tv Ronald Reagans Tear Down This Wall Speech CSPAN October 30, 2021 6:50pm-8:01pm EDT
the speechwriter in general mcmaster has ordered me to tell the story of the speech. with the first page of the speaking copy. and first for some historical background after a portion of berlin itself with the british and french control even with east berlin and all of the surrounding east germany and with a communist regime it's important to grasp that west berlin is completely surrounded and you can see it is a little.insight east germany. again, after the war, thousands of these
germans flee the communist music regime east germany to the democratic west. how do they do this? very often they do it just by stepping across the street and then they could get on the train to cross the german territory to the west. so by 1960, one fifth of the entire population of east germany just that. they fled. so to stop the enormous exodus these germans proposed a physical barrier and moscow agreed and in the middle of the night august 13, 1961, the east germans strong barbed wire all the way around west berlin to cut it off. eventually the east germans
would replace that with blocks and after that the cinderblocks would be replaced with slabs of concrete 13 feet high. more than a quarter of a century later it remained in place encircling west berlin. it shows where the wall was cut off and sense reagan mentioned it in the speech you have to the brandenburg gate was 18th century monument that once served as a ceremonial entrance to berlin and then the berlin wall cuts it off. so that brings me to the speech itself the spring of 1987 i am a speechwriter in the reagan white house i'm told the president will speak in front of the berlin wall, he will have an audience between ten and 40000 people and he will speak for about half an hour and given the setting the subject will be
foreign-policy. that is all the guidance i got. i flew to west berlin with the security people who work out security with the westerman's members of the oppressed office and check the camera angles and i went to gather materials. first stop is where the president would speak and it's very difficult to convey how momentous the place felt. just a few feet away is the water had damaging the second world war i climbed and observation platform to look over the wall into east berlin behind the westerman modern city and on the other side of the wall color listeners, more soldiers and pedestrians, on one side life, the other side
twilight. next i went to the office of the american drinking diplomat of what present reagan should not say it east west relations should not say no bashing don't mention all there used to it by now and then i was given a ride in u.s. army helicopter over the wall and from the air it looked even worse from the ground because you can see the guard runs dog towers a killing zone or no man's land. then that evening i broke away from the american party to go to a residential suburb from west berlin were at dinner party was put on for me. dieter worked at the world bank in washington and we talked about this and told him that the american diplomat for
all the news to the berlin wall. that turned out to be incorrect me is stopped talking about it but if you asked it's very clear they hated that wall every day even our hostess made the comment if gorbachev flares serious about his talk he could come to berlin and prove it by getting rid of the wall. so i put that in my notebook immediately because i knew of ronald reagan was there he went have responded to the decency of that remark so now back in washington a draft of the speech it went to the president one weekend when he was at camp david there is something in the story there because almost always the speech we go out to staffing before it went to the president because the speech writers could persuade the president to see the speech before it went out to
staffing. the following monday the picture shows this monday —- this meeting they met at the oval office with the president and the president singled out after tearing down the wall or something he particularly wanted to say. not means to come down a lot on a want to say so then the speech went out to staffing for the three weeks until the president delivered at the national security council and state department opposed it and try to stop it in part by submitting an alternative draft after not another meeting the phrase tear down the wall. comment was asked out in the memorandum to : powell the number two on national security council at that time you will see the call the speech mediocre and a missed
opportunity. in attending an economic summit before going to west berlin, getting on air force one there was yet another alternative draft and in west berlin on the way to the wall i heard this from the deputy chief of staff that was in with the president ronald reagan explained he would deliver the speech as written and then he said the boys estate will call me for this but it's the right thing to do and that is the story of the speech ronald reagan delivered on june 12th. >> there is one sign the soviets would make that would be on mistake about to events dramatically the cause of freedom and peace. general secretary gorbachev , if you seek peace, if you
seek prosperity for the soviet union and eastern europe, if you seek liberalization, come here to this gate. mr. gorbachev, open this gate. [cheers and applause] mr. gorbachev, mr. gorbachev, tr down this wall. [cheers and applause] >> the fly and ceo of radio free europe and liberty serving during the bush administration on the national security council the office of
