second say our relations with the communist. So our relations we see uncommitted. First say our relations with nuclear power. And finally perhaps most importantly. We have to come to terms with our senators.
Let me postulate of you very quickly and not fully believe. The size of the US and try to know. To what extent. The policies you have routinely applied in the recent years. No longer could. Foresee the conditions under which we live. Today. Let me take first of. Our relations with our allies. That is to say primarily European. Then she stopped. She endorses Fortis. He did respond. To see a variety. Of United States and the nation's first and your. Body is interesting to note. That it's a very moment on most. When need to. Last since last I do thing by virtue of
the of what happened in September 1941 and. Then see you when they exploded. Its first. Nuclear device. Should have been obvious then. Sooner or later. See runners to foundation stones is not the most important foundation stone of Nate. Was bound to come. Because you see a restaurant that. Depend. Upon. Its nuclear monopoly. Of the United States. This monopoly was a kind of from. Under which the nations of Western Europe. Called to feel secure. But round the union had acquired the ability. To despise United States or to get a crusade to inflict
intolerable damage to the United States. Could do to it what the United States wants. To do to solve your union. SEE very foundation to. Force the nations of Western Europe. A liability. To see benefits points and nations of Western Europe. And you did see the story. If I may say so in spite of unfortunate events. Shouldn't the goal. That he put his finger. Upon. So decisively so appalling. In spite of recent lapses in charge of the goal. Here at least Ross if he still still is the most intelligent statesman.
Seniora me still seem to have most intelligent statements of a scene with somewhat diminished intellect and capacity. Like a grade or a passing loom. Because the girl of your lives before anybody else. Sat. Through viable aspects. She. Bipolarity of nuclear power. Having replaced the American monopoly. Particularly trying to. See relations self-interest and power. Within the Atlantic and. For now it was possible. That United States might get involved. In a nuclear war. Let me see over to give you a concrete example. In which the nations of question you know.
About the nations of Western Europe would be drawn. Into serious conflict. And be destroyed. Even so she had no interest in the conflict. And on the other hand it was possible. The nations of first in Europe might get involved in which they might threaten or even use a nuclear weapon. Let me see it was in 1956. And in which United States would have. In other words the ability of the Soviet Union. To destroy the Western nations of Western Europe. And. The United States with nuclear weapons. Created. Steers our uncertainty and unjustifiable theirs. We. Destroyed. The base.
And we. Need to have us found it. And again is the sewer skies of 1966. Home to Great Britain and this problem. For it was a plan. That Clinton and fans embarked upon a military enterprise which they start was a vital interest. In which United States and the Soviet Union in concert. With the successful. And so this was a shock to Great Britain and France. A traumatic experience. Which has not yet if they ever will. Live down. So it seems to me. General de Gaulle. Made a valid point. I don't see a mash of our. Unwilling to face. For a long time at least see the realities of the situation. That we insisted.
Upon a year revival of the need. For a continuation of civil teens by which. In spite of this deficiency. We had been inflicted upon the world by virtue of the new bipolarity of nuclear power. There is indeed an urgent need. For a re-evaluation. Of our relations with our European allies. And serious reevaluation is bound to lead. To a relationship between ourselves and generations of us. Which is much less powering on our side say it has been said. Much less close much less intimate to be. Central in a moment. See the revival of nationalism. Which
we find into communist. Has also occurred in western. Adorably are not and I personally find it but it is still a fact. See. Tendencies supernational indignation. Which we witnessed in the first decade or so following. Has been largely replaced. By additional emphasis. Upon the national of India in the individual nation states. I personally like the. Tendency. But it is a frock I trust the same. And of course he has a very great responsibility. He has really been the instigator. Of this new nationalism in so west. Which in my view is obsolete in view of modern
technological military and political. In which we. Live. But that's no it does no good. To our purpose facts which are not going to go away. Because you post them. Until we have to reconcile ourselves to a much looser relationship with the nations of Western Europe. And much less interference. And much less attempt to impose our will as the most powerful nation. On. The suit policies of our allies. The second. Is intimately connected. With the first one. And that you see a problem of communism. In S.. Indeed in immediate aftermath of the Second World War. We had a simple. And to a great extent justify the concept.
