An increasingly Islamic world is inevitable. What makes Islam a candidate to reshape and replace the West?
First, with a more robust birth rate, its population is growing, while that of the West is declining. Second, immigration is bringing Islam back
to Europe, 500 years after its expulsion from Spain and three centuries after the retreat from the Balkans began. Millions have come to fill spaces left empty by aging, dying, and aborted Europeans. Third, as there was once a church militant, there is
today a mosque militant.
Fourth, Islam gives its believers clear, cogent, and coherent answers to the great questions: Who created me? Why am I here? How do I live righteously? Islam gives men a reason to live and a cause to die for. It is a fighting
faith.
Lastly, Islam is a universal religion which claims it alone has the path to salvation and is destined to become the religion of all mankind. Islam divides the world into the lost and the elect, the Dar al-Harb and the Dar al-Islam.
Ethnonationalism, the force that tore the Soviet Union apart, the relentless drive of people to separate that translates into tribalism within a country, is not only pulling our world apart, it is tearing at the seams of American union.
And the ideals that once defined us as a people--freedom, equality, democracy--have been corrupted into concepts more reminiscent of Marxist revolutions than of the American Revolution.
For what is a nation?
Is it not a people of a common ancestry, culture, and language who worship the same God, revere the same heroes, cherish the same history, celebrate the same holidays, share the same music, poetry, art, literature, held together, in
Lincoln's words, by "bonds of affection, mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield, and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearth-stone"?
If that is what a nation is, can we truly say that America is still a nation?
Avoid the democratist temptation of the internationalists
With the Cold War ending, we should look, too, with a cold eye on the international set, never at a loss for new ideas to divert US wealth and power into crusades and causes having little or nothing to do with the true national interest of the
United States. High among these is the democratist temptation [free the world], the worship of democracy as a form of governance and the concomitant ambition to see all mankind embrace it, or explain why not.
Like all idolatries, democratism substitutes a false god for the real, a love of process[political pragmatism] for a love of country.
The true national interests of the United States are not to be found in some hegemonic and utopian world order. Bush holds global democracy as a goal. This is a formula for endless conflict. “
In the presidential campaign of 2000, we failed to make foreign policy the issue. But what I said then retains relevance:
How can all our meddling not fail to spark some horrible retribution....
Have we not suffered enough--from Pan Am 103, to the World Trade Center, to the embassy bombings in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam--not to know that interventionism is the incubator of terrorism?
Or will it take some cataclysmic atrocity on US soil to awaken our global gamesmen to the going price of empire?
America today faces a choice of destinies.
We can choose to be a peacemaker of the world, or its policeman who goes about night-sticking troublemakers until we, too, find ourselves in some bloody brawl we cannot handle.
Source: Los Angeles Times, Op-Ed page
, Sep 18, 2001
Account for losses before any third-world debt forgiveness
‘Debt forgiveness’ is a fancy phrase for shifting the total burden of defaulted debts off Third World regimes and onto the backs of American taxpayers. These loans are not being wiped off the books; they are being added to the US national debt.
Before one dime in ‘loan forgiveness’ is granted to any Third World government, the American people have a right to know who lost, who looted, and who stole the billions of dollars we are being asked to forgive. We need responsibility; we need a full
accounting of how the generosity of the American people was criminally abused -- by incompetent or corrupt lending officers at the IMF and World Bank, and by the assorted dictators and thieves who stole or squandered the billions in aid
intended for the peoples they misruled. We have a right to know the names of those who lost or stole the money, and to an accounting of any and all efforts to recover the looted billions.
Source: Press Release
, Apr 24, 2000
Cuba: Siege mentality is pillar of power; end embargo
A supporter of sanctions in the past against Cuba, Buchanan said conditions had changed with the fall of Soviet Communism. “Because of the siege mentality our embargo has created inside Cuba,” he said, “our sanctions may today be the main pillar of
Castro’s power.” Dictatorial governments do not justify sanctions, Buchanan said, adding, “No one has deputized America to play Wyatt Earp to the world. Have we succumbed to the hubris of hegemony?”