secretary of defense holding degrees from american university and georgetown. and with university of texas at austin during the bush administration he served as the state department and the national security council and from stanford and the undergraduate hr mcmaster serving at the white house national security advisor to president trump and in the united states army where he rose to general and working on dereliction of duty last year he published battleground the fight to defend the free world fellow at the hoover institution holding an undergraduate degree from the united states military academy and doctorate from the university of north carolina at chapel hill. jamie and hr, thank you for
joining us jamie will set the scene on his first trip to germany 1978. make it visited the site where 16 years earlier an instrument was shot while to the no man's land the former california governor and delegation also introduced berlin from what they saw under east german communism. between 1978 when ronald reagan first visited the wall in 1987 when he spoke in front of the wall changed? to use the soviet time out of the correlation of forces then shifted? >> thank you for having me at the reagan institute because i was struck when i was reading
general mcmasters essays you have done an amazing job. and with that development to keep that speech alive. thank you for that and future generations can understand the history better. so when i was writing the essay and looking at that period, what struck me was how much the german public had suffered during that period as decades past and germans especially west berliners moved well beyond the establishment of the wall which happens almost overnight in some neighborhoods and i'm speaking from berlin. so what happened very suddenly, family and friends were not prepared for it. somewhere thrust into a
situation it became difficult to interact quickly and it took longer. people as you noted some their lives into their own hands and took the risk to go to the best and for my understanding of german history, as time went on people became more and more depressed and pessimistic about the potential for change so my 1987 you also had success of german government which some of the policies gave the indication that perhaps they doubted that change would be simple and click and had pursued various types of engagement with east germany and the soviet union. often to the consternation of the us administration. so reagan's arrival came at the moment where germans , especially west germans needed a shot in the arm and that encouragement that change was still possible and that help should be maintained for a different future for germany so the stars align in that
respect for the timing. >> so useful to state department official who i thought and berlin that i 1987 folks in germany election europe natalie follows reagan that mikhail gorbachev. by 1987 it's clear the soviet union is stagnating emanating 87 with a resurgence and everyone in the world consider including the germans the europeans gorbachev is the more the biggest figure how can that have been? >> i think it has everything to do with confidence. confidence in our democratic form of governance and who we are as a people and in the trans-atlantic relationship and among the free states of
europe time. when i do with my essay is to make that analogy the point we're making is that we can regain our confidence in who we are as a people and we can do it and was some clarity. >> so the comments from the state department in early speech draft gives a flavor of their thinking. that you provide a much more extensive overview of the speech draft to quote the state department it doesn't fine with the germans were not sentimental people that seems silly for that must come out west germans do not want to
see east germans insulted and concrete ideas not sentimental fluff good guy versus bad guy. >> okay so the state department did not like that speech. >> i have included bits and pieces that are highly intelligent very experienced people not that the apartment to my mind at the time. what were they thinking? >> they were reflecting the executive opinion of the day but this is where it brings out the strategic genius that most of the conventional foreign-policy wisdom of the day has seen the cold war primarily as a great power contest and the united states
and they saw the job was largely managing that at the same time to be there and almost perpetuity as permanent features on the geopolitical landscape and reagan you know very well how you channeled his speech and ideas, he reversed that is that was primarily about ideas with two-car for countries to embody those. so in terms of idea and communism and democracy against the dictatorship he also fought the cold war for individual people and those living behind the iron curtain and with the sentiments until the dinner party and then with
that foreign-policy establishment. and we can speak to the people behind the iron curtain and then to channel their voices. and then to say no this is not sentimental fluff clear not worried about it and then speaking to the heart of the german people and heart of the soviet people. >> does anybody feel any urge quick. >> you in the national security council. there was an event to mark the h anniversary for the fall of the berlin wall and you need to much prompting a very
sophisticated scholar of diplomacy at the speech work out does not prove it is the right decision to get it. george schultz among other side might that gorbachev and a tight spot and then you try to work with the americans and the president comes along and challenges you. so stick up for the nsc to the objection to the speech 30 years ago. you are right in the middle of berlin for those who forgot the speech or don't care to remember but come in and stick up for these guys. >> is the process is important because you want to give the president a broad range of views but the national security advisor you are the only person in the united