Of the communists. For exact time. We were confronted with a. United. Communist movement. To see tight control and leadership or something. And since we were committed. To see containment of the Soviet Union. We were proud to be committed to artificial. Containment are far less socialist communist movement since all sorts of movements where any extension. Of the power of the Soviet Union. Now about in 1948. Or Yugoslavia. It defected. Putting its own national in. Its own legions. To see communist creed as propounded. By Moscow. And in 1949 when it's a communist to go
but they did so not under sea instigation of the Soviet Union not by following the advice not to speak of the orders of the Soviet Union. So you do get down to. Decisions which where different. Forms see police as dogs Marxism-Leninism. And when in 1956. He put to the early. U.S. x. To see a monolithic character of communism pose at home and of course by showing that Stalin was not the greatest genius of mankind incomparable teacher of progress if humanity of what else. Whatever else he was was a bloody tyrant. He destroyed. She legitimacy. Of
government itself. And he became himself the victim of this talk. Late in 1964 when he was deposed first for similar reasons and used he denounced Stalin in 1956. And some time on. The Communist movement. Under the leadership. Under sea tight control. And what was before any monolithic communist became what is generally called the police and. That is to say individual communist nations and movements. To a greater or lesser extent. Following. So. They got to. See orders in councils of
society. You have to classic somber today. Certainly not every concert of the. Nation. If you compare it. Lying. Directly in a direct proximity. This is. Defying Soviet Union continuously even with a kind of supporting leave. It's almost like a home run event when the prime minister of Khomeini can make it declarations that he doesn't follow it doesn't follow the law in which the Soviet Union has a stake in the Middle East and disputed the United Nations. To make it a point to defy Soviet Union. Something which would have been conceived with 10 years ago. Now all of this Amish
school if you look. At Certainly China. Is today. Not only not the interest obviously an enemy of the Soviet Union at all chapattis and governments lie. So you see today an enormous. Kinds of communism's. Which have to be tailored to their. Own mandate and shown in the. System is much more difficult. And much more risky. Much more intellect Alaska. And political traction and. Then continual. Right across 20 years ago a perfectly. Legitimate to come in this problem that is to look at it as a monolithic movement. As a kind off centrally directed. Conspiracy.
Either from taking off from Moscow. But by doing this. Ron saves française a great deal of intellect are left for. A correct assessment of the international situation and in consequence one is bound to push. So long policy. Become obvious in our policies with regard to Vietnam. While in Europe we have. Been able to use so I don't mean Yugoslavia Hungary Czechoslovakia Pearland longer simply satellite services. Has become again. To a greater or lesser extent as independent factors on the international scene. Which have to be dealt with until. We affect. Asia. We still believe. All
to see empirical evidence to show contrary notwithstanding. No you send me a instrument. Exist in other words a direct line of control. Going from Peking to Hanoi and from Hanoi to save your own. And that they have for you are not faced with an indigenous broader civil war. But we see. Manifestation of an international conspiracy of a master plan to Congress of a man eating. Peeping. So I see no evidence for this. It is a misconception. Comfortable. Because it fits in global art. We have always
believed. In dark so it makes the operation of foreign policy. Extremely easy. With subtle differences. We should be called annoying. And so you don't need to devise. Different policies for each of. You deal with all of them received everyone says same and everything is easy. What seems to be easy. Even so it is really more difficult. Because such a simple and simplistic policy. There collects the facts into situations. We sure if they were realized tonight. Would be much more likely. To support successful policies we are pursuing. So she upshot of this analysis is simply. That is no longer sufficient. To look at it see that our enemies are one and
the same thing. And this is all communist governments of necessity we are our enemies. We have to go to relations with Tito of Yugoslavia. Even so it is a communist. And we have much worse relations with the gold who happens not to be coming in. And would certainly be utterly other far away if we were to be friendly Do they go in. Even so he cost us wherever he can. And be hostile to Tito simply because he happens to be a communist. But watch this. Symbol from and applies elsewhere. Why is it that we treat them with polls to cast off. Not in my view. Because he's a communist. But because he's an instrument. Of the political and military instrument. Because Cuba has become a military and political outcome was
