A former South African naval commander, Dieter Gerhardt, jailed in 1983 for spying for the Soviet Union, said following his release in 1992 that there was an agreement, "Chalet", in which Israel would arm eight Jericho missiles with "special warheads" for South Africa. Gerhardt said that these were atomic bombs.
Gerhardt's claims have finally been supported. During research for his newly published book, The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Alliance with Apartheid South Africa, an American academic Sasha Polakow-Suransky found secret South African documents revealing Israel's offer of nuclear warheads to the apartheid regime, the first published documentary evidence of West Jerusalem's possession of nuclear weapons.
The "top secret" minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 reveal that South Africa's Defence Minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel's Defence Minister and now its President, responded by offering them "in three sizes". The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries, with a clause that "the very existence of this agreement" was to remain secret.
The top secret minutes of the meeting record, "Minister Botha expressed interest in a limited number of units of Chalet subject to the correct payload being available." The document then states, "Minister Peres said the correct payload was available in three sizes. Minister Botha expressed his appreciation and said that he would ask for advice."
The "three sizes" are believed to refer to the conventional, chemical and nuclear weapons.
1820 GMT: Joined-Up Government? Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, Iran's representative to the International Atomic Energy Agency, said Sunday that Iran had not yet delivered a letter outlining the procedure for the uranium swap agreed last week with Brazil and Turkey.
Islamic Republic News Agency reported earlier Sunday that the letter had been delivered (see 1515 GMT). Iranian officials now say it will be submitted on Monday.
1815 GMT: Claimed video of a clashes between protesters and government forces today at Elm-o-Sanat University:
1810 GMT: Resistance. Seven opposition websites have issued a joint statement that they will “resist and persevere” in their mission of informing the public until the fall of “despotism” and the moment of “victory”.
Emrooz (Today), Tahavole Sabz (Green Evolution), Jaras/Rah-e-Sabz (Path of the Green Movement), Neday-e Sabz-e Azadi (The Green Voice of Freedom), Raymankojast (Where’s My Vote?), Mizan, and Saham News declared that that “resistance, defending the rights of the citizens, unity and avoidance of all forms of violence” are the pillars of their media activities. They urged the public to contact them with suggestions about “disseminating information” and to “resist and persist in their legal demands to restore the lost principles of the constitution.”
1800 GMT: Nourizad Still Imprisoned? An Iranian activist notifies us that Mohammad Nourizad's daughter has denied the report that he has been released from prison (see 1520 GMT). Pro-Government websites are still carrying the news.
1520 GMT: Political Prisoner News. Tabnak is reporting from Khabar Online that filmmaker Mohammad Nourizad has been released from prison. The article also denied Nourizad's claim that he was beaten by guards last week.
1515 GMT: The Uranium Dispute. The Islamic Republic News Agency reports that Iran has officially handed a letter to the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Yukiya Amano, setting out the terms for a swap of uranium, based on last week's joint declaration by Iran, Brazil and Turkey.
1510 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Rah-e-Sabz is reporting, from "sources", that film director Jafar Panahi will be freed this evening from Evin Prison.
Iranian activists are writing that student leader Majid Tavakoli has been moved back to solitary confinement.
1230 GMT: Election Manipulation? Further information on the claim (0740 GMT) that entire villages were "resurrected" --- 60 around Tabriz alone --- to provide votes for President Ahmadinejad in the 2009 election: context and details can be found in Ayande News, Tabnak, and other citations in the Green Voice of Freedom article.
1220 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Press TV, drawing from Iranian Students News Agency, writes:
The Chairman of Iran's Expediency Council, Ayatollah Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, described the Islamic Republic as "determined" to defend its rights and in particular its nuclear rights on the international stage: "Iran will not give up its rights in the face of such psychological warfare, threats, and intimidation."...
According to the senior Iranian official, the region and the world will pay a heavy price if "hostile and unethical ways" are adopted to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue.
ISNA highlights Rafsanjani's remarks about the 28th anniversary of the Iranian defence of Khorramshahr against Iraqi attack. No word, however, about his views on internal matters.
1010 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Iranian Azeri activist Behboud Gholizade, the head of the NGO Yashil, has been arrested.
0830 GMT: Corruption Corner. Fazel Mousavi of Parliament's Article 90 Commission, has asserted that files alleging corruption against senior government figures are being investigated.
