Ambassador William R. Timken, Jr.
Rothenburg, December 9, 2007.
As prepared for delivery.
Lord Mayor Hartl, Mr. Blevins, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Thank you for the invitation to visit Rothenburg. On behalf of the Embassy and the Consulate General in Munich, I would like to thank you and all the members of the German-American Society of West Middle Franconia for your commitment to our bilateral partnership.
It is a pleasure to visit Rothenburg – especially at this very special time of the year. Rothenburg epitomizes the American dream of a romantic German city, particularly at Christmas.
It is a privilege to address you in this beautiful hall. I understand it was built in 1699. This is a good example of the how the past and the future can complement each other.
Originally we had planned to come to Rothenburg on September17th – Constitution Day in the United States. Like this beautiful hall, the American Constitution is also an example of how history can complement the present and the future. September 17 was the date in 1787, 220 years ago, when the Constitutional Congress met in Philadelphia to sign the Constitution of the United States of America. Though not as bedecked in sparklers and fireworks as the signing of the Declaration of Independence that we celebrate on the Fourth of July, the workhorse that is the American Constitution merits a day of appreciation – even 220 years and two months later.
The courage of America's first leaders gave us the Declaration of Independence in 1776. Eleven years later, their patience and wisdom gave us the Constitution. In the summer of 1787, delegates met in Philadelphia to create "a more perfect Union" and craft a framework document that would balance authority and freedoms, federal interests and state powers, individual rights and national unity.
The Constitution was the work of practical minds focused on practical questions, like how to govern effectively but also limit the powers of government; how to represent the will of the people but to control the passions of temporary majorities. The text written by Thomas Jefferson, a slaveholder, would become an irrefutable brief against slavery. The Constitution, drafted and approved by men alone would, by its own logic, eventually assure the full participation of women.
The American Constitution and its first ten amendments, the Bill of Rights, first guided a nation of scarcely 4 million souls. It has withstood the test of time. The Constitution has proved durable enough to take us from the simple early days of America’s history to the complex country we know today, a time of the Internet and the human genome and a thousand different cultures living together in one nation. It has shaped our country and who Americans are as a people, all 300 million of us in 2007.
The Constitution is also America's most important export. Thomas Jefferson looked upon the Constitution as a permanent example for other peoples. "It is impossible," he wrote, "not to [sense] that we are acting for all mankind." The framers of the American Constitution devised answers that can be found in Constitutions across the world – separate branches, enumerated powers, checks and balances, specific protections of the Bill of Rights. There is a draft of the 1789 French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen with Jefferson's handwritten editing in the margins.
At the end of World War II, the transformation of the Western occupied zones in Germany into a successful democratic state was a great moment in the history of the transatlantic partnership. The final peaceful reunification of the two zones was the success story of modern diplomacy. The Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany established a parliamentary system of government that incorporated many features of the British system. However, the Basic Law also created a federal system that is more similar to the government of the United States. But the most important resemblance of the Basic Law to the Constitution of the United States was its formal declaration of the principles of human rights.
Many compare the situation in the Middle East today to the experience in postwar Germany – especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, both countries that have recently drafted new Constitutions. The situations are, of course, very different. But there are some useful guidelines. First, a prerequisite to successful democratic government is the establishment of law and order. Second, building democracy must be the responsibility first of the citizens of a country. And finally and perhaps most important, the implementation of democracy must be a bottom-up rather than a top-down affair.
When we ask ourselves, how long the young democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq will need our support, we should not forget the eleven years it took for America’s founding fathers to progress from a declaration of independence to an enduring constitution, as well as post-war Germany’s years-long path from occupation to a successful democracy. We should also realize these founders in the U.S. had great experience developing state constitutions.
Last month I was privileged to participate in the meetings between Chancellor Merkel and President Bush at the President’s ranch in Crawford, Texas. At dinner the first evening and at lunch the next day, the conversation focused on the governmental institutions that were put in place during the postwar years in Germany and Europe – and their relevancy for the future. I would like to continue that conversation with you here this evening in Rothenburg in the context of the principles of democracy that have defined international law over the last sixty years.
