Transcript of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair at the 2008 Atlantic Council Awards Dinner.

Colin Powell: Thank you very much. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. Well, first of all, let me say how pleased I am to be back with the Atlantic Council family. And I offer my congratulations to all the honorees this evening.

My task this evening is a very direct and short one. And that is to introduce the introducer of the next honoree. I have always admired leaders who face reality and don’t turn away from that reality. I’ve always admired leaders who have moral and physical courage. I’ve always admired leaders who have a vision, know where they want to go, and are prepared to lead followers in that direction.

The gentleman that I’m about to introduce is such a leader. He is a man who is committed to the Atlantic Community. He is a man who has served his nation and his people so well. He is a man who has been a great friend to the United States of America in times of need. And he is a man I am very proud to call a dear friend. Ladies and Gentlemen: former President of Spain, José María Aznar.

José María Aznar: Thank you very much, Colin, for your kind words. I appreciate it very much. I want to state my respect, consideration, friendship, and admiration for Colin Powell.

Ladies and gentlemen, it is a pleasure for me to be here to introduce one of the great world leaders and above all a wonderful person. When we first met, it seemed unlikely that we would become friends. Firstly, he was a life-long leftist; all my life, I have been a conservative. He was outspoken; I was known for being silent and reserved. He was trying find fame as a rock star; my musical skills have a lot of room for improvement. But against all odds we have developed a real friendship throughout the years.

We soon realized that we share the same values, that we have a similar vision of the world, that we believe in the importance of remaining true to your word. We have shared moments of hope and moments of uncertainty. We always act according to what we believe is right – true to our conscience and responsibilities.

The person I am here to introduce has never lost his sense of humor and optimism. And we have gone through our difficult moments. The best comment you can make about his ten years in office is that when he stepped down, his country was in a much healthier situation. He modernized his own political party, preparing it to face the challenges ahead. He revamped the economy. He worked successfully for his vision of Europe. Dynamic and open, loyal to the real bond that unites us across the Atlantic: democracy, individual freedom, human rights, and the rule of law. We share an idea of Europe: a free Europe, with an open economy, willing and able to take on responsibility with its Atlantic friends. And he joins his allies to defend those values. I have always admired his dedication and hard work.

Once in office, he did something that had not been seen for the last 200 years: he found time to increase his family. Something that is no easy task. Something that his colleagues around the world witnessed with great admiration. Nonetheless, I must say that something was running in his favor. He is married to a woman of character, intelligent, courageous, and devoted to her family. That may be one of the only two obvious things we have in common. The second would be that we belong to a very exclusive club. The one integrated by those who stepped down from power voluntarily. It’s true.

Now, he has been given the difficult task of representing the international community in its effort to secure peace in the Middle East. I could not think of a more suitable person for the job. I am sure that he believes that freedom is for everyone and that peace should be built upon the basis of respect for human rights and mutual tolerance. And, as Pope Benedict XVI has recently reminded us here in Washington, he believes that freedom is ever new. It is a challenge held out to each generation and it must constantly be won over, the cause of good.

The person I am talking about will also be devoting his future work to promote the understanding, a most major phase, a real challenge in today’s world in which freedom, democracy and tolerance will only prevail if we win the battle of global balance and ideas. Therefore, on behalf of the Atlantic Council, it is a great honor for me to introduce you to my good and unlikely friend, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr. Tony Blair. Award for Distinguished International Leadership. Thank you very much.

Tony Blair: Thank you first of all to my old friend — and dare I say, comrade — José María, who is actually one of the people I came to like most and admire most in politics. He was a wonderful President of Spain and he did so much for his country and it’s a tremendous privilege for him to present this award to me tonight, José María, thank you. Thank you very much.

He’s also incidentally someone whose friendship I tested to the uttermost in the following circumstances. When we had the Northern Ireland peace negotiation, I actually had arranged to go with my family to spend some time with José María and his wonderful wife, Ana, and their family. And we were supposed to conclude the negotiation on a Wednesday so I sent my family on ahead. That included three adolescent children and my mother-in-law. I finally arrived unfortunately on the Friday night. Now I went into José María’s home and there he was, deep in conversation with my mother-in-law, who said to me, “It’s all right.” She said, “You don’t need to turn up. We’ve sorted it all out.” “Sort out what?” I said. She said “Oh, Gibraltar.”

The transatlantic alliance is, of course, a product of historical connection, culture, language and tradition. But most of all it is an alliance of belief, of shared values, of a common outlook not just about nations and their common interest but about humanity and its common destiny. Out of the travails of the twentieth century, the alliance drew its history and its strength. In the fight against fascism, and communism, it confronted and defeated totalitarian ideology. Millions of our citizens died for the victory. Through their sacrifice, we gained our freedom.

More than that, we came to a profound understanding about what it is to be free. We realised through the pain and suffering, the difference between deferring to those in power and deciding who they are; between the rule of law and the caprice of dictatorship; between the right to speak out and the silence of the fearful.