0825 GMT: Economy Watch. Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghaddam, a leading member of Parliament's Economy Committee, has again urged the Goverernment to declare details of its subsidy cut plans, warning that otherwise there will be negative economic effects.
0810 GMT: Rafsanjani Watch. Writing for Tehran Bureau, "Hana H." has a lengthy profile of Mehdi Hashemi, Hashemi Rafsanjani's son, and the pressure upon him and his family.
Hashemi is living in Britain and has been threatened with criminal prosecution if he returns to Iran.
0745 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Kurdish activist Mohieddin Azadi, detained since March 2008, is reportedly on hunger strike.
0740 GMT: Remembering the Election (Manipulation)? Green Voice of Freedom claims a new fact from the 2009 Presidential vote for consideraiton: dozens of villages which were recorded in 1976 but had ceased to exist by 2007 suddenly appeared for last year's ballot. The website cites the example of 60 "resurrected" villages around Tabriz.
0735 GMT: Show of Force. Rah-e-Sabz reports heavy security in Khorramshahr in southwestern Iran on the eve of a visit by President Ahmadinejad.
Rooz Online claims two million Basiji militia have been mobilised for 22 Khordaad (12 June).
0715 GMT: Yesterday we began with a defiant statement from Mehdi Karroubi. Today we start with a gentler but pointed call by former President Mohammad Khatami for the Iranian people, leading up to the 12 June anniversary of the 2009 Presidential election, to claim their rights and for the Government to respect that claim. The text is in a separate entry.
Meanwhile....
Government Spin: Look Away. Far Away....
More emphasis by President Ahmadinejad and his men on events beyond Iran. On Saturday Ahmadinejad spoke with Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey, who helped broker last week's agreement on a procedure for Tehran's uranium enrichment. Press TV gives the public line:
Iran's nuclear declaration is the beginning of a new era in the international political arena and offers a great opportunity for interaction and dialogue. Tehran is to create a new atmosphere in international relations based on fair and constructive cooperation with its friend and brother countries.
Few issues highlight Barack Obama's extreme hypocrisy the way that Bagram [the US detention facility in Afghanistan] does. As everyone knows, one of George Bush’s most extreme policies was abducting people from all over the world -- far away from any battlefield -- and then detaining them at Guantanamo with no legal rights of any kind, not even the most minimal right to a habeas review in a federal court.
Back in the day, this was called "Bush's legal black hole." In 2006, Congress codified that policy by enacting the Military Commissions Act, but in 2008, the Supreme Court, in Boumedienev. Bush, ruled that provision unconstitutional, holding that the Constitution grants habeas corpus rights even to foreign nationals held at Guantanamo. Since then, detainees have won 35 out of 48 habeas hearings brought pursuant to Boumediene, on the ground that there was insufficient evidence to justify their detention.
Immediately following Boumediene, the Bush administration argued that the decision was inapplicable to detainees at Bagram --- including even those detained outside of Afghanistan but then flown to Afghanistan to be imprisoned. Amazingly, the Bush DOJ [Justice Department] --- in a lawsuit brought by Bagram detainees seeking habeas review of their detention --- contended that if they abduct someone and ship them to Guantanamo, then that person (under Boumediene) has the right to a habeas hearing, but if they instead ship them to Bagram, then the detainee has no rights of any kind. In other words, the detainee's Constitutional rights depends on where the Government decides to drop them off to be encaged.
One of the first acts undertaken by the Obama DOJ that actually shocked civil libertarians was when, last February, as The New York Times put it, Obama lawyers "told a federal judge that military detainees in Afghanistan have no legal right to challenge their imprisonment there, embraci.ng a key argument of former President Bush’s legal team"
But last April, John Bates, the Bush-43-appointed, right-wing judge overseeing the case, rejected the Bush/Obama position and held thatBoumediene applies to detainees picked up outside of Afghanistan and then shipped to Bagram. I reviewed that ruling, in which Judge Bates explained that the Bagram detainees are "virtually identical to the detainees in Boumediene," and that the Constitutional issue was exactly the same: namely, "the concern that the President could move detainees physically beyond the reach of the Constitution and detain them indefinitely".