states government in the form policy national security arena has the president has the only client and you get the president a say so it is important you spend time with the president as you did, peter on these important speeches. i had a great relationship with those in the white house and we work together coming upon a number speeches pretty early and then to ensure that those got to the president early so he could put his imprint on it. i think if you look at the warsaw speech for example there are echoes of the berlin speech and that speech it is a messy and important aspect of the job to help the president craft speeches that allows him to first of all decide on his
foreign-policy agenda but then importantly to make it public because it's important the american people support these initiatives but often times the president realize enough especially if there is more domestic focus that they underestimate the degree to which those overseas hang on every single word of a presidential speech. and this is what you got so right is that speech spoke to an international audience in a profound way. >> this is to step in and clear one thing. i wrote it and that is true but that was 100 percent ronald reagan it would have written up anybody else i can
tell you that because i then worked for vice president bush i never would've written for him only reagan alone would have insisted on delivering the speech as he had seen it over the other objections vice president bush and other policy speech, the first question he would always ask when a draft a form policy speech has state approved of this? so listen to the story. all three of you that jamie next. staying with ronald reagan for a moment. this is a story told to me by your predecessor the first national security advisor the year is 1977 now reagan is a former governor he just lost the nomination to gerald ford. he is playing close it tension and take our breaks him on
world affairs and reagan said would you like to hear mike. the cold war? than ronald reagan did putr this down in writing and quoting from him, this is reagan speaking some people think i'm simplistic but there is a difference between being simple and being simplistic might. about the cold war is that we went and they lose. how do you operationalize that? here is richard nixon and détente and then warning against an ordinance fear of communism and then turned it upside down. now that i'm older field a little risky to me.
>> i am a big fan of the approach obviously with radio free europe i think that moral clarity of reagan is incredibly essential upon hearing and ultimately they are fearful of their citizens. and when they realize that democracies are resilient and united and up to the task that strikes fear into the heart of every authoritarian leader and ultimately that is what reagan understood and why the speech in terms of letter president says in a setting like this, that is one thing with the moral clarity and the vision then you can debate tactic in the diplomacy and negotiation which obviously reagan engaged in extensively that one brief comment on the
interagency process for the conversation happening earlier and i wrote my share speeches with him that what i found in all policy jobs is that far too many people in the government and national security apparatus lose sight of ultimately they work for ny whether the president or senator in that position ultimately it is their voice public trust their confidence and mentors reason and a lot of that is necessary to box in the principles to move those through a speech writing process in a forget fundamentally where the boxes vision is and the instincts
and i had many personal experiences in my short time nsc and working in the senate where we would debate for hours speech and then put in front of your boss and he would quickly resolve all of the issues because it wasn't even a question for them to what i have read of your accounts it seems like you're speech is one of those experiences. >> so where were you when i needed you 34 years ago? so now to set the scene now little more than two years after he delivers a speech in the each german city and east german city there are prayer services followed by small peaceful demonstrations i am compressing a complicated story but they flow and spread across the country and by early november a demonstration of more than 100,000 is marching in east berlin this
brings us to the night in 1989 when there is an emergency session and then they decide to change the rules regarding border crossings one member goes out to brief the person gets it wrong some small technical change they think that will take place sometime that he gets from and a reporter says wait do you mean all border control has ended immediately and the number thinks and says yes this is on television and within minutes literally east germans came streaming to the four checkpoints of the berlin wall east german guards have no idea what's going on they have not received the orders and it is a tense moment and they began shouting car horns are
honking and the guards realize they have two choices use force or open the gates in the open the gates and the berlin wall ceased to function. again, reagan speaks june 121987 and then it falls november 91889 with those two events with a connected and anyway. >> absolutely. i think we can trace a direct cause-and-effect i'm you don't want to take this too far obviously the people live germany deserve tremendous credit for their own agency and then those fascinating historical accidents of miscommunication and communist bureaucrats. >> that had to do circumstances even come about
the german people felt they could demand their homes freedom because if you look at the history of the cold war previous times when eastern citizens try to claim their freedom from their overlords so the causality i would draw is that president reagan gave voice to the hopes and the pressures and change that correlation of forces so that the german people can take advantage of the opportunity when it presented itself. >> and one other thing about that and it does get to the role of gorbachev and expertise so the reasoning can come down peacefully november 89 because of what gorbachev did not do. he didn't set a doctrine and then going back to the most
