Transcripts For CSPAN3 Ronald 20240704

A healthy democracy doesnt just look like this. It looks like this. Where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly inspired, and the public thrives. Get informed, straight from the source, on cspan. Unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. From the nations capital, to wherever you are. It is the opinion that matters the most. This, its what democracy looks like. Cspan, powered by cable. Welcome to uncommon knowledge, im peter robinson. Today, a conversation hosted with the Ronald Reagan institute. In a moment jamie will and a charming master, will join me in discussing president reagans june 12th 1987, tear down this wall speech. But, since i was a speech writer who wrote the speech, i have been asked actually, general mcmaster has ordered me, to tell the story of the speech. Right there by the way is the first page president reagans copy. And you could see my name as the speech writer in the upper left hand corner. First, some historical background. After the second world war, west berlin, which is a portion of berlin itself, remained under American British and french control, even as east berlin, and all of the surrounding east germany, came under the control of a communist regime. This is very important to grasp that west berlin was completely surrounded by the communist east. The communist east. And you can see that west berlin was a little dot inside east germany. Again, after the war thousands of east germans flee to the communist regime in east germany to the democratic west. How did they do this . Very often they do it just by stepping across the street into west berlin and once they were in west berlin they could get on a train which had the right to cross east german territory to the west. So leaving was simple. And by 1961, a fifth of the entire population of east germany has done just that. They had fled. To stop this big enormous exodus, the east germans proposed a physical barrier and moscow agreed. In the middle of the night of august 13th 1961, the east germans strung barbed wire all the way around putting it off. There is a that shows this barbed wire and after that they would place the cinder block with slabs of concrete 13 feet high. More than a quarter of a century later, the berlin wall remained in place. Again, circling west berlin. There were slides that showed where the wall cut off it Brandenburg Gate with president reagan mentioning the gate in the speech and they were in 18th century monument that once served as a ceremonial entrance to berlin and berlin lot cuts it off. That brings me to the speech itself. It was the spring of 1987. Im a young speech writer in the Reagan White House. Im told that the president will speak in front of the berlin wall. But you have an audience of between ten and 40,000 people. Its about 40,000 people. Hell speak for about half an hour and given the setting the subject will be Foreign Policy. That was all the guidance i got. I flew to west berlin with the American Party and the security people who would work at security would be west german members of the press office who track the camera angles and so forth. And i went to gather material for stops in berlin enforce the site where the president will speak. Its a very difficult to convey how momentous the place fails. The rush, talk which still stole more damning from the second world war, climb the observation platform and looked over the hall into east berlin. Behind, me west berlin in modern cities like motion and traffic. On the other side of the wall colorless notice in more soldiers and pedestrians and onesided lies on the other side twilight next i went to the ranking american diplomat in berlin it was full of 80s what president reagan should not say. East west relations are very nuanced. Subtle. No anti communist rhetoric. Here no commie bashing. Never mentioned the, wall theyve gotten used to it by now. They were given their ride in the u. S. Army helicopter. And from the air, and look even worse this state from the ground. In west berlin. Because from the air you could see what lay on the other side of the wall. Guard wrongs and dog towers in a nomansland. Then, that evening, i broke away from the American Party to go to a suburb. Residential suburb of west berlin. Where dinner party was put on for me by visa and they had worked on the world bank in washington. They had friends and common in washington. We talked about this and. That then, i told him that the american diplomats have all gotten used to the berlin wall. That turned out to be incorrect. They may have stopped talking about after all these years, but if you asked became very clear that they still hated that wall every day. They were in the comrade, and gorbachev was serious with the talk of perestroika. They would come to berlin improve a beginning right of the wall. Putting that in my notebook immediately, a native Ronald Reagan has been there in my place he wouldve responded to the simplicity in the decency of that remark. Back in washington, drafting the speech it went to the president when we can when there was camp david. Theres something of a story there, because almost always in the Reagan White House the speech we go to staffing before much of the president. But with speech writers were able to persuade the staff secretary to let the president see the speech before it went out to staffing. The following monday, showing this. Meeting following monday, 18 to 1980. Seven speech writers went to the oval office with the president , singling out the passage tearing down the wall. Something that you particularly wanted to say. That will need to come down and thats what i would say. Then the speech went to a staffing in for three weeks until the president delivered the state department or the National Security council opposed it, trying to stop it. In part by submitting one alternative draft after another. Each with amid the call to tear down the wall. Heres a slide that shows one comment where it is exit. Calling to tear down the wall. And their side with the to colin powell, who is the number two and a Security Council at that time the National Security council at that time. Then we shall see the memorandum call with the speech mediocre. And a missed opportunity. In italy the president had been attending an economic summit before going to west berlin. In italy, as they get on air force one to fly to west Berlin State Department over another alternative draft, and in a west oberlin only way to the wall i heard this from the deputy chief of staff who is in the limousine with the president , Ronald Reagan explained that there was a speeches written, and then he said the boys are going to kill me for this, but it is the right thing to do. And that is the story of the speech that Ronald Reagan delivered on june 12th, 1987. This is something the soviets would make that will be unmistakable. Its dramatically causing the freedom and peace and general secretary gorbachev, if you seek peace and see prosperity for the soviet union in Eastern Europe and you seek liberalization come here to this gate. Gorbachev, open this gates. [applause] [applause] mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall. [applause] jimmy fly is the