On the Arrogance of Power (1966)
Senator J. William Fulbright
The attitude above all others which I feel sure is no longer valid
is the arrogance of power, the tendency
of great nations to equate power with virtue and major responsibilities with a universal
mission. The
dilemmas involved are preeminently American di lemmas, not because America has weaknesses
that
others do not have but because America is powerful as no nation has ever been before and
the
discrepancy between its power and the power of others appears to be increasing....
We are now engaged in a war to "defend freedom" in South Vietnam. Unlike the
Republic of Korea,
South Vietnam has an army which [is] without notable success and a weak, dictatorial
government which
does not command the loyalty of the South Vietn amese people. The official war aims of the
United
States Government, as I understand them, are to defeat what is regarded as North
Vietnamese
aggression, to demonstrate the futility of what the communists call "wars of national
liberation," and to
create conditions under which the South Vietnamese people will be able freely to determine
their own
future. I have not the slightest doubt of the sincerity of the President and the Vice
President and the
Secretaries of State and Defense in propounding these aims. What I do doubt_and doubt very
much_is
the ability of the United States to achieve these aims by the means being used. I do not
question the
power of our weapons and the efficiency of our logistics; I cannot say these things
delight me as the y
seem to delight some of our officials, but they are certainly impressive. What I do
question is the ability of
the United States, or France or any other Western nation, to go into a small, alien,
undeveloped Asian
nation and create stability where there is chaos, the will to fight where there is
defeatism, democracy racy
where there is no tradition of it and honest government where corruption is almost a way
of life. Our
handicap is well expressed in the pungent Chinese proverb: "In shallo w waters
dragons become the sport
of shrimps."
Early last month demonstrators in Saigon burned American jeeps, tried to assault American
soldiers, and
marched through the streets shouting "Down with the American imperialists,"
while one of the Buddhist
leaders made a speech equating the Unit ed States with the communists as a threat to South
Vietnamese
independence. Most Americans are understandably shocked ant angered to encounter such
hostility from
people who by now would be under the rule of the Viet Cong but for the sacrifice of
American lives and
money. Why, we may ask, are they so shockingly ungrateful? Surely they must know that
their very right
to parade and protest and demonstrate depends on the Americans who are defending them.
The answer, I think, is that "fatal impact" of the rich and strong on the poor
and weak. Dependent on it
though the Vietnamese are, our very strength is a reproach to their weakness, our wealth a
mockery of
their poverty, our success a reminder of their failures. What they resent is the
disruptive effect of our
strong culture upon their fragile one, an effect which we can no more avoid than a man can
help being
bigger than a child. What they fear, I think rightly, is that traditional Vietnamese
society cannot survive
the American economic and cultural impact....
The cause of our difficulties in southeast Asia is not a deficiency of power but an excess
of the wrong
kind of power which results in a feeling of impotence when it fails to achieve its desired
ends. We are still
acting like boy scouts dragging reluctant old ladies across the streets they do not want
to cross. We are
trying to remake Vietnamese society, a task which certainly cannot be accomplished by
force and which
probably cannot be accomplished by any means available to outsiders. The objective may b e
desirable,
but it is not feasible....
If America has a service to perform in the world_and I believe it has_it is in large part
the service of its
own example. In our excessive involvement in the affairs of other countries, we are not
only living off our
assets and denying our own people the proper enjoyment of their resources; we are also
denying the
world the example of a free society enjoying its freedom to the fullest. This is
regrettable indeed for a
nation that aspires to teach democracy to other nations, because, as Burke said! "E
xample is the school
of mankind, and they will learn at no other." . . .
There are many respects in which America, if it can bring itself to act with the
magnanimity and the
empathy appropriate to its size and power, can be an intelligent example to the world. We
have the
opportunity to set an example of generous understanding in our relations with China, of
practical
cooperation for peace in our relations with Russia, of reliable and respectful partnership
in our relations
with Western Europe, of material helpfulness without moral presumption in our relations
with the develop
ing nations, of abstention from the temptations of hegemony in our relations with Latin
America, and of
the all- around advantages of minding one's own business in our relations with everybody.
Most of all, we
have the opportunity to serve as an example o f democracy to the world by the way in which
we run our
own society; America, in the words of John Quincy Adams, should be "the well-wisher
to the freedom
and independence of all" but "the champion and vindicator only of her own."
. . .
If we can bring ourselves so to act, we will have overcome the dangers of the arrogance of
power. It will
involve, no doubt, the loss of certain glories, but that seems a price worth paying for
the probable rewards,
which are the happiness of America and the peace of the world.
Source: American
Civil Rights Review's Document Archive
|