important parts of tear down this wall when reagan says mr. gorbachev, tear down this wall he directed that to gorbachev rather than going into the air hoping it will come down so we offered a discussion on form policy expertise that speech was being written which member of the united states government new gorbachev that were who spent more time with gorbachev and any other american? ronald reagan that is why he knew from his countless hours after the reykjavík summit he had intuitive sense that i can push him further and demanded him to tear down the wall it wasn't going to cause the mushroom cloud were world war iii had that sense spending more time and all the criminologist and cia to also
stretch the handout so a lot of that was facilitated with that balance of pressure and that helps to create the circumstances of november 89 for people to claim their own freedom. >> excuse me at a how to do this in a zoom call that would like to for being forward and kiss you on the forehead of course you are right he knew that he could take it. so let me talk about meeting mikhail gorbachev this was 16 years ago now that one of the things he did a former leader of the great communist power becomes a capitalist he comes to the united states and gives a talk and mike reagan and
tell hearings for me to go backstage to meet gorbachev and i could see the translator talking and telling him i had written that speech and gorbachev laughed and then he explained through his translator this is just a piece of theater. he knew ronald reagan and he cannot resist a good line but it made no difference to them in moscow at all. stick up for him in the speech did make a difference. >> maybe it doesn't matter if it made a difference to him that it made a difference to germans and east germans in particular. and that calvary on the border as a caption of east germany west germany november 1989 on
that day near where martin luther translated the bible into german the birthplace of times this is where the calvary troopers went from one moment moment staring down the guards to the next moment seeing the gates thrown open and then tens of thousands i saw direct correlation back to the resolve that president reagan and demonstrated by affecting a renaissance in our military in the 1980s and demonstrated our resolve as you said his words that hey, we went and they lose. i felt a direct correlation
and i got to witness firsthand in west germany. >> i will try one more time to find somebody. maybe i'm way over doing this. >> but at the time i remember bristling that it was ignored because it didn't get covered that it was just treated the way the password treat anything. nothing special. and then the wall fell and now all of a sudden it sounds retrospectively prophetic that the time is just a speech. >> some klobuchar's views may have been encased in a think i mentioned this and something
you have written that i think us government actually beat the soviets in advance about the line. >> . >> it made things much more difficult in poland are chapters of ocular hungary. when it became clear the citizens of the countries had enough. and going to rise up and then to be too much for the communist client government to
prevent from toppling them that is what the playbook had been for decades previously. >> always the red army and then we they were done essentially. and then even the strengthening of the public perception of germany and in berlin in the east that is what made it difficult and didn't even have an option at that point. but then the administration
they think gorbachev had his hands tied. >> lessons for today. >> he is seated in berlin as we speak to something of a disappointment really. united germany is not the largest economy in europe yet despite significant progress to play a leading role many german policymakers continue to resist the responsibility that comes with such power so we had that celebration of reunification. and then there is the moment from the ninth symphony that
would be free and prosperous and then come to a continent. >> the german part of the story it relates to germany being tortured by the pre- cold war history and uncertain of its footing and unwilling to be provocative and policy thinking there is also the story to be honest about the divisions that exist in society i'm talking to you from the spelling i had been living but i was in westmoreland a few weeks ago at dinner and met some new people from west period
talking to anyone about where we lived was another world to as a part of berlin they don't and venture into. they refer to it as the soviet zone. >> even now? >> yes. even now. these are people around the time of 89 children that spend a significant part of the lives so politics remain divided in the way that east germans vote in the far right parties for instance so a lot of that divided legacy lives on in the fundamental question when it comes to german leadership in german foreign policy is whether the next generation we will see this after the september election is to step up and move on beyond the roadwork to legacy the holocaust legacies and
move beyond the divisions of the cold war era and assume that leadership mantle which to be honest i spent a lot of time in prague and other parts of europe they are looking to them to play take that leadership role take a stand for values to pursue a foreign-policy whether russia or china and matches significant history and the benefits they have achieved from german reunification. that is a big open session in german society. >> so how do we evaluate the american effort in europe during the cold war?
