|
Alan Keyes on Foreign Policy
American Independent nominee for President; 2004 Republican challenger for IL Senate
|
Commitment to Israel is a moral obligation
I believe that our best and most trustworthy alliances are cemented in shared principles. The nature of America’s special relationship and commitment to Israel, for example, is a moral obligation--not a matter of
realpolitik, or of calculation of the military odds, or of strategic advantage.America’s friendship with Israel reflects a moral truth about who we are and what we stand for.
In our foreign policy and international alliances, we must never be subservient to merely pragmatic considerations of money, oil, or any other expediency. We must set our course mindful that we are morally obligated to always stand
foursquare with those who fight on the front lines of freedom and representative government--especially if they do so with the kind of decency, courage, and integrity demonstrated by the valiant people of Israel.
Source: Campaign website, www.alankeyes.com, “Issues”
Oct 1, 2007
No troops to Darfur; but support regional aid
Q: Does the US have a role to play in ending the genocide in Darfur?A: We are a nation of nations, a people of many peoples. We are in touch with every people on Earth. If somebody is being hurt somewhere in the world, somebody in America grieves for
them. And I don’t believe we can turn our backs on that universal mission. We don’t have to send troops, but we need to support and reinforce the sense of local, regional responsibility for both humanitarian and military order in that region.
Source: 2007 GOP Presidential Forum at Morgan State University
Sep 27, 2007
Don’t pressure Israel to give up land for promise of peace
Q: Past presidents have expected Israel to give up land, not for peace but for the promise of peace. With this mindset, Pres. Bush introduced the “roadmap” in 2003, yet 60 terrorist acts are attempted & 300 rockets fall every month in Israel. Will you
stand behind Israel to not give up land for unfulfilled promises of peace, even in the face of opposition of European & Arab countries?- HUCKABEE: Yes.
- TANCREDO: Yes.
- COX: Yes.
- BROWNBACK:Yes.
- PAUL:Yes.
- HUNTER:Yes.
- KEYES: Yes.
Source: [Xref Paul] 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate
Sep 17, 2007
Monitor the eradication of legal slavery in Sudan
Q: I was made a slave during the government of Sudan’s war against black Christians of southern Sudan. I am a slave no longer, but today want to free tens of thousands of my brothers and sisters who remain in chattel slavery in Sudan. Would you today
endorse the creation of a commission to monitor the eradication of slavery in Sudan, where the slavery of a man is legal?- HUCKABEE: Yes.
- TANCREDO: Yes.
- COX: Yes.
- BROWNBACK: Yes.
- PAUL: No.
- HUNTER: Yes.
- KEYES: Yes.
Source: [Xref Paul] 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate
Sep 17, 2007
Avoid ratifying Law of the Sea Treaty
Q: Pres. Reagan rejected the Law of the Sea Treaty, because it gives International Seabed Authority dictatorial power to regulate all oceans and the riches at the bottom of the oceans, plus the power the levy international taxes, and it would make the US
subject to the decisions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Would you urge the Senate not to ratify this treaty?- HUCKABEE: Yes.
- TANCREDO: Yes.
- COX: Yes.
- BROWNBACK: Yes.
- PAUL: Yes.
- HUNTER: Yes.
- KEYES: Yes.
Source: 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate
Sep 17, 2007
Work with indigenous elements in Iran
In order to defend Americans from death, you do what you have to do. In the meantime, you take advantage of those mechanisms that will allow you to address the problem without necessarily committing the nation to war. And that includes, by the way,
a strategy that will work with indigenous elements in Iran in order to promote an alternative to the government there that would be more compatible with international and regional peace and security, more respectful of human rights.
Source: IL Senate Debate, Illinois Radio Network
Oct 12, 2004
Renounce interference with affairs of other nations
I would want to renounce the idea that we have the right to interfere, in an aggressive way, with the affairs of other nations. I think we can play a constructive role in trying to bring about diplomatic solutions in different parts of the world,
but I do not believe that when our ideas are rejected, we should resort to war in order to force people to accept a deal that’s dictated on our terms.