Now with those twentieth century battles over, it is tempting to think that this alliance has served its purpose. But here is the important point about it. It was never, and is not now, an alliance only of interests. It was and is an alliance of conviction. We, in the West, don’t own the idea of freedom. We didn’t fight for it because of the happenstance of birth in Europe or America. It is there, in the DNA of humankind. It is universal in nature and appeal. We developed it but we didn’t invent it.

Now is the time to stand up for it. If we want our values to govern the twenty first century, we must combine hard and soft power. We must show unhesitating resolution in the face of threats to our security; and we must show that our values are indeed universal, that they encompass not only freedom but justice, and not for us alone but for the world as a whole. We must show these values are global. And build alliances accordingly, starting with the renewal of our own. And we need to do it with energy and urgency. In the Middle East this is time critical. We must act now.

Two things I now perceive more clearly than in office. The first is: the fundamental shift of the centre of gravity, politically and economically, to the East; to China and of course India, but more broadly to the Middle and Far Eastern nations.

This evening I will focus elsewhere, but suffice it to say that we are still, in the West, not in the state of comprehension or analysis we need to be, fully to grasp this shift. China and India together will over the coming decades industrialise on a scale, and at a pace, the world has never seen before. In China especially, the implications are huge. Whatever the present controversies, a strong strategic relationship with it is vital; as it is with India. We are so much better able to fashion the terms of such a relationship if we do it in unison. That alone would justify and re-justify our alliance.

This is a challenge of diplomacy and statesmanship of one kind.

The other challenge arises from the security threat that occupied so much of the last years of my premiership. Today, as we meet, our armed forces face the prospect of a continuing campaign in Afghanistan and Iraq. I hope one thing unites us all. Whatever the debate about the decisions that brought us to these countries, there should be no debate about the magnificent and sustained heroism of our armed forces. British and American troops and the forces of other allied nations deserve our full support and our gratitude.

But this struggle is not limited to those fields of conflict. Out in the Middle East, it is there in the activities of Hezbollah in Lebanon, of Hamas in Palestine; it is played out in the street of Arab opinion every day. It has spread across the world. More than a score of nations have suffered terror attacks in the last year, still more have foiled them. They do not include only the usual list, but Thailand, Nigeria, China itself.

In the Middle East, the ideology that drives the extremism is not abating. The Annual Arab Public Opinion survey published last week was not striking simply for its specific findings – but for its overall picture. The basic ideological thrust of the extremists has an impact way beyond the small number of those prepared to engage in terror. In sum, it shows an alarming number of people who buy the view that Islam is under attack from the West; the leaders to support are those like Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad who are perceived to take on the West; and there is a contrast between Governments and their people that is stark.

The extremism is a tiny minority activity; the ideas, prejudices and sentiments that drive it, are not. The truth is that the roots of this global ideology are deep, far deeper than I first thought in the aftermath of September 11.

I believe the eventual outcome is not in doubt. But it is possible, dangerously, to underestimate the size of this challenge. And it is possible completely to misunderstand its origins.

This global ideology is based on a total perversion of the true faith of Islam. Its revolutionary rhetoric and attachment to so-called liberation movements is a sham designed to hide its profoundly reactionary and regressive character. It is totalitarian in nature and compromising with it will lead not to peace but to a ratcheting up of demands, none of which are remotely tolerable.

But it plays cleverly on the insecurities and uncertainty deep within Islam. It speaks to a sense that the reason for its problems is not to be found within, but as victims of outside aggression.

So today the issue hangs in the balance. The Middle East is without doubt a region in transition; but in which direction will it travel?

Like it or not, we are part of the struggle. Drawn into it, Europe and America must hold together and hold firm. Not simply for our own sake, but for that of our allies within Islam. If we do not show heart, why should they?

If they don’t see our resolve, how much more fragile is theirs?

So how is this battle won?

We have to recognise that though the circumstances and conflicts of the twentieth century are very different from ours, nonetheless, one thing remains true in any time and for all time: that if under attack, there is no choice but to defend, with a vigour, determination and will, superior to those attacking us. Our opponents today think we lack this will. Indeed they are counting on it. They think that if they make the struggle long enough and savage enough, we will eventually lose heart, and our will fade. They are fanatics but they have, unfortunately, the dedication that accompanies fanaticism.

We cannot permit this to happen. Where we are confronted, we confront. We stand up. And we do so for as long as it takes. This ideology now has a nation, Iran, that seeks to put itself at the head of extreme Islam. They need to know what we say, we mean and, if necessary, will do.

If we exhibit this attitude, peace is more likely; because they will not miscalculate or misread our character. But if they think us weak, they will fight all the harder and risk all the more.

They need to see our belief. We should not apologise for our values, but wear them with pride, proclaim their virtues loudly; show confidence; ridicule the notion that when people choose freedom this is somehow provocation to terror; and do so together, one alliance.

This struggle did not begin on September 11th 2001. It isn’t the fault of President Bush, of Israel, or of Western policy. The idea that we suppress Muslims in the West is utterly absurd. There is more religious freedom for Islam in London than in many Muslim countries.