for decades begins a tremendous and runs through george h.w. bush the cold war is global there is vietnam and korea europe is at the center of the enemy have a long bipartisan effort a struggle as kennedy calls it and now 34 years later europe and the united states are drifting apart there's a president over there talking about coming together on climate change. forgive me. i don't want to become partisan, that the soviet union would have fallen and then to waste time and money and the europeans are european they just clung to us for those decades because we are protecting them against the soviets. is just disappointing.
>> i share a lot of concerns and opinions trying to stand up for trans-atlantic values and of course it even goes beyond those values of european and american people so the research is that history but then with soviet journey. that they need to learn those lessons because they did talk about american policy things i want to highlight to pick up on general mcmaster how important the expansion was in all the pressures after world war ii to retreat again beyond the shores there was peace
dividend but once we saw the emerging threat of soviet communism so building up the military of soviet aggression but to strengthen his diplomacy as of the world most military. see you can use with the diplomatic solution but also to the point of the shared values of the united states is leading the way for the atlantic on —- atlantis surgical back to washington may drag you into european wars they don't want. and for truman and eisenhower that we do need to enter into
the nato that is an asymmetric strength to the united states against those adversaries or with western european governments and that's why we can refer to the most successful treaty alliance. because it enabled ray reagan's vision because he has that peaceful victory. >> it's not the soviet union anymore and china is harvey european threat as well but to keep an eye on the shared history and shared values we are a lot better together than when we are part. >> this is a competition of wealth a competition between free and open society and closed authoritarian systems
in the speech that has clarity to the competition is what we need today i'm encouraged by the fact that the biden administration has acknowledged at its base it is an ideological competition with the chinese communist party but we have to back data. is that the fact the budget of the defense budget because some people from the biden administration our policies have become too militarized what we need is what will says is the integration of all instruments of national power and efforts of like minded partners to prevail. of course we do need more diplomacy the has to be more than a better atmosphere in berlin or paris our allies have to step up and germany has been a week week in connection with the negotiation of the comprehensive investment from the european parliament but
also with the competition with puritans kremlin and the kremlin sustained campaign of political a version. that is effective in germany like and then an example and with power over germany's economy. >> that china. you are in the white house. you are national security advisor you have the top job in the institution that brings together military and diplomatic initiatives to the united states at the moment at the moment when the whole country partly because the
donald trump and president xi though whole country is realizing that china will not be a friend. we are in for something new "berlin on —- the berlin wall is an analogy for the great firewall of china the combination of laws and technology to isolate the realm of the chinese communist party from outside influence". all kinds of things are different what all the russians have ever got from us the chinese are invested in silicon valley up and down. >> a lot of things are different. that you are arguing there is something central to the relationship of china and is
not that different from the relationship of the struggle of the soviet union. is that correct? >> absolutely you can see that. this is an ideological competition and also that requires a high degree of clarity. so the phrase that comes to mind if i can paraphrase president xi tear down the firewall or we should do our best to get around it and this is watching me does for us every day is to trade to reach the press people who are not permitted to access a wide range of source of information so they have an opportunity to think differently. and to say earlier the authoritarians are touchy and sensitive. [laughter] and you can see this with the chinese communist party. i think there is a tremendous opportunity for us to use the
clarity from the berlin speech to communicate much more effectively with the chinese communist party. the best means to do so is to bypass the great firewall. >> everybody should read all three essays that reagan center differences not about weapons that liberty is an important reminder to differentiate the soviet union from the west these are supposed and has been neglected by recent us administrations us negotiators have been quick whether russia or iran and the obama administration with the attempts to do so under the trump administration with north korea. the overall point is that