Source: NY Times, p. A22
, Dec 17, 1999
Russia: Offer EU membership instead of encirclement
Wounded and amputated, bereft of its cubs, the Russian bear should not be provoked. Rather than encircling Russia, let us enlarge Russia’s stake in peace. Bringing Russia into the European Union would be a far wiser guarantee of
Europe’s security than a threat to go to war to defend their frontiers. By moving NATO onto Mother Russia’s front porch, we are driving her into the arms of Beijing and creating a hostile alliance it is in our vital interest to prevent.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.385-6
, Oct 9, 1999
America has a vital interest in ensuring that Japan’s industrial might and military potential are not placed in any global balance against us. Yet in this partnership, Tokyo has done most of the taking. Japan runs up huge trade surpluses, while
denying Americans fair access to its markets. America is obligated to fight for Japan; Japan has no corresponding obligation. We need a new partnership agreement by which the burdens and benefits, risks and responsibilities, are more equitably shared.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.379
, Oct 9, 1999
Korea: Replace US troops with Koreans
With twice the population of the North and 20 times its economic power, South Korea, with access to US weapons and US strategic support, is capable of manning its own defense. American troops on the DMZ should be replaced by South Koreans;
the US should remove its forces from the peninsula; and any US participation in a future Korean war should be restricted to air and naval support.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.378
, Oct 9, 1999
Puerto Rico: No statehood; eventual independence
The campaign to make Puerto Rico the 51st state must be defeated. Puerto Rico is a nation, with its own language, history, culture, and flag. To make this island a state means making America a bilingual nation and
denying to Puerto Rican patriots and nationalists, forever, their right to join the family of nations. We cannot do that and remain true to or anticolonial heritage. Puerto Rico should forever retain the right of self-determination.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.373
, Oct 9, 1999
Quebec: Offer seceding provinces alliances or statehood
Canada has not been a security concern in this century. That is changing. Quebec may declare independence, and the Maritime and Western provinces could separate from Ottawa. Americans may profoundly regret a breakup of Canada, but we are not a
disinterested party; Canada is the most important country on earth for us. Should it come apart, the US should offer trade agreements and security alliances to each successor state, and statehood itself, should any breakaway Canadian province wish it.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.370
, Oct 9, 1999
Latin America: Support Monroe Doctrine but exit Rio Pact
The next president should restate the US position that the Monroe Doctrine is the cornerstone of American foreign policy, and that the US will consider it unacceptable for any hostile regime to create a bastion in this hemisphere. But the US should
disavow any right or intention to intervene in any Latin American country that does not threaten us or its neighbors. As for the Rio Pact, the US should give notice of its withdrawal. We do not need military allies in this hemisphere to defend ourselves.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.369
, Oct 9, 1999
Poland: NATO membership implies nuclear defense
Are we willing to use nuclear weapons to defend Eastern Europe-for that is what NATO membership means. Poland has never been a vital US interest. To assert that Poland’s democracy and frontiers are now matters over which we will fight a nuclear war is a
reckless commitment. NATO is not a social club. It is a military alliance, [stating] “an armed attack on one NATO nation is to be considered an armed attack on all.” Should Russian troops skirmish with Polish troops, America could be at war.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p. 18-21
, Oct 9, 1999
Logistical help OK in East Timor, but no ground troops
Q: East Timor: The president announced that the US would participate, in a limited way, in a UN peacekeeping force going to East Timor. Should the US be participating?
A: There should be no American ground troops there. I do believe the Australians
should go in, the Portuguese and some Asian nations. That’s a regional problem there. What’s happening there is atrocious, of course. It’s the responsibility of the Indonesian government, which basically overran that area, killed some 200,000 people at
the very time the US was funneling aid and support in there. So I think we have a measure of moral responsibility, but I don’t believe American troops ought to be on the ground. We’ve got too many American troops all over the world right now doing
peacekeeping functions when their job is to defend the US. I think you should help with logistics, intelligence support, getting those people in there. But this is a job for the Australians and the Asians in the neighborhood.
Source: Interview on “Meet the Press”
, Sep 12, 1999
Pat Buchanan on China
Supported opening China in 1970s, but situation has changed
With regard to my old colleague Henry Kissinger, I’m one of 10 surviving members of that official delegation, that opened up the PRC, and where I break with Mr. Kissinger is this: When we went to China, we were trying to get our men out of Vietnam, and
the Chinese military was positioned all along the Soviet border. Now all those Chinese forces have been moved [to threaten] our friends on Taiwan and against our country. And the weapons are being bought to fight a war against a naval power in the
western Pacific, the United States.