But the Obama administration was undeterred by this loss. They quickly appealed Judge Bates' ruling. As the New York Times described that appeal: "The decision signaled that the administration was not backing down in its effort to maintain the power to imprison terrorism suspects for extended periods without judicial oversight."
Today, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals adopted the Bush/Obama position, holding that even detainees abducted outside of Afghanistan and then shipped to Bagram have no right to contest the legitimacy of their detention in a U.S. federal court, because Boumediene does not apply to prisons located within war zones (such as Afghanistan).
So congratulations to the United States and Barack Obama for winning the power to abduct people anywhere in the world and then imprison them for as long as they want with no judicial review of any kind. When the Boumediene decision was issued in the middle of the 2008 presidential campaign, John McCain called it "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country." But Obama hailed it as "a rejection of the Bush Administration's attempt to create a legal black hole at Guantanamo," and he praised the Court for "rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus". Even worse, when Obama went to the Senate floor in September, 2006, to speak against the habeas-denying provisions of the Military Commissions Act, this is what he melodramatically intoned:
As a parent, I can also imagine the terror I would feel if one of my family members were rounded up in the middle of the night and sent to Guantanamo without even getting one chance to ask why they were being held and being able to prove their innocence....
By giving suspects a chance --- even one chance --- to challenge the terms of their detention in court, to have a judge confirm that the Government has detained the right person for the right suspicions, we could solve this problem without harming our efforts in the war on terror one bit....
Most of us have been willing to make some sacrifices because we know that, in the end, it helps to make us safer. But restricting somebody's right to challenge their imprisonment indefinitely is not going to make us safer. In fact, recent evidence shows it is probably making us less safe.
Can you smell the hypocrisy? How could anyone miss its pungent, suffocating odor? Apparently, what Obama called "a legal black hole at Guantanamo" is a heinous injustice, but "a legal black hole at Bagram" is the Embodiment of Hope. And evidently, Obama would only feel "terror" if his child were abducted and taken to Guantanamoand imprisoned "without even getting one chance to ask why and prove their innocence".
But if the very same child were instead taken to Bagram and treated exactly the same way, that would be called Justice -- -or, to use his jargon, Pragmatism. And what kind of person hails a Supreme Court decision as "protecting our core values" --- as Obama said of Boumediene --- only to then turn around and make a complete mockery of that ruling by insisting that the Cherished, Sacred Rights it recognized are purely a function of where the President orders a detainee-carrying military plane to land?
Independently, what happened to Obama's eloquent insistence that "restricting somebody's right to challenge their imprisonment indefinitely is not going to make us safer; in fact, recent evidence shows it is probably making us less safe"? How does our policy of invading Afghanistan and then putting people at Bagram with no charges of any kind dispose people in that country, and the broader Muslim world, to the United States? If a country invaded the U.S. and set up prisons where Americans from around the world where detained indefinitely and denied all rights to have their detention reviewed, how would it dispose you to the country which was doing that?
One other point: this decision is likely to be appealed to the Supreme Court, which serves to further highlight how important the [Elena] Kagan-for-[John Paul] Stevens replacement could be. If the Court were to accept the appeal, Kagan would be required to recuse herself (since it was her Solicitor General's office that argued the administration's position here), which means that a 4-4 ruling would be likely, thus leaving this appellate decision undisturbed. More broadly, though, if Kagan were as sympathetic to Obama's executive power claims as her colleagues in the Obama administration are, then her confirmation could easily convert decisions on these types of questions from a 5-4 victory (which is whatBoumediene was, with Stevens in the majority) into a 5-4 defeat. Maybe we should try to find out what her views are before putting her on that Court for the next 40 years?
This is what Barack Obama has done to the habeas clause of the Constitution: if you are in Thailand (as one of the petitioners in this case was) and the U.S. abducts you and flies you to Guantanamo, then you have the right to have a federal court determine if there is sufficient evidence to hold you. If, however, President Obama orders that you be taken to from Thailand to Bagram rather than to Guantanamo, then you will have no rights of any kind, and he can order you detained there indefinitely without any right to a habeas review. That type of change is so very inspiring --- almost an exact replica of his vow to close Guantanamo...all in order to move its core attributes (including indefinite detention) a few thousand miles north to Thompson, Illinois.
Real estate agents have long emphasized "location, location, location" as the all-determining market factor. Before we elected this Constitutional Scholar as Commander-in-Chief, who knew that this platitude also shaped our entire Constitution?
