 Today, I have the great privilege to introduce Honorable Joseph Biden, the 47th Vice President of the United States. Mr. Vice President, I have no honor to know you for many, many years, long before you became Vice President, and I have always admired you as a person who, reflecting particularly on the theme of this meeting, is a truly responsive and responsible leader. Your heart, Vice President, has always been with those living in precarious situations, you just remember your speech last year, and you have a well-earned reputation for being a champion of those less privileged in society. Whether it's a worker on an assembly line, a sick patient, or victims of injustice, you always have to be an advocate of those disadvantaged during your whole career. In the last years, you have especially focused your time on the Moonshot Initiative, an essential and worldwide effort to break down walls in the medical research community with the goal of once and for all, rank-wishing the terrible cancer challenge. Mr. Vice President, you see, because I am myself in some way affected, or have been affected to it. Mr. Vice President, all of us have been impacted by this disease in one way or another. Myself, as I have just mentioned, and even my wife included. And it's safe to say, you can count on the support of the Davos community, the Forum Ecosystem, to assist you going forward in this regard. Mr. Vice President, I understand this is your final major speech in office. We are so privileged that you have chosen Davos and that you have opted to spend some time with us today. Ladies and gentlemen, please join me in welcoming Joseph Bein, Vice President of the United States. Good morning, everyone. Hilda, thank you and Klaus for your hospitality here and in the United States. When you visit me in the United States, you still act as the host. And you're very, very, very gracious. My name is Joe Biden. I'll be Vice President of the United States for 48 more hours. And then I can start to say what I think. As if I haven't the last 44 years. Klaus is not part of my presentation, but I promise you, I have met so many incredible people around the world that as we begin to reorganize the system of the delivery of both care, as well as the way we attack cancer, I'm confident, absolutely confident, God willing, if you have me back next year to talk about the project, that we will have been made exponential progress. So there's so much hope and I'm so happy to see you looking and feeling well. Ladies and gentlemen, it's a great honor to once again address this distinguished forum. This year, in these early days of 2017, there is a palpable uncertainty about the state of the world. Klaus said I chose here to make my last speech. When the President and I talked about this, President Obama and I, it seemed a fitting place to make the final speech, since it was in Europe I, on behalf of the President, made the Maiden's Speech for Administration on Foreign Policy at the Munich Conference. And I want to talk about basically the same subject eight years later. For the members of the meeting in the audience, I want to make it clear that I'm not referring, when I say the world is uneasy, I'm not referring to the imminent transition of power in my country and I mean that. In two days, there will be a new President of the United States. But there's no, be a new President of the United States. But the challenges we face and the choices we must make as an international community, don't hinge exclusively on Washington's leadership. Oh, it matters. I'm not suggesting Washington leadership does not matter, but it does not hinge exclusively on Washington's leadership. Whether we reinforce the ties that bind us or whether we unravel under the current pressures, these choices have to be made by every single nation. And they will determine, and it sounds like hyperbole, they will determine what kind of nation and what kind of nations and world we're going to leave for our children. For the past seven decades, the choices by our fathers and grandfathers and grandmothers and grandfathers have made, we've made them particularly in the United States and our allies in Europe have steered the world down a very clear path. After World War II, we literally drew a line under centuries of conflict and took steps to bend the arc of history. It sounds like hyperbole, but that we actually bent the arc of history in a more just and fair direction. Instead of resigning ourselves to ceaseless wars, we built institutions and alliances to advance our shared security. Instead of punishing former enemies, we invested billions and billions of dollars to help them rebuild. Instead of sorting the world in the winners and losers, we outlined universal values that defined a better future for our children. Our careful, and I mean careful, attention to building and sustaining the liberal international world order with the United States and Europe at its core was the bedrock of the success the world enjoyed in the second half of the 20th century. An era of expanded liberty, unprecedented economic growth that lifted millions out of poverty, a community of democracies that to this day serves as a fulcrum for our common security and our capacity to address the world's most pressing problems. Strengthening these values, values that served our community of nations so well for so long, is paramount to retaining the position of leadership the Western nations enjoy and preserving the progress we've made together and I would argue the health of the remainder of the world. In recent years, it's become very evident that the consensus upholding this system is beginning to face incredible and increasing pressures from both within our countries and without. Today, I'd like to speak to the sources of those pressures as I see it and about why it's imperative that we act urgently to defend the liberal international order, to sustain it. Here in this exclusive alpine tower where CEOs of multinational corporations rub elbows with world leaders, it's easy to embrace the intellectual benefits of a more open and integrated world. Many many benefits flow from it. But it's at our own peril that we ignore or dismiss the legitimate fears and anxieties of the existing communities all across the developed world. The concerns of mothers and fathers who, how they feel about losing that factory job that has always allowed them to provide for their families and the expectation that their children would even have a better life. Parents