David Brooks Quotes

International policy does not aim at exploiting local, specific conditions to widen zones of influence and create difficulties for another country. The goal of international policy is to insure universal fulfillment of the "Declaration of the Rights of Man" and to prevent a sharpening of international tensions and a strengthening of militarist and nationalist tendencies.

I do not support individual countries taking military action against another country because of its human rights record, or subsequently justifying taking such action on human rights grounds.

The U.N. was there to protect other Rwandese.

The Charter of the United Nations expresses the noblest aspirations of man: abjuration of force in the settlement of disputes between states; the assurance of human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion; the safeguarding of international peace and security.

The United Nations has a critical role to play in promoting stability, security, democracy, human rights, and economic development. The UN is as relevant today as at any time in its history, but it needs reform.

The United Nations, and the way we approach collective security, must be adapted to changing circumstances. The United Nations is our prime instrument for effective multilateral solutions and a rule-based international order.

Britain is committed to peace and security, and a leading supporter of the international rules-based system.

If the U.N. is ineffective, the whole concept of multilateralism will collapse.

I think this country and the world would be far better off if the US is not an outlaw state.

We always say we have wishful thinking that the Unites States would be unbiased, respect the international law, doesn't interfere in other countries around the world, and of course to stop supporting terrorists in Syria.

That there is little hope of international order or lasting peace so long as every country is free to employ whatever measures it thinks desirable in its own immediate interest, however damaging they may be to others, needs little emphasis now.

On humanitarian intervention in general, I guess my view is not unlike the view that was attributed to Gandhi, accurately or not, when he was supposedly asked what he thought about western civilization. He is supposed to have said that he thought it would be a good idea. Similarly, humanitarian intervention would be a good idea, in principle.

From Nato to the U.N. and the E.U., the generation that lived through the first half of the 20th century knew they needed to create a new world order. An order with rules and institutions which, however imperfect, could act both as constraints on individual countries going rogue and as catalysts for co-operation for mutual benefit.

We need to restore U.S. leadership to a world order that is rules-based in order to protect our American dream here at home.

We have to acknowledge and discuss with citizens that Germany needs to take on more responsibility. One of the questions is, 'Can we keep a functioning international order?'

The United States, working closely with the United Kingdom and others, established the liberal world order in the wake of World War II. The goal was to ensure that the conditions that had led to two world wars in 30 years would never again arise.

We need a principled foreign policy that consistently and resolutely stands up for freedom.

The international rules-based order in the wake of World War II is the order that has ensured prosperity and security now for 75 years. I'm fully committed to that.

We must learn the difficult lesson that the future of Mankind will only be tolerable when our course, in world affairs as in others, is based upon justice and law rather than the threat of naked power.

Over the years, the European Union and the United States have worked together to ensure peace and prosperity for our citizens and for people around the world.

Democracies don't go to war against each other, and by and large they don't sponsor terrorism. They're more likely to respect the environment and human rights and social justice. It's no accident that most of the terrorists come from non-democratic countries.

Peace, prosperity, and democracy cannot endure if imposed from the outside. We should cease to make false distinctions between peacekeeping and prevention; they are in fact inextricably linked.

You too would prefer that Russia maintained good relations with both the United Kingdom and the United States, wouldn't you? I would prefer it as well. If anybody in the U.S. or in the United Kingdom says: "I would like to establish good partnership relations with Russia", then both of us, you and me, should welcome that. So should people like me and people like you. However, we have no idea yet what would actually happen after the elections [2016]. That is why I am telling you that we will work with any President designated as such by the American public.

The first priority of humankind in this era is to establish an effective system of world law that will assure peace with justice among the peoples of the world.

International affairs will be placed on a better footing when it is understood that there is no way of punishing a people for the crimes of its rulers.