a world of delusion of communist revolution in the western hemisphere. If Castro we have trust and not a Tito. A national Communist. Minding his own communist business in Cuba we might like to write it on rather philosophical but we would not constitute you. And I suggest that the same is true. With regard to who was in. The main of Vietnam is not a threat to U.S. interests of the United States because he's a commie in this. He would be structured so that. If he if you had these signs upon territories or virus which our. United States. And so again America all thought and action. Which was 20 years ago a perfectly justified. Becomes. In our question. Because
sane. Modes of thought and thought changing on that is slowly limping behind so plastic changes. Which it couldn't survive outside. And that applies to all of. This. You see our relations we see uncommitted. 10 years ago. When C D colony say great colonial empires of Great Britain and that. Was in surpasses being completed. We conceived of our relations we see uncommitted. As a kind of great contests. Between our side and since the Soviet Union. Forgot Ross and call it the minds of men. And the main instrument of this contest. Was
foreign aid. We thought. By bringing the same happened to us we thought we had achieved in our society. By bringing service a kind of blessing to the unfortunate underdeveloped nations which are now politely called the developing. Nations. Even though most of them are just as underdeveloped as used to be. We somehow put into our work. Some are going to our. Mates and like us and our institutions. I shall go to see him do a detailed discussion. Of the poor flower on. Fallacy. Of benevolent. Thought. Around or only to say. Two things. First of all. He's a very open question. Where the.
Power. Is to legally see scheme. Which we say is man and make everybody happy. It is quite possible. That value. We have achieved in between and of which we. Are regarded by other cultures. As being of my own and. I remember very vividly a discussion I had a couple of years ago. We see. Public official. Who was on in a foreign aid mission in Burma. And you came back utterly frustrated. And he said how can you include economic development. Into a society. Which believes that it's a handicap for success in the art of which is the only success.
In other words for better or for worse. Same state in which we couldn't see everybody in between. The first of our formation. Before I see enough nationalists before I see enlightenment. When the. Disparate life insists input. Into the quiet East pro-national is sation. Of Western society. In order to make. You see technological and scientific revolution possible. Upon which our industrial societies based. So kind as to ascend into this idea that you can bring economic development to see if I still have a sense that this is really makes us. Happy.
Toward a new world
A new foreign policy for the United States, part one
Producing Organization
San Diego State University
Contributing Organization
University of Maryland (College Park, Maryland)
If you have more information about this item than what is given here, or if you have concerns about this record, we want to know! Contact us, indicating the AAPB ID (cpb-aacip/500-bc3szp38).
Episode Description
This program features the first part of a lecture by Dr. Hans Morgenthau, director, Center for the Study of American Foreign Policy, University of Chicago.
Series Description
Lectures recorded at San Diego State College's 25th Annual Institute on World Affairs. The Institute brings together world leaders to discuss issues in politics, culture, science, and more.
Global Affairs
Public Affairs
Media type
Embed Code
Copy and paste this HTML to include AAPB content on your blog or webpage.
Producing Organization: San Diego State University
Speaker: Morgenthau, Hans J. (Hans Joachim), 1904-1980
Speaker: Generales, Minos D.
AAPB Contributor Holdings
University of Maryland
Identifier: 68-9-2 (National Association of Educational Broadcasters)
Format: 1/4 inch audio tape
Duration: 00:29:48
If you have a copy of this asset and would like us to add it to our catalog, please contact us.
Chicago: “Toward a new world; A new foreign policy for the United States, part one,” 1968-12-15, University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC, accessed July 25, 2024,
MLA: “Toward a new world; A new foreign policy for the United States, part one.” 1968-12-15. University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Web. July 25, 2024. <>.
APA: Toward a new world; A new foreign policy for the United States, part one. Boston, MA: University of Maryland, American Archive of Public Broadcasting (GBH and the Library of Congress), Boston, MA and Washington, DC. Retrieved from