who don't believe they can give their children a better life than they had. My dad used to have an expression, he said, Joey, a paycheck is about a lot more, excuse me, a job is about a lot more than a paycheck. It's about your dignity, it's about your sense of yourself, it's about self-respect, it's about being able to look your child in the eye and say and mean, honey, it's going to be okay. An awful lot of people who felt that way a decade ago aren't so sure. These are pressures that are undermining the support for the liberal international order from inside. Globalization has not been an unalloyed good. I am a free trader, I am a strong supporter of globalization. But it has deepened the rift between those racing ahead at the top and those struggling to hang on in the middle are falling to the bottom. One year ago I spoke here at Davos about the challenges we face mastering the fourth industrial revolution, which will be a topic of this for the next 10 years. About how can we ensure the benefits and the burdens of globalization, digitalization, artificial intelligence are shared more equitably. In my country, there used to be a basic bargain beginning in the mid-20th century, embraced by both political parties, disagreed only in degree, and was something everyone agreed on. That basic bargain said if you contributed to the success of the enterprise with which you were engaged, you got to share in the benefits and the profits. That bargain has been fractured in my country and many of yours. Advanced technology is a divorce productivity from labor, meaning we're making more than ever with fewer and fewer workers. There's a shrinking demand for low-skilled laborers while highly educated workers are getting paid more and more contributing to the rising inequity. It's based on a meritocracy, but it still has painful outcomes in some places. International trade and greater economic integration has lifted millions of people in the developing world out of abject poverty, improving education, extending their lives, their expectations, and opening new opportunities. Standards living are still well below middle-class expectations in the United States and Europe, but the change is real and good. Meanwhile, many communities in the developed world that have long depended on manufacturing, the opposite is true. Their relative standard of living is decline. They feel shut out of opportunities. Their economic security feels jeopardized. And taking together these forces are effectively hollowing out the middle class, the traditional engine of economic growth, and I might add, of social stability in Western nations. We can't undo the changes in technology as we're in our world, nor should we try. But we can and we must take action to mitigate the economic trends that are stoking unrest in so many advanced economies and undermining people's basic sense of dignity. Our goal should be a worldwide, excuse me, the world should be where everyone, everyone's standard of living is rising. There's an urgency to taking common-sense steps like increasing cognitive capabilities through access to education and job training. In my country, back when I was a young senator, even in the 90s, I would talk and it was very much in vogue to talk to graduating high school and college seniors and say, you're going to have seven jobs in your lifetime. And I wonder why they didn't look back at me and smile and say, isn't that great? Continuing education, whether you're an astrophysicist or you're working on an assembly line, is going to be required, ensuring basic protection for workers to evaporate it from what they were 20 years ago in most of our countries, expanding access to capital, implementing progressive equitable tax system where everyone pays their fair share. I said to a group of folks like you last night, top 1% is not carrying their weight. You're not bad guys, you're all good guys. I pointed out, imagine, in terms of standard of living, imagine in most middle-class societies like European societies and ours, a person can't get much of a raise, but if you went and told them all their kids are going to have free college education, they'd be very, very thankful. A raise or free college education, they'd take the free college education. We can afford to do that in a heartbeat. In the United States of America, we have $1,300 billion worth of tax expenditures per year. Used to be $800 billion when Reagan was president. No one I have found can justify that many expenditures. Only two reasons for those expenditures, tax breaks, one, promote entrepreneurialism, risk, have people engage in productivity, increasing productivity, or promote a social good. There's a thing called stepped-up basis. You have similar things in other countries. You buy a stock, it increases fourfold over a period of time, it grows from a million to $4 million, you're on your way to cash it in, you're going to pay a capital gains tax on the $3 million, but on the way God forbid you hit by a truck, your daughter inherits it, she pays no tax. No evidence to generate increased productivity or investment that tax free money. It costs the federal government $17 billion a year. I can pay for every single solitary student in the United States of America going to a community college raising the number from six to nine million, increasing productivity by two-tenths of one percent for $6 billion a year. Eliminate that one tax expenditure. I can increase productivity and I can cut the deficit by another $11 billion. That's what I mean by more equity in the tax structure, people paying their fair share. Compounding these economic worries are people's fears about the real security risk we face. If you look at the long sweep of history or even just the trend lines in wars and other incidents of large-scale violence over the 50s, 60s, 70 years, as a practical matter we're probably safer than we've ever been, but it doesn't feel that way. Daily images of violence and unrest from all over the world are shared directly on televisions and smartphones. Images we rarely would have seen in the pre-digital age. It fosters a feeling of perpetual chaos, of being overrun by outside forces. Communications technology have fostered incredible progress, making information more accessible, breaking down barriers between people and nations, facilitating greater scientific collaboration, empowering ordinary citizens to challenge their injustice and hold their governments accountable. But they also have given hateful