When I saw this redeployment, I said, ‘It is time the US stopped building up this--what could be this Frankenstein monster and took a hard look at what they’re doing.’ They persecute Christians. They persecute
dissidents. They threaten our country. What in heaven’s name are we doing giving them a $ 70 billion trade surplus every single year when they’re using it to buy weapons to threaten our men and women?
Source: National Public Radio interview, “Talk of the Nation”
, May 30, 2000
Don’t aggravate Beijing, but don’t appease
US policy toward China should be neither to aggravate bor to appease Beijing. But allowing China to run near $60 billion annual trade surpluses at our expense, while we guarantee low-interest loans to Beijing from the World Bank, is appeasement.
American imports and investments there are financing military forces that may one day threaten Asia and the US fleet. As trade and aid have not made China more reasonable, the US should treat China as the Great Power rival it claims to be.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.376-7
, Oct 9, 1999
Support Free Asia with materiel but no troops
So long as the US guarantees the security of the nations of Free Asia, they, like Europeans, will never undertake to provide for, or to pay for, their own defense. The US should thus unilaterally declare in force the Nixon Doctrine: in future Asian wars,
America will provide the weapons of defense for free nations, but Asian soldiers, sailors, and airmen must do the fighting. As the century closes, we should end our role as a front-line fighting state in Asia, and become Free Asia’s arsenal of democracy.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.376
, Oct 9, 1999
Truculent but contained China is no threat
As China has grown powerful, it has grown truculent. Beijing has disrupted Taiwan’s elections, invaded offshore islands, sold missiles to Iran, sold nuclear technology to Pakistan, and persecuted Christians, Tibetans, and dissidents. Yet, despite its
bellicosity, China does not today threaten any vital US interest, & its emergence as a world power need not mean inevitable conflict. For China is already contained - by geography. [The only likely point of conflict without] a blue-water fleet. is Taiwan
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.374
, Oct 9, 1999
Provide Taiwan with defensive weapons against China
We should provide Taiwan with all the defensive weapons it needs to stave off any potential attack by Communist China. I don’t believe there’s going to be a cross-channel invasion. I do believe you could have trouble with the offshore islands of Quemoy &
Matsu. I do believe we should stand behind Taiwan. And I don’t believe we should appease China. I think the US should back up Taiwan. But I would not automatically commit this country to go to war with China over some collision in the Taiwan Straits.
Source: Interview on “Meet the Press”
, Sep 12, 1999
Pat Buchanan on Globalization
Kick UN out of US by 2001; use Marines to “help pack”
My friends, this to me is one of the great issues, now that the cold war is over, and it is whether America is going to remain forever independent and free, with liberty and justice in this country, as determined by us, Americans. Or
whether this decision-making authority is going to go back to the United Nations and leave this country, and that is where a number of elitists want to take us. Let me tell you what I would do if I’m elected president. I will get the
United States out of the World Trade Organization. I will get the United States out of the International Monetary Fund, and I will tell Kofi Annan, up at the U.N.: “Sir, your lease on Turtle Bay has run out. We want the United
Nations out of the United States by year’s end. And if you’re having trouble leaving, we’ll send up 10,000 marines to help you pack.”
Source: Speech at Bob Jones University in Greenville SC
, Sep 18, 2000
All US troops out of Europe by end of first term
We can be the peacemaker of the world - or its policeman. Let us use this transitory moment of American power and preeminence to encourage allies to pay for their own defense. If elected, I will have all US troops home from Europe by the end of my
first term. Certainly, sixty years after the end of World War II, and fifteen years after the Berlin Wall fell, is not too soon to get all US troops out of Europe and let Europeans provide and pay the cost of their own defense. If not now, when?
Source: Speech at AntiWar.com conference, San Mateo, CA
, Mar 24, 2000
Struggle against emerging world government
“Loyalty to the New World Order is disloyalty to the Republic. In nation after nation, the struggle between patriotism and globalism is under way.” Buchanan said the Clinton administration is allowing the UN to intrude on America’s sovereignty.
