Senator J. William Fulbright on the Arrogance of Power, 1966
The attitude above all others which I feel sure is no longer
valid is the arrogance of power, the tendency of great nations to equate power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.
By: Zully Arias , Imarys Bruno