president and ceo of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, and mr. Hice served during the Bush Administration on the National Security council and in the office of the secretary of defense. It was degrees from American University at georgetown. William served as chair of the Climate Center for National Security at the university of texas and austin and at the Bush Administration he served at the National Security council. He holds his degree from stanford in an undergraduate degree from stanford with a doctorate from yale. Mcmaster served as the white house National Security adviser to President Trump. And in the United States army, and when she rose to lieutenant general. General mcmaster is the author of the classic work on the vietnam, dereliction of duty. And last, year he published battleground. Fight to defend the free world. A fellow at the hoover institution, general mcmaster holds an undergraduate degree in the United States military academy, and a doctor to the university of North Carolina at chapel hill. Jamie, will and h are, thanks for joining us. Jimmy, fly lets set the stage. And his first trip to germany im quoting your essay for the reagan institute. On this first trip to germany in 1970, eight reagan visited the site where 16 years, earlier 18 year old peter vector, this is an east german who tried to escape over the wall, was shot and bled to death in no mans land. The former california governor of this delegation also ventured into east berlin. And was just about what they saw of life under east german communism. Jamie, between 1970 when Ronald Reagan first visited the wall, and 1987 when he spoke in front of the wall, what had changed . To use the soviets turn, correlation of forces shifted . Thanks for having me to the reagan. Institute i was struck and general mcmasters essays, conditions of mind did you, and even amazing job keeping the story of the development of the speech alive. And i thank you for that, you should generations will understand the context better. If i was writing the essay and with that period what struck me was how much the drum republic at suffrage during that period. As decades passed and germans especially west berliners moved well beyond the initial establishment of the wall which happened overnight speaking actually from berlin. And are speaking from here in berlin. It happened suddenly with families, friends werent prepared for it and some were situations is the beginning to interact rather quickly. Some people took their lives into their own hands hands trying to please the west in four minus sending a german history, people became more more. Depressed and optimistic about the potential for change. From 1987 the accepted government German Government as some of these policies that they did that change would be simple and quick and various types of engagement with east germany and the soviet union. Often to often to the consternation of u. S. Administration. And so i think reagans arrival came at a key moment, where germans, especially west germans, needed a shot in the arm. And they need that encouragement, that change was still possible, that hope should be maintained for some sort of different future for germany. And so, the stars aligned, in that respect with the timing of reagans. Visit jamie, you quote the state department official, whom i saw in berlin. This is an article he wrote much later. By 1987, quote, this is now. Folks in germany and much of europe agreed not much with Ronald Reagan, but with nickel gorbachev, closed quote. By 1987, it was clear that the soviet union had stagnated. And by 1987, the United States was resurgent. And everyone in the world could see that, including the germans. And yet europeans see gorbachev as the most hopeful figure. Im gonna go to hr, mcmaster. How could that be, hr . Well you know, i think it has everything to do with confidence, confidence in our democratic form of governments. Confidence in who we are as a people. And of course, confidence in the transatlantic relationship, and confidence among the free states of europe at the time. And what i hope to do with this essay is to make an analogy, i think the point youre making implicitly, peter, is that we can regain our confidence in who we are as a people. An inter democratic form of governance. And we can do, but i think, with affective leadership, and with some clarity. Clarity that that speech provided, and the leadership that Ronald Reagan provided. Well, im quoting you. You come down to fight. Quote, the comments from the state department and the staff on early speech drafts, give the flavor of their thinking. I put up a couple of slides earlier. But you provide a much more extensive overview of their comments on speech drafts. You are quoting the state department and. This wont fly with the germans. Not sentimental people. It seems silly, as edited. This much come out. Westerners dont want to see east germans insulted. We need concrete ideas, not sentimental slop. Too much emphasis on good guys versus bad guys. Okay with, the state department and the n s d did not like that speech. Well walk, i quoted little bits and pieces, but these were highly intelligent very experienced people. Not that that went through my mind at the time. What were they thinking . Well peter, i think were reflecting a lot of his the conventional wisdom, and the Expert Opinion of the day. And yet, i dont use that derisively. But this is where i think, it really brings out reagans strategic genius, that he was willing, and i will summarize this. Way most of the conventional Foreign Policy wisdom of the day, including every previous american president since the cold war, had seen the cold war primarily as a great power contest between the powerful soviet union, and the powerful United States. And they saw their job as largely managing that. So dont let the soviets expand anymore, but at the same time we need to assume the soviet union and the warsaw pact will be there, almost in perpetuity, a permanent feature on the geopolitical landscape. And reagan, as you know very well, well visions and ideas of the speech. He reversed that. He saw the cold war as primarily a battle of ideas. And that happens to have powerful countries embodying it. And so because he thought of the cold war in terms of ideas, freedom against tyranny, capitalism against communism, democracy against dictatorship, he also thought of the cold war in terms of how it encouraged or affected individual peoples. And he was aware of the sentiments of many of the People Living behind the iron curtain of the east germans, trapped by the wall there. A lot of the sentiments that you pick up from that dinner party. And so, reagan was willing to go against a lot of the Expert Opinions, and the state department, Foreign Policy establishment, that wanted to see cold war only in terms of the use rival power blocs. He said no, we can push this further. We can stand up for our ideas, that freedom is better than tyranny. And we can speak to the people behind the iron curtain. And we can even, in some ways, channel their voices. But i think it was because he had that entirely different Strategic Vision and theory of the case, for what the cold war was all about, that he was willing to back