Key Note Speech of President Aleksander Kwaśniewski at the ceremony of launching
the Zbigniew Brzeziński Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy at CSIS, July 18, 2002

I am very happy and proud to participate in today`s ceremony and talk to you on the occasion of the inauguration of Zbigniew Brzeziński Chair. Since Zbigniew Brzeziński is an exceptional man. A man that in a unique way has left his trace in the history of two nations - American and Polish. A person, who influenced the shaping of the new international order. Once he was one of the closest associates of an American president, some years later, when the tenure of the first Polish president elected in general elections was coming to an end - Zbigniew Brzeziński was proposed to stand for the highest office in our country. He refused. Nevertheless, this speaks a lot about a man for whom we all have gathered here.
By the way, you did the right thing when you refused as I would have had to defeat you. And one does not do such things to friends. I do not know if it is legitimate to compare Brzeziński to Kościuszko, or Pułaski, but these men have undoubtedly something in common - respect for the highest values: freedom, democracy and human rights. Public activity of Brzeziński has been characterized by keeping to these ideals above all. This is why, as soldiers of the 19th century, fighting for "your freedom and ours", Zbigniew Brzeziński could become a hero of two nations. He says about himself that in a political sense he is an American, however, in his heart, he is a Pole. To me Professor is a unique Polish-American joint-venture - our joint so very successful transnational endeavor.
The biography of Zbigniew Brzeziński is a part of the Polish history of the 20th century. Together with his family he was made to stay abroad in the country that as time went by became his new homeland. However, all the time he has been loyal to Polish culture and history, has never been deaf to what was going in his first homeland - especially when he could do most. Jan Nowak was right when he said that the presence of Brzeziński in the White House in a critical year 1980 was "a true decree of Providence" for Poland. Professor Brzeziński has never feared strong and bold decisions. I think that his attitude has been influenced by his personal experience from the family of Polish emigrants who could not return to their country because of the totalitarian regime.
One of your family treasures, which is in your house near Washington - is a hat of a Polish Army officer, your father. I am glad that now, when you have been awarded a title of honoris causa of the Polish National Defense University - you can put beside it your own hat of a Polish officer. It is a testimony of gratitude of us - Poles - for all the battles fought in our cause.
It is symptomatic that Zbigniew Brzeziński Chair has been funded by two countries - Poland and the United States. I want to thank here all generous donors, and in particular President of Telekomunikacja Polska, Mr. Marek Józefiak, and I want to say that this endeavor is a symbol, which can be an example of how to deepen the relations between our countries. Since it shows how, in spite of differences between our two countries, we are able to create real value that will serve our common good. I am facing a difficult challenge today. I am aware that outstanding politicians, thinkers, and international relations researchers gathered here, represent what is best in America, what decides about the position of the United States in the modern world: courage and independent critical thinking. The auditorium is exacting, but it is an even stronger incentive for deep reflection, and even higher my satisfaction with this meeting.
The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), by detailed analyses of global issues has deserved the fame of one of the best centers in the world. It is people that decide about the rank of an institution. Professor Zbigniew Brzeziński is one of the personages whose opinions set forth the directions of thinking. He is a great visionary, and at the same he has been one of those who have made political decisions setting the course of modern history. Poland will always remember how much credit you deserve for your efforts concerning our membership in NATO. Two years ago Zbigniew Brzeziński wrote: "The transatlantic Alliance is America`s most important global relationship... The larger Europe becomes, the less likely it is that either external or internal threats will pose a serious challenge to international peace".
This assessment has become even more valid after the events of the 11th of September. We all feel a sense, that our security is targeted by threats that are not sufficiently recognized, difficult to predict, too complex for simple evaluation. These threats are scattered and have many dimensions. This is why the enlargement of the North Atlantic Alliance we are favoring and striving for- is today not only a need but a necessity.
Neither Europe, nor the world as a whole face today a threat of a global confrontation between the states. A red warning light signalizing a classical military aggression will probably not be lit on global maps. Nobody presses territorial claims - military plans are not worked out on such bases. Throughout the whole human history there were the powers that threatened the security of other states - or even the very existence of these powers was received as a threat. Today it is not the case.