their recent administrations have placed too much emphasis on diplomatic cooperation and too little time clarity. do i have that right quick. >> yes. especially with nuclear weapons involved, there is a need to negotiate even with authoritarians. we cannot help and aspire to a quick regime change but there's obviously the way they did it even speaking to the chopper others leaders there was no problem talking about what was at stake and the cruelty and the hollowness of what that regime represented. and that has been missing in recent administrations and it's a challenge in europe and
it is fundamentally part of the problem is they try to deal with the russia that is headed and incredibly sense of direction cracking down what they have done the last few days trying to put my own organization outside of your there for the last 30 years freezing our bank accounts, and then arrest headed in that direction is highly likely to last out to neighbors building forces on the ukrainian border. there is very little interest in most parts of europe to speak speak openly and frankly what is at stake with either of those two powers run a moral perspective and you still care specially in
germany that we know they have a lot of problems on the other hand we have to do business with them and we need their investment certain segments of our economy are and engagement with them and a lot of that european mindset has not move beyond that that is a significant problem now but how does the us has framed the conflict correctly to highlight the situation correctly from a moral and economic perspective, how do you bring allies along feel they have the luxury to remain neutral in this competition is the
fundamental challenge and we can start with different approaches from the trump administration on that as well. >> the three of you convinced me that it was pretty well under reagan with frank simplicity and so forth so if it works so well under reagan i will grant jamie's argument we haven't seen that moral clarity so there is a question i will hit you with in a moment that donald trump, god bless him in my opinion he set the speeches including in warsaw that hr mentioned. then walked away from the lectern and never behaved as if he had given those.
why is it that reagan's example it works why is it so hard to follow? >> it is a puzzle but old habits die hard. but we do have to be careful as we look back at reagan and his successes from the hindsight of course it worked out it's so simple because between that wasn't really clear reagan had confidence that he had a lot of criticism because he was trying very risky things and challenging a lot of wisdom and it was somewhat different from the russia that we face today especially on the nucleoside and on the economic side but went to take away china
especially remember our adversary is the chinese communist party but they are central allies they haven't lived under multiparty democracy is a only with under the surveillance state they don't want to be told how may babies they can or cannot have the soviet people just like that would drive a wedge and then we said we're on your side we are your allies. we need to recapture that more directly to the chinese people
that speaking to that military buildup at the same time he said mr. gorbachev turned down the wall reagan and schultz were still behind the scenes talking about the nuclear forces treaty. it is still historically unprecedented several policy experts will say that is a way to do the policy or you get tough are you speaking single terms like tear down this wall you can do both of those together those of the most effective when you do them together so in the case we when they lose but not the one that destroys the soviet union
but that they could do that with that diplomacy as long as it was backed up by military strength and moral clarity. >> the last question about what it means so it is a reminder that self-respect foundational to the competition with the chinese communist party. "you are a big shot sophisticated thinker but yet you are like reagan that you keep coming back to the simple point all right harley cheap self-respect as a nation we are so polarized when half the
country thinks your former boss should be in jail the other half thinks joe biden stole the election we have one part of the country watching msnbc the other part sitting on fox news all day. things were rougher politically during the reagan years and is now remembered. but it was not like this. so self-respect and that's why the reagan institute is such an important organization. all of us in the hoover institution were all working this space so we have to make a concerted effort to rebuild our confidence who we are as a people and in our democratic institutions and pencil and processes. i think we can do that. i think what we can do is demand more from political leaders too often are compromising principles to score points.