up his, speech writers like you. And say, no, this is not sentimental slop. No, we are not worried about the east germans. Were going to be speaking to the heart of the german people, and speaking into the hearts of the soviet people. Does anybody feel any urge. Hr, you ran the National Security council. Let me put it this way. There is an event a couple of years ago, to mark the 30th anniversary of the fall of the berlin wall. And, as jamie noted, i dont need too much prompting to tell the story of this speech. And there is very specific who said wait a minute now, that the speech worked out, it does not prove that it was the right decision to give it. George schultz, among others, saw the speech as putting gorbachev in a tight spot. In the politburo, you see you try to work with the americans, and the president comes along and challenges you like this. What do you think youre doing, comrade. Hr, and looking to you to stick up for the nfc, and its objections to the speech 30 something years ago. Jamie, you are right in the middle of berlin, or as far as i can, tell germans have forgotten the speech, or dont care to be reminded. Im giving you guys a chance, come in and, stick up for these guys. You know the process is important right, because you want to give a president a broad range of views. But, the National Security adviser job, your job is the adviser, because you are the only person in the United States government, in the Foreign Policy National Security arena, who has the president as his hurl her only client. Your job is to give the president a say. And so, its really important that we spend time with the president on, as you did peter, on these important speeches. And you know, i had a great relationship with your old friend and the other speech writers. In the white house, and we worked together, on a number of speeches very early. And then, i would ensure that the speeches got to the president early. So, he could put his imprint on it. And, i think that if you look at President Trumps warsaw speech for example, there were echoes of the berlin speech in that speech. And so, its an immensely important i think, aspect of the job, is to help the president craft speeches that allow him to, first of all, decide on what his Foreign Policy agenda is. But then, importantly in our democracy, to make it public, right. Because its important that the American People support really these initiatives. But i think oftentimes, what president s dont realize enough, is especially if theres more domestic focus. Like President Trump was, for example. I think president s sometimes underestimate the degree to which those overseas, hang on every single word of a president s speech. Yes, and i think this is what you got so right. Is that for that speech, it spoke to an international audience, in a powerful and profound way. Okay, well. By the way, so this is where ive got to step in and clear up one thing. I wrote it, it was kind of a strange thing. I wrote it, and that was true as far as it goes, but it was 100 percent Ronald Reagan. I would not have written that for anybody else. And i can tell you that, because i had worked for then Vice President george h. W. Bush. We have never written it for him. Reagan, and reagan alone, would have insisted on delivering the speech, once he had seen it, over other objections. George bush, Vice President bush, and every Foreign Policy speech, the first question he would always ask me when i drafted a Foreign Policy speech is, did the state approve of . This that was his first question. So jamie, you listen to this story. All three of you, but jamie next. We will stay with Ronald Reagan here for a moment. This is a story, i think its a famous story. It was told me by who was your predecessor, who was Ronald Reagans first National Security adviser. So, the years 1977. Reagan is now a former governor, he has just lost the republican president ial nomination to gerald ford. And so far, there is no inkling that he is going to run for president. Still, he is playing close attention to world affairs. And stopped by himself, and reach sin on world affairs. And then, reagan says, would you like to hear my theory of the cold war . And allen said, of course governor. And then Ronald Reagan, and quoting now he puts this down writing now. And im quoting from him. This is reagan speaking, some people think im simplistic, but there is a difference between being simple, and being simplistic. My theory about the cold war is, that we win, and they lose. Well, how do you, how do you operationalize that . We thats, here is the hole, heres Richard Nixon and henry kissinger, and jimmy carter, i think its the same year that jimmy carter gave his speech warning against an inordinate fear of communism. And Ronald Reagans impulses just, to turn it upside down. And so, it feels risky. Now that im older, it feels a little risky to me. Im a big fan of the approach, obviously, especially where i stand today at greater liberty. I think the moral clarity of reagan, is incredibly essential here. Authoritarians, ultimately are incredibly fearful. They are fearful of their own citizens. And when they realize that democracies are resilient and united, and up to the task. I mean, that strikes fear into the heart of every authoritarian leader. Thats ultimately why, what reagan understood, and why this speech was so powerful. Now we, in terms of what a president says, the setting like this, thats one thing, in terms of presenting the moral clarity, the vision. And then you can debate the tactics. And the diplomacy, and the negotiations, which ultimately reagan engaged in extensively. But one brief comment on the we brought that to the conversation was happening earlier. I had only a bit role in the george w. Bush administration, but i worked with senator marco rubio for years, i wrote my share of speeches with him. What i found, in all of the policy jobs i held in washington, was that far too many people in the government, and in the National Security apparatus, they lose sight of ultimately, who they work for, and why, whether its the president or a senator, they are in that position. They were the ones elected, it is all ultimately their voice. Most of those people were elected for the right reason. The public put their confidence in them, for a certain reason. And, a lot of the process is necessary. But, ultimately many staffers i think, strive to box in their principles. To move their principles through Something Like a speech writing process. And they forget, fundamentally, where their bosses vision is, where the bosses instinct is. And i had many personal experience, even in my short time and working in the senate, where we would debate for hours over email, or days about a speech. And then, you would put it in front of your boss. And, they would simply resolve all of the issues. Because it wasnt even a question for them. And i think from what ive read of your account peter, it sounds like the speech was one of those experiences. All i can say is where were you guys when i needed you 43 years ago . Okay, a little more seen setting. In the autumn of 1989, now we are a little bit more than two years after reagan delivers this speech. In the east german city of leipsic, they began