individuals a megaphone to spread their virulent extremist ideologies. Radical jihadists not only recruit and find haven and ungoverned deserts of Iraq and Syria, they do the same in the ungoverned spaces of the Internet. Governors seem less real to people. Terrorists attacks feel inescapable. Fears about unrelenting migration, mountains, people continue to flee violence and deprivation in their homelands. In the wake of these understandable fears, we've seen a series of alarming responses. Popular movements, both on the left and the right, have demonstrated a dangerous willingness to revert to political small-mindedness, to the same nationalist, protectionist, isolationist agendas that led the world to consume itself in war during the past century. And we've seen time and again throughout history dangerous demagogues and autocrats who have emerged seeking to capitalize on people's insecurities. It's nothing new in history. In this case, using Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, xenophobic rhetoric to stir fear, sow division and advance their own agendas, this is a political odds with our values and with the vision that we build and sustains the liberal international order. And the impulses to hunker down, shut the gates, build walls, exit at this moment is precisely the wrong answer. It offers a false sense of security in an interconnected world that is not going to resolve the root causes of these fears, and it risks rotting from inside out the foundations of the very system that spawns a West historically unprecedented success. We need to tap into the big-heartedness that can conceive the Marshall Plan, the foresight, the Plan Bretton Woods, the audacity that proposed the United Nations. We can't rout fear with retrenchment. This is a moment to lead boldly and recommit ourselves to common principles which remain essential to any, to my nation and to all liberal democracies all over the world. Of course, for those who don't share this vision in the world, those who wish to dissolve the community of democracies and supporting institutions in favor of parochial international order, where power rules and spheres of influence lock in and divide nations. We hear those voices in the West, but the greatest threat on this front springs from the distinct and liberal and external actors who equate their success with fracturing the liberal international order. We see it in Asia, in the Middle East, where China and Iran would clearly prefer a world in which they have overwhelming sway in their regions, and I'll not mince words. This movement is principally led by Russia. Under President Putin, Russia is working with every tool available to them to one whittle away at the edges of the European project, test the fault lines among Western nations, and return to a politics defined by spheres of influence. We see it in their aggression against their neighbors, sending in so-called little green men across borders to stir violence and stirs of strains of separatism in Ukraine. Using energy as a weapon, cutting off gas supplies midwinter, raising prices to manipulate nations to act in Russia's interest, using corruption to empower oligarchs to coerce politicians. We see it in their worldwide use of propaganda and false information campaigns, injecting down on political agitation and democratic systems, strengthening illiberal factions and forces on both left and right to seek out and roll back the decades of progress from within our systems. We even saw it in the cyber intrusions against political parties and individuals in the United States of America, which our intelligence community, all 17, have determined with high confidence—I've been doing this for 46 years. They seldom use the phrase high confidence that they were specifically motivated to influence the elections. But it's not only the United States I need not tell you that has been targeted. Europe has seen the same kind of attacks in the past. With many countries in Europe slated to hold elections this year, we should expect further attempts by Russia to meddle in the democratic process. It will occur again, I promise you. And again, the purpose is clear—to collapse the liberal international order. Simply put, Mr. Putin has a different vision of the future, one in which Russia is pursuing across the board. It seeks to return to a world where the strong imposes will through military might, corruption, and criminality, while weaker nations have to fall in line. And from the first moments of our administration, even as we saw it to press the so-called reset button with then-President Medvedev, President Obama and I have made it clear that there is no way for nations to behave in the 21st century. I was asked to lay out our policy at Munich in 2009, February. When I addressed the conference, I said, and I have quote, We will not recognize any nation having a sphere of influence, but will remain our view that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and to choose their own alliances. End of quote. That was our position, that is our position, that should be our position. We have spent our position throughout the past eight years with the position that has to continue to be championed in the years ahead. Look, the United States hasn't always been the perfect guardian of that order, of our order. We have not always lived up to our values, and some of our past missteps have provided fodder for the forces of illiberalism. But President Obama and I have worked consistently over the past eight years to lead not only by the example of our power, but by the power of our example. And this is the challenge that will, by necessity, define the foreign policy agendas of all of our nations as we move forward. So although I'm only going to be Vice President for 48 more hours, I'm here today to issue a call to action. We cannot wait for others to write the future they hope to see. The United States and Europe has to lead the fight to defend the values that have brought us where we are today. A fight to create a more equitable, more inclusive growth for people at every level, not only in our continents, but around the world. A fight for democracy, wherever it's under threat, be it at home or abroad. A fight to lift up forces of inclusion while imposing intolerance in all its guises. A fight to embrace that world order has gotten us here, a fight to urge those to reject isolationism and protectionism. A fight to block the dangerous proposition, and it is a proposition now that facts