But we have to deal with other threats. A global terrorism monster is forcing its way into our life. Terrorist attacks of the 11th of September were absolutely unexpected, but the circumstances that had led to them had not come out of the blue. For years the whole range of states and governments have supported terrorists. For years the terrorist groups have been becoming consolidated, anchoring in the states that are so weak that they cannot even control the situation in their own territory. I do not think that terrorism can be perceived as a price for democracy and tolerance, or as a side effect of globalization. It is the activity of groups and organizations that first of all strive to achieve their political goals. They use religion as an instrument and pretext; they take advantage of technological complexity of modern social life. Mobility and openness, that give life to global civilization, are becoming a jungle masking the actions of terrorists, where their "heart of darkness" can grow.
Today we are facing a challenge how to counteract threats that are global by nature and come from directions that are difficult to define. How to behave vis-a-vis the actors in the international arena, that are not states but constitute a threat to security? How to prepare defense against terrorist threats that are terrifying, but at the same time vague? How to approach the regimes supporting terrorism and weak states, that are not able to face this scourge?
These challenges are not conventional. And the response should not be conventional either. President Bush, Congress and the whole American society tragically experienced by September 11 events have been searching for the response. We have been searching for it also in Poland - not only in the act of solidarity with America, but also in the interest of Poland and Europe. I have been carefully following the creation of a new American security doctrine outlined by President Bush in his speech in Berlin and West Point. I have no doubt that it is necessary to create a new approach, new synthesis of security elements so far split into internal and external, and a new definition of threats. I propose that the necessary innovations be jointly considered by Americans and Europeans. The most creative may be the cooperation in the frames of an informal group of "wise men" covering the threats in the whole transatlantic space. In this room, I can see many of such "wise men".
As my contribution to the discussion I would like to propose five principles upon which the transatlantic security strategy could be based.
Firstly - redefinition of deterrence. According to a classical concept deterrence is directed against states. This policy is addressed to those who think in a rational manner, control centralized structures and are susceptible to the consequences of a potential military threat. Scattered terrorist groups are a completely different category. However, deterrence can and should continue to be used against the states that support terrorism.
Secondly - multi-dimensional threats require multi-directional response. Only military operations, though often indispensable, will not suffice. Our defense against terrorism must be conducted jointly by politicians, military, diplomats, economists, lawyers, police officers, intelligence. It should be calculated to eliminate the sources of terrorism, with the application of a package of non-military assets and capabilities, as broad as possible. To be successful we need determination in action, creativity in thinking, and imagination in planning.
Thirdly, the ability to tame everything that is threat to international security, even if it is a non-state structure. However, it requires an unprecedented international cooperation. In some justified cases - let us be blunt - it would imply the interference in the area which used to be defined as `home affairs` of individual countries. But let us not fear the crossing of the Rubicon. Nobody today has the right to question the legality of the international community actions striving to protect violated human rights and restore peace and security. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in the forum of the Commission on Human Rights rightly said: "We cannot and we shall not accept situations in which people are brutally persecuted behind the curtain of national borders".
Fourthly - flexibility in response and capability to conduct preventive actions. There are different types of threats and forms of our cooperation to fight them should be different as well. These may be, for example, coalitions, based upon the principle that everybody should contribute to the achievement of a common goal within the frames of one`s capabilities and potential.
Fifthly - new approach to institutional aspects of security. It will not suffice to have good institutions only though they are necessary for the world`s order. We need a sense of a joint strategy, clear leadership and ability for rapid reaction, even beyond the existing institutions. The most important thing is that it is done in line with generally accepted rules and values.
If the transatlantic community is to be appropriately armed to face the threats of the 21st century, those five guidelines should be the constant inspiration in our thoughts and in our deeds.
Let me say a few words about the security of Poland. As a member of the North Atlantic Alliance and close partner of the United States my country in the 21st century can feel safe from traditional threats. But it is not safe from non-conventional terrorist threats - just as the whole world is not free from them.
For the first time in history we have become an integral part of the Atlantic community and united Europe, and at the same time we have been developing good relations with our Eastern neighbors. From Polish perspective the key institutional challenge for security is the development of appropriate and mutually beneficial relations between NATO and the European Union. Both organizations will soon enlarge. Both can make a new contribution to the building of transatlantic and European security and stability based upon a flexible division of tasks and one`s potential. Common European Security and Defense Policy, if it is finally initiated, can enhance the European security identity - and by this - the European pillar of NATO. In other words - an emerging European defense policy can only reinforce transatlantic dimension of European security, making Europeans more reliable partners for the USA.