holding weekly prayer service, followed by small, peaceful demonstrations. Im compressing a complicated story here. But, these weekly demonstrations grow, they spread across the country of east germany. By early november, a demonstration in more than 100,000 is marched in East Portland self. This brings us to the night of november 9th, 1989, when the east german politburo is meeting in an emergency session. And, they decide to change the rules concerning border crossings. And, one member of the politburo goes out to brief the press, and gets it wrong. Some changes, some small technical change they are considering, that will take place sometime. But he gets it wrong, and a reporter says well wait a minute, do you mean that all border controls have ended immediately . And the politburo sinks through moment, and says yes. This is on radio, and on television, within minutes, literally just a few minutes, east germans began streaming to the fore checkpoints of the berlin wall. East german guards have no idea whats going, and they have not received these orders. And, there is a tense moment, as the crowd grows and begins shouting. Car horns are honking, and the guards realize they have two choices. Use force, or open the gate. And they open the gate, and the berlin wall ceases to function. All right, again, reagan speaks on june 12th, 1987, and the wall falls, ceases to function, effectively falls, on november 9th, 1989. Were those two events connected in any way . Absolutely peter. Yeah, i mean i think we can trace almost even a direct cause and effect. And i dont want to take this too far. Obviously, the people of germany deserve a tremendous credit for their own in running up and tearing down the wall. There is a course some fascinating historical accidents of miscommunication, and communist bureaucrats and a couple of guards out front. But, how do those circumstances even come about, and give the german people to feel that they can rise up and, if you look at the history of the cold war prognostics, debuted past in. The previous times when east german citizens, would it try to claim their freedom from the soviet overlords, the red army would roland. And so i think the, causality i would draw, is that president reagan gave voice to the hopes, and created the circumstances and the pressures, and change that correlation of voices, so that the german people could take advantage of the opportunity, when history presented itself. Can i add one other thing, on that if i will. And, this does get to the role of gorbachev and expertise. There is one reason why the wall was able to mount peacefully in november of 89, was because of what gorbachev didnt do. He repudiated he didnt let the tanks roland. I want to go back to one of the most important parts of terror down this wall, is what reagan says right before this. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall. Why does he directed to gorbachev, rather than just an abstract, throwing words into the air, and hope that the wall will come down . Its because for all of our discussion earlier on Foreign Policy expertise, when that speech is being written, which member of the United States government knew gorbachev best . Which member of the 90s government spend more time with gorbachev than any other american. Ronald reagan. And so, rate thats why reagan knew that was countless hours with gorbachev, and the summit where there was exchanges of letters and phone calls. He had a really intuitive sense of this guy gorbachev, then i could push him further, i could put that demand in him to tear down that wall. And it wasnt going to cause the cold war to. So, reagan had that really intuitive sense, from spending so much time with gorbachev, more than all of the criminologists, the state department, a cia, of that balance of. But also expecting a hand out. And so i think, when you look at gorbachevs role in ending the cold war, a lot of which was facilitated by reagan knowing him well, and setting that balance of pressure. And that helps create the circumstances in november of 89, so the german people can claim their own freedom. Excuse me will. I dont know how to do this in a zoom call, but i would like to lean forward, and kiss you write on the forehead. Ive worried about this for 34 years. Ill give you a hug. Back of course youre right, reagan knew gorbachev would take. It all right, so let me tell you about meeting mikhail gorbachev. This is a long time ago. Now this must be 15 years ago now. But one of the things he did, the former year of the great communist power, was become a socialist. I beg your pardon, a capitalist. And he came to United States, and gave talks. And, mike reagan, the president son, interviews him. And mike and i are friends, and mike arranged for me to go backstage and he gorbachev. And, i could see gorbachev translating, he was telling him that i had written that speech. And gorbachev laughed, and he said, when drama tour, drama tour. And then he explained through his translator, this was just a piece of theater. He knew Ronald Reagan, and Ronald Reagan couldnt resist a good line. But it made no difference to them in moscow at all. Jamie, hr, stick up for gorbachev, will you. The speech didnt make a darn bit of difference. Well you know, it doesnt matter may be, it doesnt make a difference to him or anybody in moscow. It made a heck of a lot of difference to the germans, and east germans in particular. And as somebody, i was serving as a cabinet in the second United States cavalry, on the border of east germany and west germany in november of 1989. And, on that day, near kohberger, many, the town where Martin Luther translated the bible into german, the birthplace of hans morgan. This is where our soldiers, our cavalry troopers went from one moment, staring down east german border guards, to the next moment, seeing the gates thrown open, and then tens, and then thousands, and then tens of thousands of east germans pouring across that border, bearing bouquets of flowers and bottles of wine. And there were, hugs and tears of joy. And i will tell you, i saw a direct correlation, not only back to the speech, but to the resolve that president reagan demonstrated, by affecting a renaissance in our military in the 19 80s. And demonstrating our resolve to, as you said, in his words, when you cited that early interview. That hey, we win, and they lose. And so, i felt a direct correlation, peter. And i got to witness it firsthand, in cobourg, west germany. And im going to try one more time, to find someone who will say, wait a minute were just way overdue on this. You know, correctly, that well, you made the speech. At the time, the speech was largely ignored. I remember personally, it was a bit ignored, because it because it did get covered, but it was just treated as the way the press would treat any statement by the president. Nothing special. And then, the wall fell, and the speech all of the sudden found, this is a strange way of putting it, but i can think of any other way of putting it, it became retrospectively prophetic. But at the time, it was just a speech, jamie . Yeah, i think some of the sum of gorbachevs views may have been shaped and i think i mentioned this in my, essay can remember where it was from. I dont