The third element is the creation of a regional dynamic. That presumes the stabilization of the immediate environment of Israel and Palestine， that is， progress with Lebanon and Syria. A sovereign Lebanon with stable， controlled borders is a guarantee of security for the whole region. Syria must assumeits responsibilities and make the necessary gestures toward the international community. After that， it will be up to us to give it a full role to play， notably in the framework of a renewed partnership with Europe. A comprehensive， lasting settlement must indeed include a settlement of the Israeli-Syrian aspect of the conflict in accordance with Security Council resolutions.
In Iraq， the situation has deteriorated too much to hope for an immediate settlement. But it would be even more dangerous not to establish a framework for ending the crisis. For my part， this framework should include two tracks：
First， we must be clear on a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops. I believe that it should take place within a year. That will allow Iraqis to feel that their future is in their hands and put them back on the path of national sovereignty. To eliminate the spiral of failure， we must begin by reestablishing real political prospects.
The second track involves a triple mobilization to bring about these political prospects： a mobilization by the Iraqis themselves， which must involve a crucial national reconciliation， notably by offering a power-sharing agreement to all those who renounce violence and by completing the process of constitutional reform. States in the region， from Turkey to Iran， from Syria to the Gulf States， must be mobilized in support of this process to ensure Iraq‘s territorial integrity. And finally， there must be an international mobilization， when the time comes， with an international conference. The United States should of course play a central role in this. But Europe too must assume its responsibilities.
Finally， the overall vision required for this region demands a full accounting of the Iranian challenge， which doesn’t involve proliferation only.
An Iran with a military nuclear capability is unacceptable. But this crisis is also rooted in Iran‘s desire to assert its regional power， its national pride and its concern for security. That is why the solution can’t be a military one. Tothe contrary， it means recognizing Iran‘s role in the region and establishing a stability process among all the countries in the zone that permits dialogue and guarantees peace and economic development.
That is why the approach we’ve taken is political， combining dialogue and firmness. That is the point of UN resolution 1737， adopted unanimously in late December： the sanctions set forth in the resolution respond to the Iranian refusal to suspend its sensitive nuclear activities. If Iran makes a gesture to suspend enrichment， the Security Council can suspend the sanctions. The path of dialogue remains open and， for us， remains a priority.
In this new phase， it is essential for the international community to remain united： this is one of the achievements of the work undertaken four years ago by the Europeans. More than ever， it is the condition underlying the legitimacy of our action and thus its long-term efficacy. The United States has a major role to play to end the crisis. My conviction is that when the time comes， it will take place through the engagement of a real bilateral dialogue with Teheran.
Ladies and Gentlemen，
In the profoundly new world that is taking shape， we need a resolutely new diplomacy.
Never has there been so much instability. Never have the threats been stronger. But never， perhaps， have solutions been so close.
Today‘s diplomacy must be one of action and results. Diplomacy can no longer be founded just on “hard power” and force. But neither can it be founded only on “soft power”， the power to influence and convince. Diplomacy must now be based on “building power”.
Yes， the United States and Europe have a particular responsibility when it comes to crafting lasting solutions to the challenges of our time. Let us gainstrength from the ties of friendship between our two nations in finding the answers expected by so many people. Let’s place the transatlantic relationship in the service of a new world order that has room for everyone. Together let‘s act as builders to move toward greater peace and justice.
Thank you.
汉语回放（万园园译）
大家都知道，我们现在正站在世界发展的一个重要的十字路口。在过去的几年里，我们的世界已经在改变。全球化已经深深地动摇了伟大的国际平衡。这对我们所有人都是一个巨大的挑战：是风险，但也是一个机会。
如果我们想继续掌控这些变化，我们就必须更好地分析、更好地理解它们。
这就是我今天的演讲内容：让我们放下成见，真实地认识世界，为实现更广泛的公正和和平而努力前进。
一、国际秩序的缺失是对当今社会的真正威胁过去我们受两大半球影响：东方和西方；我们有两个超级大国：
美国和苏联，过去维系两大超级力量的平衡点虽然危险不稳定，但它确实存在。而如今，这个平衡点已经消失，中心不复存在。所以现在没有什么约束着这个秩序混乱的世界。
当然，多边机构虽然存在，但是，它们无法尽显它们的作用来建立真正的全球化治理体系。联合国的决策在这些机构中无法达成一致，单方面的决定使其合法性受到质疑。但不可否认的是：个人利益的总和并不能代表全局利益，代表着集体价值的联合国将最终确立起多边主义的合法性。
诚然，有些国家更具有影响力，但没有任何国家可以独自给世界冠以新的秩序。难道美国不能抛开一切，扮演好这个角色吗？事实上，它仍然是主导力量，单单其本身就已具有所有必要的属性：军事实力、经济实力、技术创新能力、其生活方式的吸引力。在整个20世纪，它能够建立起一种经济和文化模式，树立起一个现代典范，让世界欢呼雀跃，钦佩不已。对我们来说，你们是自由的象征，是人权的捍卫者。自从来美国居住，我就爱上了这个国家，我想告诉你们：美国一直是全世界很多人的梦想之地。
但现在让我们看清楚一些事实：伊拉克战争这个转折点，不仅打破了美国的形象也同样破坏了整个西方世界的形象。美国和欧洲需重新争取其他民族的尊崇。
深深的不公正加剧了国际秩序的混乱。一场前所未有的科技进步正在席卷着整个世界，它创造更多的财富，提供更多的机会，也给那些拥有必要资产的国家、民族、企业、个人，带来赢利的机会。
但对于其他很多人，这一转变却意味着越来越多的不平等，新的风险和攀高的恐惧。这些恐惧存在于欧洲，在法国尤甚，人们恐惧各自原本的社会公正会因此动荡瓦解。
在社会权利和法律规范领域，全球化并不能使各项规章制度更加紧密：因为发生在全球范围内的竞争并不对称，新的商业差额导致外包，并危害到发达国家的社会福利。
这些风险通常最先打击那些没有受过教育、没有技能，隔离于世界文化之外的弱势群体。我想告诉那些受国际化教育的精英，那些没有你们那么幸运的人，需要你们对他们担负起责任和使命。哈佛是人人梦寐以求的地方，哈佛大学也必须为世界秩序出谋划策、提供帮助，致力于纠正世界的混乱秩序。
但是，这些风险也开始影响到那些因日渐贫困而日渐脆弱的中产阶级。如果全球化是以中产阶层的消亡或是以贫穷人群和极少数的富人群体间对抗的消失作为结局，那么现在该采取行动了。多样性和平衡是社会的关键，没人会容忍长期持续增长的不平等。
我们国内发生的也正在全球范围内发生。全球化正在动摇着原先稳定的一部分发展中国家，悄悄地削弱它们的经济实力。因此，种族间和宗教间的关系日趋紧张，地球的自然资源和生态平衡也面临着威胁。这就是我们生活的世界，一个前所未有的复杂的、动荡的世界。
全球的无序状态既不是无关痛痒的表面现象，也不是临时产生的突发事件，而是持久的严重失衡的表现。