NATO - enlarging and developing partner relations with Russia - will remain a fundament of transatlantic community. Last year in Warsaw President Bush spoke about "Europe united, free and living in peace". Europe, however, will never be fully secure without America. America, in turn, will not feel fully secure without Europe. US military power and its political significance will be most effective if they are supported by European cooperation and solidarity. Europe must carry its part of a burden, otherwise it will become a burden itself.
The most important challenge is to adjust NATO to new nature and new perception of threats keeping at the same time the Alliance`s cohesion and the rule of solidarity. NATO, being a transatlantic alliance by its nature, must go beyond its borders and become a globally selective alliance. Whatever is perceived as a threat to allies` security should be considered as a goal of joint actions - preventive or responding to an attack - no matter what the geographic criteria. NATO will also play an important role in counteracting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, which is particularly significant in the context of terrorist threats.
We must remember that winning a battle does not mean winning the war.
As I have already said, we need a joint strategy and clearly defined leadership. I am convinced that the US can offer both. The United States is the power of a new type - its strength is not expressed by dominance over others but by taking over the responsibility for the peaceful future of the world. Zbigniew Brzeziński when receiving the title of honoris causa at Warsaw National Defense University expressed it very briefly, but he was very right when he said: "American hegemony is an alternative to the world`s anarchy".
The conclusion from my speech is obvious: Poland, Europe and the whole world need the United States as never before, and the United States needs the world. Indeed, the new Rome, as one of outstanding American academics recently noted, "in the global era of information cannot achieve its aims unilaterally". And we know well that it is the United States, accused of unilateralism, that has covered with its security guarantees over 50 countries of the world, including Poland. Lasting peace and security are based upon common values, common interests and joint global responsibility.

Zbigniew Brzeziński’s Remarks at the Inauguration of His Chair at CSIS

I want to make two points about the Chair and America today. We all know and we have all heard it said that America is the only superpower in the world today. It's a new fact in the history of international affairs. There has never been a true global superpower before that stood alone in the world. But in my view, it is all the more important that America should avoid the temptation of strategic over-simplification and should carefully avoid the risk of political, perhaps even historical, self-isolation.
First, the role of this Chair at CSIS is to recognize the manifold complexity of the existing global turmoil and its many sources as the point of departure for a comprehensive multi-dimensional response that's capable of mobilizing global support, of projecting American values, and of linking whatever physical struggle we have to wage with systematic support of human rights and individual freedom. We should do this in order to ensure that the quality of the coalition we lead is above all else a philosophical and a moral one, not just based on efficient force. This is absolutely essential if we are to prevail. I hope that the Chair, by focusing on global strategy on the sources of our security dilemmas, will confront and contribute to the awareness of the complexity of global turmoil.
Second, the Chair can help America realize that, while it is indeed a hegemon and paramount, America is not omnipotent. In fact, America could become isolated and then undermined. It is here that the relationship with Europe is particularly important. This Chair is also designed to focus on Europe and I think that has been one of the intents of the Polish initiators of this venture.
With Europe, America is omnipotent. America and Europe together are truly omnipotent in the world in every respect and decisively so. We share common values with Europe and we should engage together in joint threat assessments. You [President of Poland Aleksander Kwasniewski] mentioned the idea of wise men to conduct American-European joint assessments of the nature of the threats that we confront today. An understanding of their complex and diverse roots will go a long way to maintain that unity, to minimize the risk of self-isolation, and to prevent the emergence of a doctrinal gap between America and Europe. Many people on both sides of the Atlantic are currently seeking to establish the intellectual case for the proposition that America and Europe are philosophically pointed in different directions.
We must remember that together with Europe we can shape the world in keeping with our basic principles that America enshrined when she became independent. These principles, shared by so many Europeans, have made America that which it has been for the last 200 years-a symbol of liberty and a reflection of collective and individual commitment to an idea that elevates the individual above society and society above the state. That's the joint mission that we have. I think the Chair can contribute to keeping it alive and giving it strategic direction. Thank you.