know if it was written, or how clever i read it. I think the u. S. Government actually briefed the soviets in advance, to warn them about the lions. And so, that could have just been some of the bureaucratic ways, that the Reagan Administration gave a heads up, essentially, i think through the soviet ambassador in berlin or elsewhere. But ultimately, i agree with general mcmaster. I think it made things much more difficult for gorbachev, if he had wanted to intervene, whether it was in germany, in berlin in november of 1989, or in poland, or in fact lasalle boxier, or in hungary. I mean, that was the fundamental tipping point, when it became clear that the citizens of those countries had had enough. And they were going to rise up, and were going to be too much for their, for the communist client government, to prevent from toppling. Them and they all needed, ultimately, soviet intervention, if they were to survive. That is what the playbook had been for decades previously. Whether it was in in prague. It was always the red army. And if gorbachev had kept the red army in the barracks, they were done, essentially, right . Yes. And that, i think that is ultimately, even just the strengthening of the Public Perceptions in germany, in berlin, in the east. As we know there was listen to in the east as well. That is what made it difficult for gorbachev, i think, itlimited his options. He really didnt even have much of an option then, at that point. You can also then look, obviously, the other diplomacy that the administration engaged in with gorbachev. And, there are our efforts to actually reach out him, i guess later in the george h. W. Bush administration, to actually try to find ways to support him, which probably played a role. But ultimately, i think gorbachev had his hands tied, when the tea key moment came. Okay, so lessons for today. China, in a moment, the Biden Administration, in a moment. Right now, ill stay with jamie, because he is seated in berlin as we speak. This is been something of a disappointment, really. Im quoting you, jamie. You a united germany is now the largest economy in europe, and the continents natural leader. Yet despite significant progress in its willingness to play a leading role, many german policy makers continue to resist, the responsibility that comes with such power, close quote. So, we have that celebration of reunification in 1994, is that the formal reunification . And there is that moment of playing the final chorus from beethovens ninth symphony in front of Brandenburg Gates, fireworks exploding. And, this is really a moment europe is democratic and free, and its going to be prosperous and healthy. And now we come to a continent that seems, well, jamie you tell us what happened, you help tell us what happened here. Well the german part of the story is complex. Some of it relates to germany being tortured by its pre cold war history. Uncertain of its footing, unwilling to be provocative in its policy thinking. There is also a sad story, to be honest. We could look back at the speech, just about the divisions that still exist in german society. It is if anything, im talking to you from east berlin, where ive been living in recent months. But i was in west berlin a few weeks ago at dinner, and met some new people from west berlin. And, talking to them about where even we lived. It was another world to them, it was a part of berlin they dont even venture into. They referred to it as the soviet zone, that lives on peoples mind, even now. Even . Now yes, even now. And these are people who would have been, around the time of 89, children. So not even people who had spent a significant part of their lives living during that divided past. So the politics remain divided, in the way that east germans vote, and the success of some of the farright parties, for instance. So a lot of that divided legacy lives on. And i think the fundamental question though, when it comes to german leadership in the world, german policy, is whether the next generation. And we could see this after the september elections this year, is more willing to step up and move beyond the world war ii legacy, the holocaust legacy, move beyond some of the divisions of the cold war era. And assume that leadership mantle, which to be honest, given that i also spent a lot of time in prague, and other parts of europe, the rest of europe is looking for them to play, who take that leadership role. Not just economically, which they have now for decades, but to take a stand for values, and pursue a Foreign Policy, whether its visavis russia, or china, that matches the significance of the history of the recent decades. And the benefits theyve achieved from german reunification. So, thats a big, open question, that still exist in german society. Hr, ill come to china and you in just a moment. But will, how do we evaluate with . Just to remove, how do we evaluate, the american effort in europe, during the cold war . Four and a half decades, it started with truman and runs right through george h. W. Bush. And of course, the cold war is global. There is vietnam, theres korea. But europe is all of the sudden, what really matters. Europe is at the center of it. And we have this long, expensive, bipartisan effort, this long twilight struggle, as john kennedy called it. And we win. And now 34 years later, europe and United States are drifting apart. We have a president over there now, talking about coming together on climate change, forgive me when i dont want to become partisan. But, so the soviet union would have fallen anyway, and wasted a lot of time and money. And the europeans are european, they dont like it, it was artificial, they just for those decades, because we protect them against the soviets. And it was all just disappointing. Well yeah, well i share a lot of the fundamental concerns of course jamie is really on the front lines of trying to stand up for the transatlantic values and the alliance over there. And of course, it goes beyond his leader to leader relations. It goes back to the shared values and commitments that european and American People. So the one great strength of that, and one great resource, is that history of working together, and the tyranny. But, each generation in some ways, needs to learn the lessons and new. I mean, he did talk of american policy near throughout the cold war. Two quick things i want to highlight, and thats picking up on general mcmaster. First is, how importantly American Military buildup in expansion of all the pressures a world war ii war with the United States to rapidly demobilize, and retreat again behind our borders. And for good reasons, there was. But then, once we see the emerging threat of soviet communism, we had to remobilize. And so, that military, which helped prevents further soviet aggression. But also, and this is reagans genius, strengthened his diplomacy. Thats what peace through strength is about, is building the worlds most powerful, most potent, most fearsome military, so that you dont have to go into a hot. War but that, you can use that to call your adversaries to diplomatic solutions, if the military solution is not there. The other key, one and that gets to the point of shared values, with the United States leading the