but we cannot wait for them either we have to you are part to recognize that great promise of america and to celebrate the fact that we have a say in how we are governed. i don't think the chinese people or anyone is culturally predisposed to not want to say and how they are governed we should celebrate we have freedom of speech and freedom of expression and we need to encourage institutions to reform themselves. the fourth estate is one of those and has some work to do. but ultimately the number one priority is the education particularly it is our history as i'm so excited to participate in this discussion. because when you learn the history of the reagan years , you see the contrast between the carter malaise and a
crisis of confidence in the seventies. remember stagflation and the lost more in vietnam our confidence was shaken. but that doesn't have to remain permanent that was not a permanent condition. we can change it and we have to educator sold or we educate ourselves about the great promise of our republic and recognize as the founders did it requires constant nurturing literature our confidence. >> two final questions. we are at one hours to give is one sentence reply if you can i will give you two quotations. james hoagland at the "washington post" history is
likely to record the child tear down the wall as a meaningless talked"quotation number two at the time was a lutheran pastor and democracy advocate insight east germany later went to become on to be present every unified germany. speaking a couple of years ago seeking the right words at the right time in the right place. "who is right? >> i thought it would be a little bit of a closer call. >> he had the strategic imagination without the iron curtain. >> and then to make it
unanimous. >> emphasize words and deeds and talk about the military strength and those efforts and tear down the wall speech as well as sustained efforts with nuclear weapons so it is the integration of policy with those powerful words. >> c would have to deal with the hoover institution with hr as my colleagues? >> they have to them using the term and is smack dab in the middle of the university and tens of millions of people with radio free europe so
imagine someone one dozen years or more after ronald reagan delivered the speech give me two sentences why we are still talking about that speech 34 years later one thing they need to remember. >> it is a tall order but it change the lives of millions because i do think it was that powerful and the moral clarity
to pay a key role is difficult to explain i watched it on tv and had a powerful way to shape my career so we need to bring people to berlin that people need to see and walk past the gate where the speech was given talk to berliners and then to see that firsthand the most powerful way to learn about how important the speech was. >> two things. that young people should learn from the speech and from the cold war is the arc of history does not have the free and open society we have to compete effectively. >> .
>> and then to compete effectively so history should teach us that america is a force worker good in the world. we are not follis as well as the ideological movement behind a new sentiment toward isolationism. that's a student sought to take away. that we have to compete and be confident in america's role in the world. >> so we need to teach this history about the holocaust of the virtually wicked barbarous things they are capable of doing with each other and if you look at the soviet
communism, we should not forget. >> i want to quote one of my favorite lines from the speech, as long as this was permitted to stand not the german question alone but the question of freedom for all mankind and with the tyranny we are reminded the question for freedom of all mankind is a present-day challenge for students and young people today. >> jamie five from radio free europe and radio liberty, thank you general hr mcmaster here at the hoover institution and the author of battleground, thank you. william bowden from the university of texas and the author of the forthcoming book titled. >> the peacemaker.
>> i like that. >> published sometime december or january. >> thank you. for uncommon knowledge the hoover institution and fox nation and the ronald reagan institute, iam peter robinson. >> individual who serves as vice president must be qualified to be president. second, the individual who serves as vice president of the united states, must be one who shares the views of the president on the critical issues of foreign-policy and national defense and then to play the role to keep peace. third and then at this
particular time when we have the executive in the hands of one party and the congress controlled by another party, it is vital the vice president of the united states can work for approval for those that we consider for the national interest. it was this criteria when we ponder this decision last night and early this morning and that means the three criteria. and serving 25 years of a distinction.
[applause] earning the respect both democrats and republicans and with those policies that have he's an honor with a strong national defense of this country that we are having these in the world. above all, he is a man with the responsibilities of the great office that i hold , should fall upon him has been in the case with other vice president in our history, we could all say the leadership of america is in good hands. [applause]. . . .