no longer matter. I work with a wonderful guy in the United States Senate with a great sense of humor. He was a senator from Wyoming, and when he'd be in debate, he'd stand up and he'd say, everyone's entitled to their own opinion, they're not entitled to their own facts. If the truth holds no inherent power in a world where propagandas, demagogues, and extremists carry sway, to win this fight, we have to continue to invest in our democratic alliances. As it has been for seven decades, the unity of transatlantic connection is essential to addressing the global challenges we all face. Defending the liberal international order requires it to resist the forces of European disintegration and maintain a long-standing insistence on a Europe whole, free, and at peace. It means fighting for the European Union, presumptions of me to say that as an American, one of the most vibrant and consequential institutions on earth. The EU has contributed to the prosperity of millions, fully reformed and improved living standards, driving peaceful resolution to disputes between nations. Oh, it has its shortcomings. It means keeping open the door for membership in the European and transatlantic institutions. For those states of Europe, on the Europe's eastern edge, where people in places like the Balkans, Ukraine continue to strive to be part of an incredible undertaking that is European Union, and is used as a tool to get them to reject the illiberalism that has defined their countries for so long, to get them to attack the cancer of corruption in their states, to get them to move into the 21st century. And the EU has been an indispensable partner to the United States as the EU and the UK began to navigate a new relationship. It remains profoundly in my country's interest to maintain our close relationship with both parties. For all our people, I think I can say this as a fact. All our people are safer when we work together. We have to continue to stand up for those basic norms of modern nations, principles of territorial integrity, freedom of navigation, national sovereignty, or as I said in Munich, the right of all nations to make their own decisions to choose their own alliances. To that end, we must bolster Europe's energy independence so that nations are not subject to outside manipulation and prove our cyber defenses and combat misinformation that perverts outsiders or, excuse me, that prevents outsiders and prevent outsiders, excuse me, from perverting our democratic processes. And the single greatest bulwark for our transatlantic partnership is the unshakable commitment of the United States to all of our NATO allies. It is a sacred obligation we have embraced that an attack on one is an attack on all. That can never be placed in question. In addition, we have to continue to stand with Ukraine as they resist Russia's acts of aggression and pursue the European path as long as they are pursuing it in the way that is demanded. In two days, the United States will engage in an act that has defined our exceptional democracy for more than 200 years, a peaceful transition to power from one leader and one political party to another. And it is my hope and expectation that the next President and Vice President of the United States and our leaders in Congress will ensure that the United States continues to fulfill our historic responsibility as the indispensable nation. But we have never been able to lead alone, not after World War II, not during the depths of the Cold War and not today. The United States, our NATO allies, all nations of Europe, we are in this together. It is the oldest and strongest democracies in the world, we have a responsibility to beat back the challenges that are at our door now. We must never forget how far we've come, how we got here, or take for granted that this success will continue without an awful lot of really hard work and investment. It's only by championing the liberal international order, by continuing to invest in our security, reaffirming our shared values, expanding the cause of liberty around the world, that we are going to retain our positional leadership. Because if we don't fight for our values, no one else will. The idea of Europe holing free in a peace, in my opinion, constitutes one of the most audacious consequential visions of the past century. The nation and the notion that after centuries of conflict, Europe could reinvent itself as an integrated community, one committed to political solidarity, the free flow of goods and people, the solemn obligation of collective defense that succeeded in achieving it was audacious. The United States believed in it and still believes in it. My prayers, people across Europe believed in it, they did and aspired to it, and I hope they still believe in it. The success of the European Enterprise, very simply, is essential to American security in the 21st century. In the 20th century, we remain so in the 21st. Our Atlantic Alliance is the bedrock of addressing so many 21st century threats from terrorism to the spread of disease like Ebola and climate change. You've heard me make this case for four decades, but I'm not alone in this belief. America's commitment to NATO, notwithstanding some of the things you've heard recently, is thoroughly bipartisan. Just last month, my good friend and frequent sparring partner, Senator John McCain traveled to Estonia where he said, quote, the best way to prevent Russian misbehavior is by having a credible, strong military and a strong NATO alliance. And then same trip, another leading republic and very close friend of mine, Lindsey Graham, assured Ukrainian troops serving on the front lines, your fight is our fight. That's the same sentiment expressed two days ago when I made my sixth trip to Ukraine as Vice President. History has proven that the defense of free nations in Europe has always banned America's fight and the foundation of our security. Throughout more than four decades of an incredibly divisive foreign policy debates, there has always been a consensus about the value of this transatlantic relationship. And it has to change. It has to alter. But the essence of it has to remain. As I enter private life, I can tell you that I will stand with you as you carry this fight forward. I'll continue to use my voice and empower as a citizen, doing whatever I can to keep our transatlantic alliance strong and vibrant. Because our common future and the future of my children and grandchildren depends on it. Thank you for taking time to listen.