way in creating the atlantic alliance. Remember, for the first hundred 50 years, of the existence of the country. Going back to washingtons farewell, address there were no permit alliance, there are they create things of. And for truman and eisenhower to then revert back, they know it could lead to enter into this north of the antique treaty, this atlantic alliance. They knew that that was going to be a major strain for United States, in search of an ibis ferry. And it was something that certainly, the western european governments fought long and hard as well. And, thats why we have the nato is the most successful Treaty Alliance in history. Because, it enabled rage means vision of, we win, they lose. It accomplished, piece and we really want that peaceful victory. You know, the stakes are somewhat different now. Its not the soviet union anymore, its imperialist russia. There is certainly of course china, which is not just an Asian Pacific threat, the becoming more vague european threat as. Well and that shared history, that shared values, will remind americans, europeans, that we do a lot better when we are, together than we are. Apart hr, we so this is a competition of wills you know . This is a competition between our free and open societies, and closed authoritarian systems. Talk about a speech that lens clarity to that competition. And i think thats what we need today. Im encouraged by the fact that the Biden Administration has acknowledged that this isnt, at its base an ideological competition with the Chinese Communist party. But, we have to back that up. What is in effect effective reduction of the Defense Budget for example, because of this mantra that you hear from some people in the Biden Administration, that our policies have become to militarize. What we need is more diplomacy what. We need is what will said, we need integration of all instruments of national power, and efforts of likeminded partners to prevail in this type of competition. Of course, we do need more diplomacy, but more diplomacy has to be more than a better atmosphere at cocktail parties, in berlin or paris. Our allies have to step up, and germany has been a weak link, a weak link in connection with the negotiation of the comprehensive agreement on investment. Which thankfully, is dying in the european parliament. But also, in connection with the competition with putins kremlin. And, the kremlins sustain campaign of political subversion in here. I would say, that campaign is effective in germany, and i would like jamie to maybe comment about it, about how russia is contributing to a weakening of resolve in germany. And, an example of the u. S. , maybe not being as tough on our allies, as much as we love, them is backing off on the nord stream pipeline, which is going to give russia a chorus of power over germanys economy. Hr, china though, i just, you are in the white house, youre the National Security adviser, you have a top job in the institution that brings together military and diplomatic initiatives, and presents them to the chief executive of the United States. At the moment, when the whole country, partly because of donald trump, and partly because of president xi jinping, the whole country is realizing that china is not going to be our friend. We are in for something new here. Hr mcmaster, quote, the berlin wall is an apt, ill, inexact, analogy for the great firewall of china. The combination of laws and technology designed to isolate the realm of the Chinese Communist party from outside influence, is closed, quote. All kinds of things are different, china is bigger than the soviet union ever was. It has cash, all we ever bought, all the russians ever bought from us was wheat. The chinese, as you all know, my colleagues here in northern california, at the hoover institution. The chinese are invested in silicon valley, up and down the peninsula. So, a lot of things are different. But you are arguing, that theres something central, to the relationship with china, thats not that different from the relationship with, the struggle, the conflict with the soviet union. Is that correct . Absolutely, you can see that in jaime wills superb essays, this is an ideological competition, its also an ideological competition that requires a high degree of clarity. So i mean, the phrase that comes to mind, if i could paraphrase from reagans speech is, chairman xi, tear down that firewall. Or, we should do our best to get around it. And this is what jaime does for us every day, is to try to reach oh pressed peoples, peoples who are not permitted to access a wide range of sources of information, so that they have an opportunity to think differently. And, as will i think, said or jaime earlier said, authoritarians are kind of touchy, theyre kind of sensitive. And, you see this, with you see this with the Chinese Communist party. I think there is a tremendous opportunity for us to use the kind of clarity of the berlin speech, to compete much more effectively with the Chinese Communist party. And i think the best means of doing so, is to bypass the great firewall. Let me quote you one more time jamie. We everybody should read all three essays, but Im Holding Back slightly on quoting will, because he was so effusively bout of the speech. And i figured i can handle that part myself. Jamie, reagan said, our differences are not about, and im quoting you, theyre not about weapons, but about liberty. This was an important reminder about what differentiates the soviet union from the west. These are all principles, that have been neglected by recent u. S. Administrations. U. S. Negotiators have been clipped quick to conclude flawed deals, be it with russia, or ran in the abomination. Or attempts to do so under the trump administration, hr, are you listening, with north korea, close quote. Your overall point if i take this correctly, is that recent administrations have placed too much of this is undiplomatic cooperation, and too little on clarity and forthrightness of principle. Have i got that right . Yeah, i think clearly, especially when you have Nuclear Weapons involved, there is a need to negotiate even with authoritarians. We cant hope, and aspire to quick regime change. And all of the countries that threaten us. But there was something obviously in the way that reagan did it, even as the manner of speaking to gorbachev and other soviet leaders he had no problem, publicly talking about what was at stake, and the cruelty eu, and the hollowness of what that regime represented. And that, i think, has been missing in many recent u. S. Administrations. Its a huge challenge in europe, going back to what general mcmaster was saying. And, this is fundamentally part of the problem, is that europe and germany is trying to deal with russia that is heading in an incredibly dangerous direction, cracking down on dissent at home. Even, what the kremlin has done, with navalnys, in the last two days, trying to push my own organization out, which has had a bureau over there for 30 years, ever since they were invited by president yeltsin. Freezing our bank account, and then russia is headed in that direction, highly likely to lash out at its neighbors, building up forces on the ukrainian border. And china is a very similar story. And