UPDATE: Law Professor Steve Vladeck has more on the ruling, including "the perverse incentive that today's decision supports," as predicted by Justice [Antonin] Scalia in his Boumediene dissent: namely, that a President attempting to deny Constitutional rights to detainees can simply transfer them to a "war zone" instead of to Guantanamo and then claim that courts cannot interfere in the detention. Barack Obama quickly adopted that tactic for rendering the rights in Boumediene moot --- the same rights which, less than two years ago, he was praising the Supreme Court for safeguarding and lambasting the Bush administration for denying. Vladeck also explains why the appellate court's caveat -- that overt government manipulation to evade habeas rights (i.e., shipping them to a war zone with the specific intent of avoidingBoumediene) might alter the calculus -- is rather meaningless.
UPDATE II: Guest-hosting for Rachel Maddow last night, Chris Hayes talked with Shayana Kadidal of the Center for Constitutional Rights about the Bagram ruling and Obama's hypocrisy on these issues, and it was quite good, including a video clip of the 2006 Obama speech I excerpted above:
And in The New York Times, Charlie Savage has a typically thorough examination of the impact of the ruling. As he writes: "The decision was a broad victory for the Obama administration in its efforts to hold terrorism suspects overseas for indefinite periods without judicial oversight." But GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham (author of the habeas-denying provision in the Military Commissions Act) "called the ruling a 'big win' and praised the administration for appealing the lower court’s ruling", and that's what really matters.
Yesterday former President Mohammad Khatami, speaking to academics, used the historical background of the month of Khordaad --- which began on Saturday --- to set up the importance of the present:
The month of Khordaad has been very significant in the recent history of our beloved Iran....We should call it the reflection of the faith, determination, dedication, fight against oppression and tyranny, and seeking of justice by the people of Iran.
The lively presence of the people in the tenth presidential election on Khordaad 22nd [12 June], which unfortunately was followed with bitter events, was significant. It has been the sign of life and joy of the people who insist on their rights, and I wish these people would have been appreciated.
Finally [the great demonstration on] Khordaad 25th [15 June] was one of the climactic events of the civil presence of the people demanding their rights and protests peacefully and without any violence. It would have been great if the nature of this civilized presence was honoured.
It would have been great if the protests of the people, even if they was not valid in the eyes of the authorities, were dealt with through respect and with the help of the same people. The problem would have been solved in a justified way while considering people's views, or in some reasonable way people would have been convinced.
Unfortunately not only were the people called "Dirt and Dust" [the expression used by President Ahmadinejad in his "victory speech"] but also the peaceful and civilized behavior of the people was answered with violence, the prisons were filled, and pressure was increased. There have been many unrecoverable human, financial and psychological damages, and there have been no attempts to compensate for them. Tragedies happened in some prisons which ended in martyrdom and injury of some of our dear youth and people.
Yes, Khordaad is the month of the people and whatever happened in all these days was the emergence of the will of a nation that with all of its existence demanded the establishment of a democratic system based on religious teachings and its historic demands.
Now we passed all those days [of last year], but the future is ahead of us and we should not let those important events become just a vague memory in our minds, but rather we should use them as a backbone to move forward and to guard the values of the revolution and use them to fulfill the historic demands of the nation. All of us have the responsibility to keep these memories alive in a civilized way, according to the law and without any violence.
We can and should look to the future and learn from the past. The bitter events, especially what have happened in the past year, should not make us lose hope. The sweetness of the memories should not cause us neglect the long path that we have ahead of us.
The right way is for everyone to avoid violence, especially the Government, since it contradicts the principles of democracy, values of the Revolution, and the historic demands and identity of the nation. The right path is to insist on the full implementation of the Constitution as a comprehensive document of national unity which ensures that beside every right and power someone would be held responsible.
I am saying it again that, in order for us to achieve our long-term goals, we should be together and the dignity of every Iranian should be honored. We should avoid the methods that the violence-seekers and the enemies of the people used and are still using. This has no outcome except to increase the distances between and hard feelings among the people, and the continuation of these methods will result in damaging the whole establishment.
Unfortunately today we are witnessing the increasing pressure, new arrests and also actions of some fearless and irresponsible groups, which has the support of some authorities, so even those who are not physically in prison are feeling unsafe and under pressure.