Source: Organizational website, RenewAmerica.us, “On The Issues”
Aug 3, 2004
Routine military intervention is wrong
Q: When do you think the US should become involved in militarily around the world?
A: We need to end the Clinton policy of interventionism on behalf of all kinds of globalist interests that are of not direct relevance to our values.
Kosovo was an example. We ought to avoid interventions that are based on propaganda. We’ve got to send a message to the world, that we will not be stepping in to intervene in the affairs of other countries on any kind of routine basis.
Source: GOP Debate on the Larry King Show
Feb 15, 2000
Africa: No money for AIDS, because money won’t cure AIDS
Q: Should we appropriate $300 million out of the surplus to help fight AIDS in Africa?
A: The premise of your question [is that we] measure compassion is by how much money we’re going to
throw at some problem, regardless of whether the problem is susceptible to being dealt with by all the money. After all, asking whether we should spend $300 million to cure an incurable disease is kind of an academic point, and you should realize that.
Source: GOP Debate in Michigan
Jan 10, 2000
South Africa: Venture capital instead of foreign aid
Foreign aid is everybody’s favorite whipping boy, which makes you wonder how it has managed to survive for so long. One reason may be that we all have our exceptions to the general anti-foreign aid bias. I confess that South Africa would be high
on my list of favorite exceptions. But then I realize what a disservice we will do to South Africa’s people, particularly her black people, if we continue to think of them as victims. Standard foreign aid projects, funneling money government-to-
government through inefficient bureaucracies and political networks, will end up consuming millions while wasting South Africa’s most valuable resource. South Africa needs venture capital, the kind you get from corporations rather than
governments. The people who spent so much time and effort getting investors to pull out of South Africa [on anti-apartheid platforms] need to organize just as massively for them to go back in.
Source: Our Character, Our Future, p. 93-5
May 2, 1996
Rwanda: Humanitarian grounds 150x more than in Bosnia
Q: Do you support President Clinton’s Bosnia policy?
A: No. Every single argument that was raised with respect to Bosnia on humanitarian grounds applied over 150 times to Rwanda, and we sat on our hands and did nothing. Why do we need to send 20,000
troops to Bosnia when all those European countries can do the same job we can? Our neighboorhood is our neighborhood.
Source: Interview with USA Today
Jan 23, 1996
Alan Keyes on China
Panama Canal: Keep US in; keep China Out
Keyes says the Panama Canal treaty was a “stupid mistake” and that he would take steps to return the canal to US control if elected. Last month, the US turned control of the canal over to Panama as called for under a 1977 treaty, which Keyes said he did
not support. Keyes believes the Chinese could be seeking ways to control the waterway. “We’re in a situation now where it would be folly to wait until the Communist Chinese get some kind of entrenched foothold in Panama.”
Source: Boston Globe, p. A20
Jan 14, 2000
Clarifying commitment to Taiwan avoids Chinese attack
Q: What would you do if Taiwan declared independence, & the Chinese began to fire missiles?
A: We have to make clear to the Chinese that we intend to make good on our pledges to safeguard the security of Taiwan. A move like that wouldn’t happen without
a preceding crisis, in which I would have demonstrated, through the placement of our forces, that we intended to make good on our commitment. To avoid that eventuality, we should stop sending confusing signals about our resolve with respect to Taiwan.
Source: New Hampshire GOP Debates
Dec 3, 1999
Military intervention to ensure Taiwan’s self-determination
I would put in place the kind of anti-missile defenses that can be extended as an umbrella to protect Taiwan when they come under threats [from China]. Self-determination, allowing people to decide their own destiny, has been fundamental to American
foreign policy for decades. We should certainly stand for it where the Taiwanese are concerned. We should make it clear that any [attack by] the Communist Chinese would, in fact, mean a military confrontation with the United States.