You can argue about the rights and wrongs of the military invasion of Iraq or Afghanistan, but to allow for a single instant that this action justifies not simply terrorism but the idea that the West is innately hostile to Islam, only has to be contemplated, rationally, momentarily, for its nonsense to be manifest. We get rid of two brutal dictatorships; put in place a UN led democratic process; plus billions of dollars in aid: Where exactly is the hostility to Islam? And the only reason our troops are forced to stay is because of terror attacks carried out by this ideology in defiance of the democratically expressed wishes of the Muslim people of both countries.

And if it is hard and bloody, how bizarre to blame the allied forces, there under a UN mandate and who are trying to keep the peace, rather than those using terror to disturb it.

Yet this paradigm that it is ‘our’ fault that this terror threat is with us, has infiltrated a large part of Middle Eastern public opinion and actually influences significantly a large part of our own. It has to be taken on.

And here is the good news. The same poll shows most Muslims want peace. Most support a two state solution in Israel and Palestine. The modern minded rulers of the successful Arab economies are also admired. People in Iran don’t hate America even if its leader does. Go beneath the surface and there are allies out in the region and within Islam; people who believe strongly in their faith, but know that the twenty first century is not about civilisations in combat but in alliance. In other words people are open to persuasion.

And here is the point. To win this struggle, we must be prepared to confront; but we must also be prepared to persuade.

This is a battle that can take a military or security form. But it can’t be won by military or security means alone. It is a battle of ideas. To win, we must persuade people of what we stand for and why; and we must do so in a way that answers their concerns as well as our own.

We believe in freedom and democracy. We also believe in justice. We believe in equality. We believe in a fair chance for all, in opportunity that goes beyond an elite and stretches down into the core of society. That, after all, is the American dream; free not just in politics but free to achieve, to fulfil your ambition by your own efforts and hard work, to make something of yourself, to give your children a better start than you had.

We believe in freedom and democracy. We also believe in justice. We believe in equality. We believe in a fair chance for all, in opportunity that goes beyond an elite and stretches down into the core of society. That, after all, is the American dream; free not just in politics but free to achieve, to fulfil your ambition by your own efforts and hard work, to make something of yourself, to give your children a better start than you had.

To win this battle, we must demonstrate these values too. That is why the Middle East peace process matters. It is the litmus test of our sincerity. We should not in any way dilute our commitment to Israel’s security. We simply have to show equal commitment to justice for the Palestinians.

In the coming months, we have a chance to put it on a path to peace. It will require Israel to do more to lift the burden of occupation and give the Palestinians a sense that a state is possible. It will require the Palestinians to do more to get the robust capability on security to give the Israelis a sense that a state is permissible. It will require a different and better strategy for Gaza. And it will require a relentless, insistent focus on the issues, from the U.S. and the international community, macro and micro managing it as necessary, to get the job done. President Bush and Secretary Rice have made that commitment. This can be done. It has to be done. It is not optional. It is mandatory for success.

The origin of this extremism does not lie in this dispute; but a major part of defeating it, lies in its resolution.

Then, wider than this, we have to work with the modern and moderate voices within Islam to help them counter the extremism and show how faith in Islam is supremely consistent with engagement in the twenty first century, economically, politically, and culturally. There is a vast amount of toil and time and energy to be expended in building bridges, educating each other about the other, creating the civic and social networks of reconciliation.

I would go further still.

In Africa, we have a cause of justice which cries out to be pursued; one that is, at the same time, a moral imperative and a strategic investment; one that needs the attention of East and West. In climate change, we have an issue that demonstrates that justice is also part of the compact of responsibility between this generation and those of the future.

My argument is therefore this. The struggle can be won. But it can only be won by a strategy big enough and comprehensive enough to remove the roots as well as the branches. The battle will, in the end, be won within Islam. But only if we show that our values are theirs also.

The problem with so much of Western politics is that the argument is posed as one between the advocates of hard power and soft power, when the reality is, we need both.

This is where America and Europe, united, should act. America has to reach out. Europe has to stand up. Not a single one of the global challenges facing us today is more easily capable of solution, if we are apart; if we let the small irritants obscure the fundamental verities; if we allow ourselves to be assailed by doubt about the value of our partnership, rather than affirm, albeit self-critically, its strengths.

We need now a powerful revival of our alliance. In the world so rapidly changing around us, we cannot take a narrow view of our interests or a short-sighted view of our destiny. We can’t afford to take fright at these changes and go back into isolationism. We can’t avoid the challenges. But we can master them. Together.

The transatlantic partnership was never just the foundation of our security. It was the foundation of our way of life. It was forged in experience of the most bitter and anguished kind.

Out of it came a new Europe, a new world order, a new consensus as to how life should be lived.

Today times are different. Every era is different. What is necessary is to distinguish between what endures for one time and what endures for all time.

In our history, we discovered the values that endure. We learnt what really matters and what is worth fighting for.

And we learnt it together.

Today, the challenge to those values is different. But it is no less real. Our propensity to avow those values will shape the way the twenty first century is governed. Will these values become, as they should be, universal values, open over time to all human beings everywhere; or will they be falsely seen as the product of a bygone age? That is the question. It is fundamental. It is urgent. It is our duty to answer it.

Washington, D.C.
April 21, 2008