The second resolution is to create a safe and free environment according to the principles of the constitution that embodies the freedoms of associations, assembly, and press, and turns the military and police environment into a lawful and politically healthy and active environment.
The spirit of our Revolution demands and the people want the free, healthy, and joyful elections.
THE PRESIDENT: It is wonderful to be back at the United States Military Academy -- the oldest continuously occupied military post in America -- as we commission the newest officers in the United States Army.
Thank you, General Hagenbeck, for your introduction, on a day that holds special meaning for you and the Dean, General Finnegan. Both of you first came to West Point in the Class of 1971 and went on to inspire soldiers under your command. You've led this Academy to a well-deserved recognition: best college in America. (Applause.) And today, you're both looking forward to a well-deserved retirement from the Army. General Hagenbeck and Judy, General Finnegan and Joan, we thank you for 39 years of remarkable service to the Army and to America. (Applause.)
To the Commandant, General Rapp, the Academy staff and faculty, most of whom are veterans, thank you for your service and for inspiring these cadets to become the "leaders of character" they are today. (Applause.) Let me also acknowledge the presence of General Shinseki, Secretary McHugh, the members of Congress who are with us here today, including two former soldiers this Academy knows well, Senator Jack Reed and Congressman Patrick Murphy. (Applause.)
To all the families here -- especially all the moms and dads -- this day is a tribute to you as well. The decision to come to West Point was made by your sons and daughters, but it was you who instilled in them a spirit of service that has led them to this hallowed place in a time of war. So on behalf of the American people, thank you for your example and thank you for your patriotism. (Applause.)
To the United States Corps of Cadets, and most of all, the Class of 2010 -- it is a singular honor to serve as your Commander-in-Chief. As your Superintendent indicated, under our constitutional system my power as President is wisely limited. But there are some areas where my power is absolute. And so, as your Commander-in-Chief, I hereby absolve all cadets who are on restriction for minor conduct offenses. (Applause.) I will leave the definition of "minor" -- (laughter) -- to those who know better. (Laughter.)
Class of 2010, today is your day -- a day to celebrate all that you've achieved, in the finest tradition of the soldier-scholar, and to look forward to the important service that lies ahead.
You have pushed yourself through the agony of Beast Barracks, the weeks of training in rain and mud, and, I'm told, more inspections and drills than perhaps any class before you. Along the way, I'm sure you faced a few moments when you asked yourself: "What am I doing here?" I have those moments sometimes. (Laughter.)
You've trained for the complexities of today's missions, knowing that success will be measured not merely by performance on the battlefield, but also by your understanding of the cultures and traditions and languages in the place where you serve.
You've reached out across borders, with more international experience than any class in Academy history. You've not only attended foreign academies to forge new friendships, you've welcomed into your ranks cadets from nearly a dozen countries.
You've challenged yourself intellectually in the sciences and the humanities, in history and technology. You've achieved a standard of academic excellence that is without question, tying the record for the most post-graduate scholarships of any class in West Point history. (Applause.)
This includes your number one overall cadet and your valedictorian -- Liz Betterbed and Alex Rosenberg. And by the way, this is the first time in Academy history where your two top awards have been earned by female candidates. (Applause.)
This underscores a fact that I've seen in the faces of our troops from Baghdad to Bagram -- in the 21st century, our women in uniform play an indispensable role in our national defense. And time and again, they have proven themselves to be role models for our daughters and our sons -- as students and as soldiers and as leaders in the United States armed forces.
And the faces in this stadium show a simple truth: America's Army represents the full breadth of America's experience. You come from every corner of our country -- from privilege and from poverty, from cities and small towns. You worship all of the great religions that enrich the life of our people. You include the vast diversity of race and ethnicity that is fundamental to our nation's strength.
There is, however, one thing that sets you apart. Here in these quiet hills, you've come together to prepare for the most difficult test of our time. You signed up knowing your service would send you into harm's way, and you did so long after the first drums of war were sounded. In you we see the commitment of our country, and timeless virtues that have served our nation well.
We see your sense of duty -- including those who have earned their right shoulder patch -- their right shoulder combat patches, like the soldier who suffered a grenade wound in Iraq, yet still helped his fellow soldiers to evacuate -- your First Captain of the Corps of Cadets, Tyler Gordy. (Applause.)