Source: New Hampshire GOP Debates
Dec 3, 1999
Call to account those responsible for Chinese espionage
I cannot understand how any American can be complacent about [Chinese espionage detailed in the Cox Report]. We will be struggling to deal with the consequences of this devastating blow for the next 20 and 30 years. And yet many Americans are still just
sitting and watching. We should have a deep sense of outrage, and our political leaders should call to account those who have been on watch. God help us if we accept a week or two of public hand-wringing over the Cox Report as an adequate response.
Source: WorldNetDaily “GOP folds on Chinagate”
May 28, 1999
China is an egregious abuser of human life and human rights
The Beijing women’s conference is a travesty. The venue is bad, since the Chinese government continues to be an egregious abuser of human life and human rights. The document is bad since it includes many of the culture of death priorities of the Clintons
(abortion, condom distribution, assaults on motherhood, etc.).
Source: Interview on CompuServe
Sep 6, 1995
Alan Keyes on United Nations
United Nations: source of dangerously naive globalist dreams
Whatever benefits of international cooperation and consultation the United Nations has made possible, it has from its flawed founding been a source of dangerously naive globalist dreams. Some American politicians have been so corrupted by the
internationalist ideal that they cannot resist the temptation to elevate the United Nations into a supra-national entity that threatens American sovereignty.Should this pernicious tendency persist, the United States will have to withdraw from the
United Nations, and yet firmly maintain our ongoing international responsibilities as a sovereign nation and world leader. Ultimately, it is more important that the United States of America should survive in freedom than that the United
Nations should survive at all.
Let me add that I have never supported the United Nations. As a UN ambassador, I represented the interests of the United States at the United Nations, which is a very different thing than supporting the UN itself.
Source: Campaign website, www.alankeyes.com, “Issues”
Oct 1, 2007
I’ve never been a supporter of the UN, even while Ambassador
Q: You seem to remain a supporter of the United Nations, even though a great many conservatives are not.A: First, let me make one thing very clear. I’ve never been a supporter, per se, of the United Nations. In fact, I was there, under Ronald
Reagan, championing the battle against the UN’s efforts to destroy our values, to destroy our alliances, to destroy our nation-- championing policies that withheld funds from the
UN, tried to achieve some change in their corruption, took strong stands against everything at the UN that assaulted our policies and values, our relationships with countries like Israel. So, the notion that
I was some kind of “supporter” of the UN is just a lie. I represented the interests of the US at the UN, for a president who understood those interests, and was not afraid to defend them.
Source: 2007 GOP Values Voter Presidential Debate
Sep 17, 2007
Against paying UN until they reform
Q: Do you think our reasons for withholding payment from the UN are valid?
A: I do think they’re valid. To try to get the United Nations to reform its wasteful practices, reform its opposition to the free enterprise approaches that could
actually help countries around the world to develop, we withheld those dollars. And I’d continue to withhold them today because the organization has not responded, it has not reformed. And I think it until it does, we ought to stand firm in our position.
Source: Republican Debate at Dartmouth College
Oct 29, 1999
Fostered policy of withholding UN funds; UN wastes US taxes
I’ll take the blame for [withholding UN funding], because I was one of those people in the Reagan administration who helped foster that policy. We withheld our contributions because it is an organization that takes our money, tosses it down the rathole
of UN waste, and puts our money into the pockets of the rich people in developing countries. [Paying the UN gives US taxes] to international bureaucrats who are basically interested in doing nothing but maintaining their own comfort and security.
Source: Republican Debate at Dartmouth College
Oct 29, 1999
If the UN undermines US sovereignty, we should quit.
Some American politicians have been so corrupted by internationalism that they will not resist the temptation to erect the United Nations into a supra-national entity that undermines our sovereignty. Should it prove impossible to fight this tendency
by other means, the United States would have to withdraw from the United Nations, while clearly maintaining our ongoing commitment to our international responsibilities as a sovereign nation and world leader.
Source: www.keyes2000.org/issues/unitednations.html 1/7/99
Jan 7, 1999
Page last updated: Dec 07, 2008