Today's world presents many challenges, from transnational terrorism to economic interdependence, from global warming to AIDS and possible future pandemics, and above all to the continuing quest for human dignity and liberty. The United States believes that collective action and international law are essential in coordinating the international community's approach to these deep and difficult problems.
International law is as important to the United States as it was 60 years ago. The U.S. helps develop it, relies on it, and abides by it. When we assume international obligations, we take them seriously and seek to meet them. Where international law applies, all branches of the U.S. government enforce it. Our careful approach to treaty negotiation and treaty acceptance reflects our respect for international law.
In addition, our Supreme Court has made clear that our Constitution protects certain core individual rights, including the right to a fair trial, to free speech, and to equal protection of the laws, from infringement by any legal act, including international rules. Our highest court must have the final say when safeguarding the fundamental rights enshrined in our Constitution.
One of the most contentious international legal issues that we have faced most recently is detention policies regarding captured members of Al Qaida and the Taliban. What legal rules to apply to them? These suspected terrorists do not fit neatly within existing legal rules - whether of domestic criminal law or the laws of war. The majority were captured or turned over to U.S. forces in Afghanistan or Pakistan during the international armed conflict that took place in Afghanistan in 2001 and 2002. Most of these persons could not be tried in U.S. courts because U.S. criminal laws did not extend to their actions in Afghanistan, with the obvious exception of those who committed specific war crimes. This is a very different situation from that of terrorist suspects in Europe in the 1980s and even today, where European courts can preside over domestic prosecutions of members of the IRA, the Red Brigades, the Red Army Faction and, now, of Islamic extremists in London and Madrid. At the same time, these detainees did not qualify as prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions – which extends special protection only to persons who openly identify themselves as part of a nation’s armed forces.
The Bush Administration has worked hard to identify and implement international rules applicable to these terrorist suspects. We have not ignored, changed, or re-interpreted existing international law. Members of Al Qaida captured outside our own territories do not fit neatly into traditional criminal law rules or into the Geneva Conventions. But our Constitution continues to guide us. In fact, last year, our Supreme Court ruled that the one provision of the Geneva Conventions that does apply, even if the Conventions as a whole do not, is Common Article 3. Common Article 3 prohibits murder, cruel treatment, and torture of persons, such, as civilians or captured or wounded combatants, taking no active part in hostilities during a non-international armed conflict. …This creates at best an incomplete legal framework. It has therefore been necessary for the Administration to work with Congress to fill in the gaps. We have done this in a way that complies with and in certain respects exceeds our obligations under Common Article 3.
As a result of many discussions with European governments, there is a growing acknowledgment of this gap in the international legal system. We continue to work closely with Germany and other partners in developing international legal principles to address more effectively the challenges posed by today's international terrorism. Last week, our Homeland Security Secretary, Michael Chertoff met with Minister Schäuble and five other interior ministers to review ways in which international legal principles might be adapted to deal with the asymmetric nature and international character of 21st century terrorism. They discussed the effects of traditional international legal distinctions, such as those between international law in peacetime versus in time of war, between state and non-state actors and between combatants and non-combatants. Our ongoing dialogue aims at harmonizing international legal norms with our respective national legislation in order to deal more effectively with the common threat of international terrorism.
In this and other examples, the United States has worked hard to uphold international law and hold fast to the ideals of our founding documents. For over two centuries, these documents have defined America's purposes in the world. We do not hide, as some suggest, behind our Constitution. The Constitution has guided the United States through war and peace, through booms and busts, through times when Americans have been united and through times when they have been divided. Federal versus states’ rights, the freedoms of individuals versus the need for order in society, declarations of war and peaceful diplomacy, desegregation and women’s rights – these are some of the constitutional dramas that have played out over the course of the history of the United States. This is an ongoing story – one that Americans reflect on with a special sense of respect on each anniversary of the signing of our Constitution.
One point I want to make perfectly clear, contrary to opinion editorials in the German press, the people of the United States yield to no nation in our belief in the rule of law and moral authority. This has been proven in history, is true today and will be validated when future history is written.
Thank you.