At the same time, he said, the US is guilty of “trampling on the sovereignty” of other nations by injecting troops in internal conflicts, such as Kosovo. “If ever sovereignty becomes obsolete, we may expect America’s involvement in endless wars until,
one day, we pay a horrific price in some act of cataclysmic terror on our own soil,“ Buchanan said. ”For interventionism is the spawning pool of international terror.“ The UN is increasingly seeking authority over US troops and control of the nation’s
borders, Buchanan warned. ”This then is a millennial struggle that succeeds the Cold War: It is the struggle of patriots of every nation against a world government where all nations yield up their sovereignty and fade away,“ he said.
Source: Associated Press, “Attack World Government”
, Jan 6, 2000
Base alliances on their view of US; not on democracy status
The US posture toward other nations should be based not on their internal arrangements but on their stance toward us. Just as policies and regimes pass, so, too, should alliances be temporary and transient. Whether a nation is democratic should
be of less concern to us than how it views America. The form of government nations adopt is their own business. The rise of autocrats does not threaten us if we decline to make the internal affairs of other nations our central concern.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p. 14-15
, Oct 9, 1999
Independence, not isolationism
The message of George Washington’s Farewell Address was not to isolate America from Europe but to keep it independent of Europe. Stay out of foreign wars, Washington admonished. Look west to the mountains, the plains, the Pacific.
That is where our destiny lies. Europe is the past. Avoid “permanent alliances”; devote your energies to your own country. Independence, not isolation, is the American tradition.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p. 52
, Oct 9, 1999
Globalist Elites have not yielded their empire
American boys yet unborn are being committed to fight where no American soldiers have ever fought before. In a 1990 article, I wrote: “The day of realpoliticians, with their Metternichian ‘new architectures’ and balance-of-power stratagems... is over.”
I was wrong. I underestimated the grip that the globalist elites have on power, and the will of these elites never to yield the bureaucratic-military empire--the existence of which gives meaning to their lives. But that hold is weakening.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.328
, Oct 9, 1999
Practice “masterly inactivity,” not “entangling alliances”
America did very well in the 1800s, Buchanan argues in his book, because it avoided “entangling alliances,” wasting neither men nor treasure on foreign wars. It should not have fought Germany in 1917 (“no vital interest”), nor in the 1940s (“no threat”).
If it wishes to remain the world’s pre-eminent power in the 21st century, it must give wide berth to the Kosovos, Somalias, and East Timors that constantly cry for attention. “Masterly inactivity” is the role Buchanan prefers for his country.
Source: The Economist, p. 31
, Oct 2, 1999
Push US foreign policy toward isolationism
Buchanan said his goal was to push US foreign policy toward isolationism. “We need a foreign policy that will get us out of all these foreign entanglements and quarrels that are poisoning our politics and assuring the US will be involved in wars in the
future that are none of our business,” he said. Buchanan holds such strongly isolationist views that he believes the US had no compelling interest in fighting in WWII, although it should have supported its allies.
Source: Boston Globe, p. A4
, Sep 20, 1999
Withdraw from UN; Kyoto Treaty; Rome Treaty
I will demand the US Senate reject Al Gore’s industry-butchering Kyoto Treaty. The Rome treaty creating a new UN war crimes tribunal will be ash-canned. We will withdraw from all UN and global agencies that do not serve American interests. A Buchanan
Administration will recapture America’s lost sovereignty.
Source: www.gopatgo2000.com/000-c-foreignpolicy.html 5/28/99
, May 28, 1999
End foreign aid; withdraw from most of IMF
The World Bank will be privatized. Not one dime of the International Monetary Fund will go to prop up corrupt foreign regimes or countries hostile to the United States. Fifty years of foreign aid, an ancient relic of the cold war, will be brought to an
end.
Source: www.gopatgo2000.com/000-c-foreignpolicy.html 5/28/99
, May 28, 1999
End New World Order; end foreign aid
I read that our government backed a World Bank loan of $265 million to Hanoi, which is still a communist regime. This means [US taxpayers are] guaranteeing loans to the regime that murdered [our sons who were sent] to Vietnam. That, my friends, is your
New World Order. I want to say to all the globalists and internationalists-when I raise my hand to take the oath of office, your New World Order comes crashing down.
