Rudy Giuliani Republican Candidate
Trade Agreements International Institutions/UN Reform
- "Now, on the question of torture. We should not torture. America should not stand for torture, America should not allow torture. But America should engage in aggressive questioning of Islamic terrorists who are arrested or who are apprehended. Because if we don't we leave ourselves open to significant attack.
And the line between the two is very delicate and very difficult. But we can't abandon aggressive questioning of people who are intent on coming here to kill us. Or killing us overseas?
So I think America should never be for torture. America should be against torture. It violates the Geneva Convention. Certainly when we're dealing with armed combatants, we shouldn't get near anything like that. There is a distinction, sometimes, when you're dealing with terrorists. You may have to use means that are a little tougher." Town hall meeting in Davenport, Iowa, 10/24/07
- "We must preserve the gains made by the USA PATRIOT Act and not unrealistically limit electronic surveillance or legal interrogation. Preventing a chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear attack on our homeland must be the federal government's top priority." Rudolph W. Giuliani, "Toward a Realistic Peace: Defending Civilization and Defeating Terrorists by Making the International System Work," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 86 No. 5, September/October 2007, p. 8
- "We can't close Guantanamo because nobody will take the people there. I mean, I -- the president is attempting to move those people to other countries, and those countries are intelligent enough to say we don't want people as dangerous as this in our country.
So what are you proposing, that we release them in New York or in Boston or in Los Angeles? So there's a reality to this that the liberal media and some of the Democratic politicians seem to try to avoid." Fox News Republican Presidential Candidates Debate in Durham, NH, 9/5/07
- "I oppose ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty. I believe the treaty is well intentioned, and I appreciate the hard work of U.S. negotiators who sought to resolve problems in the treaty first identified by President Reagan. I also understand the arguments of those - particularly in our military - who claim that this treaty will enhance America's ability to guarantee freedom of the seas for all peace-loving nations.
"But I believe that the treaty is fundamentally flawed. I cannot support the creation of yet another unaccountable international bureaucracy that might infringe on American sovereignty and curtail America's freedoms. I oppose ratification of this treaty as long as it fails to address these concerns." Giuliani Website, Policy Statement, 10/30/07
- "I think this would be a heck of a good time to expand NATO. NATO needs a little revitalization. I think we could look to countries like Australia; we could look to Japan; we could look to expand it, geographically." Fox News Channel Republican Debate in Orlando, Florida, 10/21
- "A primary goal for our diplomacy - whether directed toward great powers, developing states, or international institutions - must be to strengthen the international system, which most of the world has a direct interest in seeing function well... There is no realistic alternative to the sovereign state system... We should therefore work to strengthen the international system through America's relations with other great powers, both long established and rising." Rudolph W. Giuliani, "Toward a Realistic Peace: Defending Civilization and Defeating Terrorists by Making the International System Work," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 86 No. 5, September/October 2007, p. 11
- "Finally, we need to look realistically at America's relationship with the United Nations. The organization can be useful for some humanitarian and peacekeeping functions, but we should not expect much more of it. The UN has proved irrelevant to the resolution of almost every major dispute of the last 50 years. Worse, it has failed to combat terrorism and human rights abuses. It has not lived up to the great hopes that inspired its creation. Too often, it has been weak, indecisive, and outright corrupt. The UN's charter and the speeches of its members' leaders have meant little because its members' deeds have frequently fallen short. International law and institutions exist to serve peoples and nations, but many leaders act as if the reverse were true - that is, as if institutions, not the ends to be achieved, were the important thing. Despite the UN's flaws, however, the great objectives of humanity would become even more difficult to achieve without mechanisms for international discussion. History has shown that such institutions work best when the United States leads them. Yet we cannot take for granted that they will work forever and must be prepared to look to other tools." Rudolph W. Giuliani, "Toward a Realistic Peace: Defending Civilization and Defeating Terrorists by Making the International System Work," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 86 No. 5, September/October 2007, p. 11
- "The answer is that I don't think we should have false expectations for the U.N. being able to be particularly useful in solving any major dispute. They haven't solved one--or even approached one--in 30 or 40 years." Interview 6/30/2007 WSJ OpinionJournal
- "Maybe we should look at [U.S. funding to the U.N.], and we should scale down our expectations of what the U.N. can do. I mean, after all, even Clinton did that. Clinton went to NATO instead of the U.N." Interview 6/30/2007 WSJ OpinionJournal
- "I would certainly look at [limiting U.S. funding to the U.N.] if they don't reform, and use it as a lever to get them to reform. When I say reform I don't have great expectations that the U.N. is going to live up to its original commitment to promote a freedom for people and peace. But I do think that they can carry out their lesser commitments better--the humanitarian mission with less corruption. And we should discipline them to do that. I think America has to work through the coalitions that have had--haven't always been successful--but have had success. NATO is a useful coalition to broaden and expand. Its original mission is in Europe. You can see its mission is already much broader than Europe. I think that you could expand NATO: You could look to include some of our Asian allies in NATO. I think that the other way to go is to look at some of these coalitions that seem to be effective at solving a particular problem and then see if you can work through them more." Interview 6/30/2007 WSJ OpinionJournal
- "The next president must champion human rights and speak out when they are violated. America should continue to use its influence to bring attention to individual abuses and use a full range of inducements and pressures to try to end them. Securing the rights of men, women, and children everywhere should be a core commitment of any country that counts itself as part of the civilized world. Whether with friends, allies, or adversaries, democracy will always be an issue in our relations and part of the conversation. And so the better a country's record on good governance, human rights, and democratic development, the better its relations with the United States will be." Rudolph W. Giuliani, "Toward a Realistic Peace: Defending Civilization and Defeating Terrorists by Making the International System Work," Foreign Affairs, Vol. 86 No. 5, September/October 2007, p. 15-16