Top 75 Zbigniew Brzezinski Quotes of All time - Quotes.Pub

Here you will find all the famous Zbigniew Brzezinski quotes. There are more than 75 quotes in our Zbigniew Brzezinski quotes collection. We have collected all of them and made stunning posters out of those quotes so you can use Zbigniew Brzezinski quotes wallpapers and images to share on the various social media platforms. You can download the quotes posters in various different sizes for free.

We have a large public that is very ignorant about public affairs and very susceptible to simplistic slogans by candidates who appear out of nowhere, have no track record, but mouth appealing slogans.

An arc of crisis stretches along the shores of the Indian Ocean, with fragile social and political structures in a region of vital importance to us threatened with fragmentation. The resulting political chaos could well be filled by elements hostile to our values and sympathetic to our adversaries.

When it comes to Jewish sensitivity, I don’t find the proposition compelling that non-Jews have no right to comment. We all have the right to comment about each other. And I object when people say that these comments are motivated by anti-Semitism.

With the more endowed nations constrained by their own higher technological capacity for self-destruction as well as by self interest, war may have become a luxury that only the poor peoples of this world can afford.

The first and most important is to emphasize the enduring nature of the alliance relationship particularly with Europe which does share our values and interests even if it disagrees with us on specific policies.

The Ukrainian opposition should adopt democratic unity as its main principle, and it also must have one leader.

Like so many empires before it, the Soviet Union eventually imploded and fragmented, falling victim not so much to a direct military defeat as to disintegration accelerated by economic and social strains.

Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America’s status as a global power.

I don’t feel I was “born American,” but my homeland was denied to me after the end of World War II and I craved something I could identify with.

Foreign policy should not be justified through making oneself feel good, but through results that have tangible consequences.

Not to mention the fact that of course terrorists hate freedom. I think they do hate. But believe me, I don’t think they sit there abstractly hating freedom.

The ongoing changes in the distribution of global power and mounting global strife make it all the more imperative that America not retreat into an ignorant garrison-state mentality or wallow in self-righteous cultural hedonism.

It is conceivable that at some point a truly united and powerful European Union could become a global political rival to the United States.

American power worldwide is at its historic zenith.

Palestinian terrorism has to be rejected and condemned, yes. But it should not be translated defacto into a policy of support for a really increasingly brutal repression, colonial settlements and a new wall.

I never exploited my father’s role in helping Jews avoid the concentration camps.

Lets cooperate and challenge the administration to cooperate with us because within the administration there are also moderates and people who are not fully comfortable with the tendencies that have prevailed in recent times.

But if Russia is to be part of this larger zone of peace it cannot bring into it its imperial baggage. It cannot bring into it a policy of genocide against the Chechens, and cannot kill journalists, and it cannot repress the mass media.

In fact, an Islamic revival – already abetted from the outside not only by Iran but also by Saudi Arabia – is likely to become the mobilizing impulse for the increasingly pervasive new nationalisms, determined to oppose any reintegration under Russian – and hence infidel – control.

Sovereignty is a word that is used often but it has really no specific meaning. Sovereignty today is nominal. Any number of countries that are sovereign are sovereign only nominally and relatively.

The United States can certainly defeat North Vietnam, but the United States cannot defeat a guerrilla war which is being raged from a sanctuary through a pattern of penetration, intervention, evasion, which is very difficult for a technologically advanced country like the United States to combat.

Though Stalinism may have been a needless tragedy for both the Russian people and communism as an ideal, there is the intellectually tantalizing possibility that for the world at large it was, as we shall see, a blessing in disguise.

The legitimacy of the leadership depends on what that country thinks of its leaders.

Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam.

Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.

The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America’s engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

War on terrorism defines the central preoccupation of the United States in the world today, and it does reflect in my view a rather narrow and extremist vision of foreign policy of the world’s first superpower, of a great democracy, with genuinely idealistic traditions.

The language of the internet is English, and an overwhelming proportion of the global computer chatter also originates from America, influencing the content of global conversation.

I think the US has the right to have its own national security policy. I think most Americans would agree with that. And therefore clarity on this issue is important and especially if we commit ourselves, explicitly and bindingly, to Israel’s security.

We cannot have that relationship if we only dictate or threaten and condemn those who disagree.

The world became more aware that America-despite being the hope of many who have the personal drive and ambition to become part of the “American dream”-is beset by serious operational challenges: a massive and growing national debt, widening social inequality, a cornucopian culture that worships materialism, a financial system given to greedy speculation, and a polarized political system.

We have actually experienced in recent months a dramatic demonstration of an unprecedented intelligence failure, perhaps the most significant intelligence failure in the history of the United States.

In Iraq we must succeed. Failure is not an option.

I was confident about America and the idea that in America people can become American without masking their ethnic identity.

In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last.

It follows that America’s primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it.

Iraq may have been a preview of that, but it’s still redeemable if we get out fast. In a war with Iran, we’ll get dragged down for 20 or 30 years. The world will condemn us. We will lose our position in the world.

There is an element of paranoia in this inclination to view any serious attempt at a compromised peace as somehow directed against Israel.

As in all things, it is terribly important to have a sense of priorities in what you do. And to make certain that priorities do not clash.

The scope of America’s global hegemony is admittedly great, but its depth is shallow, limited by both domestic and external restraints.

To resolve conflicts, excessive ambitions and one’s own fears and aspirationis must be sacrificed.

One has to understand what the enemy is all about: the enemy’s history, the enemy’s culture, the enemy’s aspirations. If you understand these well, you can perhaps move towards peace.

Russia’s only real geostrategic option – the option that would give Russia a realistic international role and also maximize the opportunity of transforming and socially modernizing itself – is Europe.

I have no patience for those in the American Jewish community who just go around slandering people as anti-Semites without realizing that what they’re doing is really trivializing anti-Semitism.

One has to define very clearly what one’s objectives are, determine in advance how much one is prepared to pay to achieve that objective and then act accordingly.

The key point to bear in mind is that Russia cannot be in Europe without Ukraine also being in Europe, whereas Ukraine can be in Europe without Russia being in Europe.

Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers.

The dynamic character of China’s nonstatist economic transformation, including its social openness to the rest of the world, is not mutually compatible in the long run with a relatively closed and bureaucratically rigid Communist dictatorship.

There is an element of delusional obsession in the French political elite’s preoccupation with the notion that France is still a global power.

A great deal of world politics is a fundamental struggle, but it is also a struggle that has to be waged intelligently.

1
2