there is very little interest, in most parts of europe, in speaking openly and frankly, about what is at stake with either of these two powers. From a moral perspective, and you still hear, especially in germany, but also in brussels and many other european capitals, a lot of well, we know that they have a lot of problems. But on the other hand, we have to do business with them, we need their investments. Segments of our economy and our alliances on engagement with them. And, a lot of the european mindset has not moved beyond that. And there were some more dynamics, as we talked about earlier, in germany circa 1987, thats how you got policy for the western government at the time. But, it is a significant problem now. And then the fundamental question for the u. S. Side is, how did the u. S. , i think in both the trump and Biden Administration, when it comes to china, has framed the conflict correctly, has highlighted the situation correctly, both from a moral perspective and economic perspective, and a defense perspective. How do you bring allies along, who feel they have the luxury, perhaps, of remaining neutral in this competition . Thats the fundamental challenge, and weve seen starkly different approaches from the trump administration, compared to the biden team on that. Well well we, the three if you have convinced me that it worked pretty well under reagan. Moral clarity, strength, duplicity, and so forth. So if it works so well under reagan, why have im going to grant jamies argument that we havent seen quite that kind of moral clarity. There is a question and hit you with in a moment, noel hit will with it. Donald trump, god bless him, he gave half a dozen, in my opinion, really a wonderful set piece speeches, including in warsaw, which hr mentioned. And then, walked away from that, and never mention, or never behaved as if he had given those. He didnt seem to be integrated. Why does it seem to be, reagans example still lives the. Three of you have prove that, why is it so hard to follow . Well. Well it is a puzzle. But again, a lot of and secondly, we do need to be careful to look back at reagan, and reagans administrations successors, from the hindsight bias that we might. Well first of all, the threat is so simple because. You know peter, it wasnt really clear it was going to work. Out because reagan had confidence it was, and he had a lot of criticism against this. But he was trying some very risky things, he was challenging a lot of the conventional wisdom. And you know, the soviet threat that, strong as it was, was somewhat different than certainly the china threat, and the russia threat that we face today. Hard earned, especially on the nuclear side, but then easier on the, i would say on the economic side. But, once you take away china specially, from reagan, for one, remember that our adversary is not the country or the people of china the Chinese Communist party. And, the people of china are potential allies for it. I mean, we see the picture. And but they dont like, behave in an orwellian surveillance state. They dont like being told how many babies they can or cant have. They dont like not being able to choose their own future. The soviet people didnt like that either. And reagan spoke to that. And part of this tragedy strategy was to not allege that the kremlin and the soviet people. And the soviet people here, america is on your side. And of course you want freedom, we are allies. We need to get respect for that, and speak a lot more directly to the chinese people. These organizations are doing some good work there. By the second, part i do want to come back to reagan and gorbachev, and negotiations as well. Because in tandem with that military buildup, in tandem with speaking to the moral clarity. At the same moment that he was saying, mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall, reagan and schultz were still working behind the scenes in the soviets, in the group that became the entry Media Nuclear forces. Treaty and and its historically unprecedented treaty that spanned entire areas. With Nuclear Weapons. And so, we sometime so Foreign Policy experts will put that in quotes sometimes, we do make these things harder on you either do diplomacy, or you get tough. You either do subtle, nuanced diplomacy, or you speak in single, like tear down this wall but you can do both things together, and their most affected when you do them together. Thats why again, going back to reagans theory of the case, so you wanted to win, not just with a hot war that destroyed the soviet union, but he wanted to win peacefully. I mean, he could do that with that diplomacy as long as it was backed up by military strength, and moral clarity. Hr, last question about what it means for today, before i move the kind of summary here. Hr mcmaster,. Reagans speech provides a reminder, that self respect, self respect is foundational to the competition with the Chinese Communist party. Close quote. My first comment on that is, you are a big shot, sophisticated thinker. And yet, your like reagan, in that you keep coming back to the simple points. All right, but how do we achieve, with respect, as a nation, at a time when we are so polarized. When half the country thinks your former boss should be in jail, and the other half of the country thinks that joe biden stole the election. And weve got one part of the country watching msnbc, and keeping it on all day, and the other part putting on fox news all day. And things, were referred to when politically, during the reagan years than it is now. Remember, but it was not like this. So, self respect, hr. Well, this is why i think the reagan institution is such an important organization. I think all of us, in the hoover institution, all of us who are working in this space, i think that we have to make a concerted effort to rebuild our confidence. Confidence in who we are as a people, and confidence in our Democratic Institutions and principles and processes. And i think we can do that. But i think we have, to do is more from political leaders who are too often compromise principles to score principal points. But we cant wait for them either, we have to do our part to recognize the great promise of america, to celebrate fact that we have a say in our government. As will said, i dont think the chinese people, or any people, are predisposed towards not wanting a say in how they are governed we ought to celebrate that we live under rule of law, that we have freeman speech, and freedom of expression. And, we need to encourage institutions to reform themselves. I would say the Fourth Estate is one of. Those it has some work to do. But ultimately i think the number one bra to be education. Education is particularly about our history. Thats why im so excited to participate in this discussion with. With you and jamie and will. Because i think when you learn the history of the reagan years, you see the contrast between the carter malays speech, and a real crisis of confidence in the 1970s. Remember stagflation . Remember a lost war in vietnam . Remember the oil embargo . Our confidence was shaken, like its shaken today. Right, but it doesnt have to remain permanent. Just like the wall, just like that east west german border was not a permanent