We see your sense of honor -- in your respect for tradition, knowing that you join a Long Grey Line that stretches through the centuries; and in your reverence for each other, as when the Corps stands in silence every time a former cadet makes the ultimate sacrifice for our nation. Indeed, today we honor the 78 graduates of this Academy who have given their lives for our freedom and our security in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And we see your love of country -- a devotion to America captured in the motto you chose as a class, a motto which will guide your lives of service: "Loyal 'Til the End."
Duty. Honor. Love of country. Everything you have learned here, all that you've achieved here, has prepared you for today -- when you raise your right hand; when you take that oath; when your loved one or mentor pins those gold bars on your shoulders; when you become, at long last, commissioned officers in the United States Army.
This is the ninth consecutive commencement that has taken place at West Point with our nation at war. This time of war began in Afghanistan -- a place that may seem as far away from this peaceful bend in the Hudson River as anywhere on Earth. The war began only because our own cities and civilians were attacked by violent extremists who plotted from a distant place, and it continues only because that plotting persists to this day.
For many years, our focus was on Iraq. And year after year, our troops faced a set of challenges there that were as daunting as they were complex. A lesser Army might have seen its spirit broken. But the American military is more resilient than that. Our troops adapted, they persisted, they partnered with coalition and Iraqi counterparts, and through their competence and creativity and courage, we are poised to end our combat mission in Iraq this summer. (Applause.)
Even as we transition to an Iraqi lead and bring our troops home, our commitment to the Iraqi people endures. We will continue to advise and assist Iraqi security forces, who are already responsible for security in most of the country. And a strong American civilian presence will help Iraqis forge political and economic progress. This will not be a simple task, but this is what success looks like: an Iraq that provides no haven to terrorists; a democratic Iraq that is sovereign and stable and self-reliant.
And as we end the war in Iraq, though, we are pressing forward in Afghanistan. Six months ago, I came to West Point to announce a new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. And I stand here humbled by the knowledge that many of you will soon be serving in harm's way. I assure you, you will go with the full support of a proud and grateful nation.
We face a tough fight in Afghanistan. Any insurgency that is confronted with a direct challenge will turn to new tactics. And from Marja to Kandahar, that is what the Taliban has done through assassination and indiscriminate killing and intimidation. Moreover, any country that has known decades of war will be tested in finding political solutions to its problems, and providing governance that can sustain progress and serve the needs of its people.
So this war has changed over the last nine years, but it's no less important than it was in those days after 9/11. We toppled the Taliban regime -- now we must break the momentum of a Taliban insurgency and train Afghan security forces. We have supported the election of a sovereign government -- now we must strengthen its capacities. We've brought hope to the Afghan people -- now we must see that their country does not fall prey to our common enemies. Cadets, there will be difficult days ahead. We will adapt, we will persist, and I have no doubt that together with our Afghan and international partners, we will succeed in Afghanistan. (Applause.)
Now even as we fight the wars in front of us, we also have to see the horizon beyond these wars -- because unlike a terrorist whose goal is to destroy, our future will be defined by what we build. We have to see that horizon, and to get there we must pursue a strategy of national renewal and global leadership. We have to build the sources of America's strength and influence, and shape a world that's more peaceful and more prosperous.
Time and again, Americans have risen to meet and to shape moments of change. This is one of those moments -- an era of economic transformation and individual empowerment; of ancient hatreds and new dangers; of emerging powers and new global challenges. And we're going to need all of you to help meet these challenges. You've answered the call. You, and all who wear America's uniform, remain the cornerstone of our national defense, the anchor of global security. And through a period when too many of our institutions have acted irresponsibly, the American military has set a standard of service and sacrifice that is as great as any in this nation's history. (Applause.)
Now the rest of us -- the rest of us must do our part. And to do so, we must first recognize that our strength and influence abroad begins with steps we take at home. We must educate our children to compete in an age where knowledge is capital, and the marketplace is global. We must develop clean energy that can power new industry and unbound us from foreign oil and preserve our planet. We have to pursue science and research that unlocks wonders as unforeseen to us today as the microchip and the surface of the moon were a century ago.
