Follow us on social

google cta
Signal-2023-06-07-133150_002

What kind of peace do we seek? At 60, JFK's speech never gets old

On Saturday it will be six decades since the 35th president made a call for not seeing the Soviet enemy as ‘evil.’ We have a lot to learn.

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

June 10th marks 60 years since American President John F. Kennedy delivered a searing critique of the Cold War and its mindset at a commencement address on the campus of American University in Washington, DC. 

In it, Kennedy expounded upon his vision of what peace might look like in the nuclear age. 

“What kind of peace do we seek?,” he asked.

"Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children — not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women — not merely peace in our time but peace for all time."

For Kennedy, the specter of nuclear war, to which the United States and the U.S.S.R. came within a hair's breadth the previous October during the Cuban Missile Crisis, made the pursuit of peace with the Soviet adversary an imperative. Yet it was one that put the young president at odds, perhaps fatally so, with this own national security-military-intelligence establishment.

But at AU, Kennedy took his case for a sane, rational and above all ethical Cold War policy directly to the American people.

“I speak of peace,” said Kennedy, “as the necessary, rational end of rational men. I realize that the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war — and frequently the words of the pursuer fall on deaf ears. But we have no more urgent task.”

And Kennedy had, over the course of his presidency, and to the great consternation of the Pentagon and CIA, found a most unlikely partner in that pursuit, Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. Over the course of a series of U.S.-Soviet crises (the Bay of Pigs, the Vienna summit, and the Berlin Crisis) Kennedy and Khrushchev had developed a rapport which helped steer us away from apocalypse during the Cuban Missile Crisis. And in the  aftermath of that crisis, the two began working toward a Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

Kennedy realized that progress was contingent upon seeing the other as we might wish we to be seen, in other words, upon empathy.

“No government or social system is so evil,” said Kennedy, “that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue.”

"So, let us not be blind to our differences but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal."

Such a way of thinking about the current Russian adversary is now notably absent in the corridors of power of Joe Biden’s Washington.

Indeed, in our view, Kennedy’s speech now stands as an important indictment of how far in the wrong direction recent Democratic administrations have traveled in the decades since Kennedy’s speech. While we are both on record condemning Putin’s invasion, we are mindful of the administration’s failure to pursue diplomatic avenues to both prevent and end the war. 

Today we stand perilously close to nuclear escalation as the administration ignores the red lines it set and succumbs to assorted hawks by agreeing to send F-16s to Ukraine. One can only hope President Kennedy’s message, delivered six decades ago this Saturday, somehow and in some way is understood by a new generation inside and outside Washington D.C., and has an impact on the course of war — and peace.


President John F. Kennedy addresses American University Commencement, receives honorary degree, June 10, 1963, Washington DC. (public domain)
google cta
Analysis | Europe
nuclear weapons
Top image credit: rawf8 via shutterstock.com

What will happen when there are no guardrails on nuclear weapons?

Global Crises

The New START Treaty — the last arms control agreement between the U.S. and Russia — is set to expire next week, unless President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin make a last minute decision to renew it. Letting the treaty expire would increase the risk of nuclear conflict and open the door to an accelerated nuclear arms race. A coalition of arms control and disarmament groups is pushing Congress and the president to pledge to continue to observe the New START limits on deployed, strategic nuclear weapons by the US and Russia.

New START matters. The treaty, which entered into force on February 5, 2011 after a successful effort by the Obama administration to win over enough Republican senators to achieve the required two-thirds majority to ratify the deal, capped deployed warheads to 1,550 for each side, and established verification procedures to ensure that both sides abided by the pact. New START was far from perfect, but it did put much needed guardrails on nuclear development that reduced the prospect of an all-out arms race.

keep readingShow less
Trump Hegseth Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump, joined by Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, announces plans for a “Golden Fleet” of new U.S. Navy battleships, Monday, December 22, 2025, at the Mar-a-Lago Club in Palm Beach, Florida. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's realist defense strategy with interventionist asterisks

Washington Politics

The Trump administration has released its National Defense Strategy, a document that in many ways marks a sharp break from the interventionist orthodoxies of the past 35 years, but possesses clear militaristic impulses in its own right.

Rhetorically quite compatible with realism and restraint, the report envisages a more focused U.S. grand strategy, shedding force posture dominance in all major theaters for a more concentrated role in the Western Hemisphere and Indo-Pacific. At the same time however, it retains a rather status quo Republican view of the Middle East, painting Iran as an intransigent aggressor and Israel as a model ally. Its muscular approach to the Western Hemisphere also may lend itself to the very interventionism that the report ostensibly opposes.

keep readingShow less
Alternative vs. legacy media
Top photo credit: Gemini AI

Ding dong the legacy media and its slavish war reporting is dead

Media

In a major development that must be frustrating to an establishment trying to sell their policies to an increasingly skeptical public, the rising popularity of independent media has made it impossible to create broad consensus for corporate-compliant narratives, and to casually denigrate, or even censor, those who disagree.

It’s been a long road.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.