condition. We can change it, and i think we have to do is educate ourselves about the great promise of the public about the boundaries so lets start nurturing our republic and regaining our confidence. Two final questions for, you are a go around and give each of you. Were coming up i think were, at an hour, some and ask them for you to be succinct, give me one sentence answer, if you possibly can. Here is the person the first question, i want you to quotations. James at the washington post. And this is writing soon after reagan delivered the berlin address. Quote, history is likely to record the challenge to tear down this wall, as a meaningless taunt. Close quote. Thats quotation ember one. Heres quotation ember to. This comes from walking who it was at the time a lutheran pastor, and Democracy Advocate inside east germany, who later went on to become president of the reunified germany. Quote, this is speak a couple of years ago. Reagan spoke the right word, at the right time, and in the right place. Closed quote. Will, who is right . Well certainly the i put that question together, i thought it would be a little closer, call at this point. Look, reagan had the strategic imagination to envision a World Without the berlin wall, without the even without the soviet union. Jamie . We certainly president. And hr, are you going to make it unanimous, or is there gonna be trouble . Im gonna say unanimous, but lets also emphasize words and deeds, right. Words and deeds, weve talked about the military strength, and the broad range of diplomatic efforts. Weve talked about the tear down the wall speech as well, as sustained efforts to eliminate class of Nuclear Weapons. So, i think its the integration of policy, and a broad range of efforts with those powerful words. You see what i have to deal with, at the hoover institution, with hr as my colleague . He says yes, yes, words matter but. Every so often, you need to call in the tanks. Last question. All three of you, are we, or have been, teachers. Hr is teaching this term, or i guess the turn just ended. Will is smack dab in the middle of one of the nations great universities. Jamie is, in a certain sense, educating tens of millions of people with Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty. But, you also have been a teacher. I imagine a high school or college kid today, and that is to say, imagine someone who was born a dozen years or more after Ronald Reagan delivered the speech. Give me, give me a sentence, two sentences, that explain to such a young american, why were still talking about that speech, 34 years later. And what one thing, if they can remember one thing about it, what one thing they need to remember. Jamie, lets go with you first. Its a tall order. But i have to say, i think the message i would have is, it really changed the lives of millions. Because, i do think it was that powerful, and the basic, simple, moral clarity played a key role in helping to end the cold war. But its incredibly difficult to explain that, to people who did not live through that period. I was a kid when the wall fell, so i watched it on tv, and it had a powerful role in shaping my career from afar. But, i would just suggest that we need to bring people to berlin. I think you cant learn, even despite the people need to see, and walk through the Brandenburg Gate. Walk past where the speech was given, talk to berliners, some who were are still alive, who lived through that period, and see it firsthand. I think, thats the most powerful way to learn about how important the speech was. Hr . I guess theres two things. I think that young people should learn from the speech, and from the cold war, is that the arc of history does not guarantee the primacy of our free and open societies, over closed authoritarian systems. We have to compete effectively. Youre saying the arc of history doesnt always bend towards justice . It does not. You may have to grab it and bend it ourselves . And, for us to compete effectively, it requires confidence, and i think that the history should teach us, that america is a force for good in the world. Were not flawless, but i think we need to reject the orthodoxy of the new left, as well as the orthodoxy of the socalled realist school, which is really an Ideological Movement behind a new sentiment towards isolationism. So, i think that thats what students ought to take away from this. Is that, we have to compete, and we have to what we ought to be confidence about americas role in the world. Well, last word . All right, again to things briefly. First, we need to teach this history, to remind our students, and when we teach about the holocaust, of the truly awful, wicked, barbarous things that human beings are capable of doing to each other. And when you look at the vicious repression of soviet communism, this is on the entire world. We should not forget that. Second, i just want a quote my favorite line from the speech. Which we havent mentioned yet today. This is reagans word. As long as the as long as the scar is permitted to stand. It is not the german question the remains open, but the question of freedom for all mankind. And when we look at chinese or north korean tyranny today we are reminded that, the question of. Freedom for all mankind is not a historical question alone, but a present day challenge for our students and our young peoples sake. Jamie of Radio Free Europe and rainy Radio Liberty thank you. General hr mcmaster. My pal here at the hoover institution, and the author of the most recent battleground, thank you. And will of the university of texas, and the offer of the forthcoming book the, title of which he is about to name. The peacemaker, Ronald Reagan in the white house. Well, i like that. And the update is . Sometimes, december or january, so still about six months away. All right jamie, will , and hr mcmaster, thank you. For uncommon knowledge, the hoover institution, fox nation and, the Ronald Reagan institute, i am peter robinson. This year, tv celebrates 25 years are presenting nonfiction books. For the 22nd year in a, roll book tv is live, with the library of congress this National Book festival. And since 2001, book tv, in partnership with the library of congress, has provided signature indepth uninterrupted coverage of the National Book fashionable featuring hundreds of nonfiction authors and guests. Watch saturday at book tv once again is it brings you live all day coverage of the National Book festival. Gas and off this includes library of congress carly hayden. Chet buttigieg on his book, i have something to tell you for your. Adults and former nfl player russell, author of the yards between. Us see our complete National Book festival schedule online at booktv. Org. The library of Congress National book festival, long saturday. Beginning at 9 am eastern on cspan two. Cspanshop. Org is cspans online store. Presser our latest collection of cspan products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. Theres something for every cspan fan. Funding for cspan two comes from these television and more. Including its extremely rare. Hi but friends dont have to be. When youre connected. Fox, along with these television companies, supports cspan 2 in a public service. 30 years ago, on