Simply put, American innovation must be the foundation of American power -- because at no time in human history has a nation of diminished economic vitality maintained its military and political primacy. And so that means that the civilians among us, as parents and community leaders, elected officials, business leaders, we have a role to play. We cannot leave it to those in uniform to defend this country -- we have to make sure that America is building on its strengths. (Applause.)
As we build these economic sources of our strength, the second thing we must do is build and integrate the capabilities that can advance our interests, and the common interests of human beings around the world. America's armed forces are adapting to changing times, but your efforts have to be complemented. We will need the renewed engagement of our diplomats, from grand capitals to dangerous outposts. We need development experts who can support Afghan agriculture and help Africans build the capacity to feed themselves. We need intelligence agencies that work seamlessly with their counterparts to unravel plots that run from the mountains of Pakistan to the streets of our cities. We need law enforcement that can strengthen judicial systems abroad, and protect us here at home. And we need first responders who can act swiftly in the event of earthquakes and storms and disease.
The burdens of this century cannot fall on our soldiers alone. It also cannot fall on American shoulders alone. Our adversaries would like to see America sap its strength by overextending our power. And in the past, we've always had the foresight to avoid acting alone. We were part of the most powerful wartime coalition in human history through World War II. We stitched together a community of free nations and institutions to endure and ultimately prevail during a Cold War.
Yes, we are clear-eyed about the shortfalls of our international system. But America has not succeeded by stepping out of the currents of cooperation --- we have succeeded by steering those currents in the direction of liberty and justice, so nations thrive by meeting their responsibilities and face consequences when they don't.
So we have to shape an international order that can meet the challenges of our generation. We will be steadfast in strengthening those old alliances that have served us so well, including those who will serve by your side in Afghanistan and around the globe. As influence extends to more countries and capitals, we also have to build new partnerships, and shape stronger international standards and institutions.
This engagement is not an end in itself. The international order we seek is one that can resolve the challenges of our times --- countering violent extremism and insurgency; stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and securing nuclear materials; combating a changing climate and sustaining global growth; helping countries feed themselves and care for their sick; preventing conflict and healing wounds. If we are successful in these tasks, that will lessen conflicts around the world. It will be supportive of our efforts by our military to secure our country.
More than anything else, though, our success will be claimed by who we are as a country. This is more important than ever, given the nature of the challenges that we face. Our campaign to disrupt, dismantle, and to defeat al Qaeda is part of an international effort that is necessary and just.
But this is a different kind of war. There will be no simple moment of surrender to mark the journey's end --- no armistice, no banner headline. Though we have had more success in eliminating al Qaeda leaders in recent months than in recent years, they will continue to recruit, and plot, and exploit our open society. We see that in bombs that go off in Kabul and Karachi. We see it in attempts to blow up an airliner over Detroit or an SUV in Times Square, even as these failed attacks show that pressure on networks like al Qaeda is forcing them to rely on terrorists with less time and space to train. We see the potential duration of this struggle in al Qaeda's gross distortions of Islam, their disrespect for human life, and their attempt to prey upon fear and hatred and prejudice.
So the threat will not go away soon, but let's be clear: Al Qaeda and its affiliates are small men on the wrong side of history. They lead no nation. They lead no religion. We need not give in to fear every time a terrorist tries to scare us. We should not discard our freedoms because extremists try to exploit them. We cannot succumb to division because others try to drive us apart. We are the United States of America. (Applause.) We are the United States of America, and we have repaired our union, and faced down fascism, and outlasted communism. We've gone through turmoil, we've gone through Civil War, and we have come out stronger --- and we will do so once more. (Applause.)
And I know this to be true because I see the strength and resilience of the American people. Terrorists want to scare us. New Yorkers just go about their lives unafraid. (Applause.) Extremists want a war between America and Islam, but Muslims are part of our national life, including those who serve in our United States Army. (Applause.) Adversaries want to divide us, but we are united by our support for you -- soldiers who send a clear message that this country is both the land of the free and the home of the brave. (Applause.)
You know, in an age of instant access to information, a lot of cynicism in the news, it's easy to lose perspective in a flood of pictures and the swirl of political debate. Power and influence can seem to ebb and flow. Wars and grand plans can be deemed won or lost day to day, even hour to hour. As we experience the immediacy of the image of a suffering child or the boasts of a prideful dictator, it's easy to give in to the belief sometimes that human progress has stalled --- that events are beyond our control, that change is not possible.