It is time we begin looking out for our country and our people first for a change.
Look at foreign aid. Each year we send $12 billion abroad in foreign aid. $50 billion goes to Mexico. World Bank loans go to communist China. If we cannot balance our own budget, what are we doing sending American dollars abroad to balance the budgets of
foreign countries? We cut our budget for the elderly & veterans & farmers-then our government ships $12 billion abroad. When I get to the White House, foreign aid will come to an end and we will start looking out for the forgotten Americans right here.
Armenia: History shows national interest trumps atrocities
Q: In Buchanan’s book, he praised the way the British were mistreating the Armenians, in what he called the Armenian holocaust. If it’s America first, why did he prefer Britain to Armenia as far as people being mistreated goes?
A: I did not say that
was a good thing at all. What I said was that if you go back in all these massacres and genocides of peoples, you will find that despite the fact that statesmen say this is awful and it can’t happen again, it does every single time and there has never
been a real intervention to stop it.
The British issue was with the Bulgarian massacres by the Turks. Disraeli said we ought to stay with the Turks even though they did it, and Gladstone said we ought to throw the Turks out of Europe even though
they’re our allies. What I’m saying was this shows you when national interest come into collision, even with horrific human rights atrocities, every time virtually, national interest wins. I don’t say it’s morally right. I was writing history.
Source: National Public Radio interview, “Talk of the Nation”
, May 30, 2000
Hitler was no threat to US; sought mastery of Europe only
Following his victory [over France in 1940], Hitler made no overt move to threaten US vital interests. As of mid-1940, his actions argue that beneath the overlay of Nazi ideology, he was driven by a traditional German policy of “The Drive to the East.”
In this analysis, Hitler had not wanted war with the West. Hitler saw the world divided into four spheres: Great Britain holding its empire; Japan, dominant in East Asia; Germany, master of Europe; and America, mistress of the Western Hemisphere.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.268-9
, Oct 9, 1999
FDR forced Japan to attack US as back door to WWII
In early 1941, FDR froze all Japanese assets, cutting off trade, including oil. Without oil, the Japanese empire must wither & die.. The oil embargo was “economic war” against an oil-starved nation. FDR knew the consequences of an oil embargo & approved,
because he wanted Japan to attack. A war with Japan was the only way he could take us to war in Europe. FDR seemed anxious to get into the war, [but was] elected on a promise to stay out, [so] FDR needed to maneuver Japan into firing the first shot.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.285-7
, Oct 9, 1999
American leaders obsessed with Jewish influence
In a chapter of his book criticizing the power of numerous American ethnic groups over foreign policy, Buchanan writes, “After WWII, Jewish influence over foreign policy became almost an obsession with American leaders.” Buchanan responded to critics
that the observation was lifted from a complex criticism directed at numerous groups. “One paragraph discussing the power of the Israeli lobby is not only legitimate, it is necessary,” he declared.
Source: Francis X. Clines, New York Times, p. A20
, Sep 21, 1999
Hitler was no direct threat to the US after 1940
In his book, Buchanan says that Hitler offered “no physical threat to the US” as of late 1940, after his defeat in the Battle of Britain. Buchanan questions whether Hitler sought war with the West or was driven to it. “Hitler made no overt move to
threaten US vital interests” after his initial victories across Europe, Buchanan writes. Americans had no choice but to fight once Hitler declared war on the US, but Hitler was primarily interested in building an empire to the East, not westward toward t
Source: Francis X. Clines, New York Times, p. A20
, Sep 21, 1999
Give GOP credit for Reagan’s ending of the Cold War
Under the Reagan Doctrine, one by one, the communist dominos began to fall. First, Grenada was liberated. Then, the Red Army was run out of Afghanistan, by U.S. weapons. In Nicaragua, the Marxist regime was forced to hold free elections - by Ronald
Reagan’s contra army. Have they forgotten? It was under our party that the Berlin Wall came down, and Europe was reunited. It was under our party that the Soviet Empire collapsed, and the captive nations broke free. Ronald Reagan won the Cold War.
Source: Speech at 1992 GOP Convention
, Aug 17, 1992
Click here for 18 older quotations from Pat Buchanan on Foreign Policy.
Click here for definitions & background information on Foreign Policy.