But this nation was founded upon a different notion. We believe, "that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." (Applause.) And that truth has bound us together, a nation populated by people from around the globe, enduring hardship and achieving greatness as one people. And that belief is as true today as it was 200 years ago. It is a belief that has been claimed by people of every race and religion in every region of the world. Can anybody doubt that this belief will be any less true --- any less powerful --- two years, two decades, or even two centuries from now?
And so a fundamental part of our strategy for our security has to be America's support for those universal rights that formed the creed of our founding. And we will promote these values above all by living them -- through our fidelity to the rule of law and our Constitution, even when it's hard; even when we're being attacked; even when we're in the midst of war.
And we will commit ourselves to forever pursuing a more perfect union. Together with our friends and allies, America will always seek a world that extends these rights so that when an individual is being silenced, we aim to be her voice. Where ideas are suppressed, we provide space for open debate. Where democratic institutions take hold, we add a wind at their back. When humanitarian disaster strikes, we extend a hand. Where human dignity is denied, America opposes poverty and is a source of opportunity. That is who we are. That is what we do.
We do so with no illusions. We understand change doesn't come quick. We understand that neither America nor any nation can dictate every outcome beyond its borders. We know that a world of mortal men and women will never be rid of oppression or evil. What we can do, what we must do, is work and reach and fight for the world that we seek -- all of us, those in uniform and those who are not.
And in preparing for today, I turned to the world --- to the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes. And reflecting on his Civil War experience, he said, and I quote, "To fight out a war you must believe in something and want something with all your might. So must you do to carry anything else to an end worth reaching." Holmes went on, "More than that, you must be willing to commit yourself to a course, perhaps a long and hard one, without being able to foresee exactly where you will come out."
America does not fight for the sake of fighting. We abhor war. As one who has never experienced the field of battle --- and I say that with humility, knowing, as General MacArthur said, "the soldier above all others prays for peace" --- we fight because we must. We fight to keep our families and communities safe. We fight for the security of our allies and partners, because America believes that we will be safer when our friends are safer; that we will be stronger when the world is more just.
So cadets, a long and hard road awaits you. You go abroad because your service is fundamental to our security back home. You go abroad as representatives of the values that this country was founded upon. And when you inevitably face setbacks --- when the fighting is fierce or a village elder is fearful; when the end that you are seeking seems uncertain --- think back to West Point.
Here, in this peaceful part of the world, you have drilled and you have studied and come of age in the footsteps of great men and women --- Americans who faced times of trial, and who even in victory could not have foreseen the America they helped to build, the world they helped to shape.
George Washington was able to free a band of patriots from the rule of an empire, but he could not have foreseen his country growing to include 50 states connecting two oceans.
[Ulysses S.] Grant was able to save a union and see the slaves freed, but he could not have foreseen just how much his country would extend full rights and opportunities to citizens of every color.
[Dwight] Eisenhower was able to see Germany surrender and a former enemy grow into an ally, but he could not have foreseen the Berlin Wall coming down without a shot being fired.
Today it is your generation that has borne a heavy burden --- soldiers, graduates of this Academy like John Meyer and Greg Ambrosia who have braved enemy fire, protected their units, carried out their missions, earned the commendation of this Army, and of a grateful nation.
From the birth of our existence, America has had a faith in the future -- a belief that where we're going is better than where we've been, even when the path ahead is uncertain. To fulfill that promise, generations of Americans have built upon the foundation of our forefathers -- finding opportunity, fighting injustice, forging a more perfect union. Our achievement would not be possible without the Long Grey Line that has sacrificed for duty, for honor, for country. (Applause.)
And years from now when you return here, when for you the shadows have grown longer, I have no doubt that you will have added your name to the book of history. I have no doubt that we will have prevailed in the struggles of our times. I have no doubt that your legacy will be an America that has emerged stronger, and a world that is more just, because we are Americans, and our destiny is never written for us, it is written by us, and we are ready to lead once more.
Thank you. May God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)
Monday, May 24, 2010 at 7:35 
A former South African naval commander, Dieter Gerhardt, jailed in 1983 for spying for the Soviet Union, said following his release in 1992 that there was an agreement, "Chalet", in which Israel would arm eight Jericho missiles with "special warheads" for South Africa. Gerhardt said that these were atomic bombs.
