 There are a few earthly things more beautiful than a university," wrote John Mayfield in his tribute to English universities. And his words are equally true today. He admired the splendid beauty of a university because it was, he said, a place where those who hate ignorance may strive to know, where those who perceive truth may strive to make others see. I have therefore chosen this time and place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth too rarely perceived, and that is the most important topic on earth, peace. What kind of a peace do I mean and what kind of a peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war, not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind of peace that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and build a better life for their children, not merely peace for Americans, but peace for all men and women, not merely peace in our time, but peace in all time. We first examine our attitude towards peace itself. Too many of us think it is impossible. Too many think it is unreal, but that is a dangerous, defeatist belief. It leads to the conclusion that war is inevitable, that mankind is doomed, that we are gripped by forces we cannot control. We need not accept that view. Our problems are man-made, therefore they can be solved by man, and man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man's reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable, and we believe they can do it again. Let us focus on a practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature, but on a gradual evolution in human institutions, on a series of concrete actions and effective agreements which are in the interests of all concerned. There is no single simple key to this peace, no grand or magic formula to be adopted by one or two powers. Genuine peace must be the product of many nations, the sum of many acts. It must be dynamic, not static, changing to meet the challenge of each new generation, for peace is a process, a way of solving problems. So let us persevere. Peace need not be impractical, and war need not be inevitable. By defining our goal more clearly, by making it seem more manageable and less remote, we can help all people to see it, to draw hope from it, and to move irresistibly towards it. No government or social system is so evil that its people must be considered as lacking in virtue. As Americans, we find communism profoundly repugnant as a negation of personal freedom and dignity, but we can still hail the Russian people, for there are many achievements in science and space, in economic and industrial growth, in culture, in acts of courage. We must persevere in the search for peace, in the hope that constructive changes within the communist block might bring within reach solutions which now seem beyond us. We must conduct our affairs in such a way that it becomes in the communist interest to agree on a genuine peace, for we can seek a relaxation of tensions without relaxing our God, and for our part we do not need to use threats to prove we are resolute. We do not need to jam foreign broadcasts out of fear our faith will be eroded. We are unwilling to impose our system on any unwilling people, but we are willing and able to engage in peaceful competition with any people on earth. Speaking of other nations, I wish to make one point clear. We are bound to many nations by alliances. These alliances exist because our concern and theirs substantially overlap. Our commitment to defend Western Europe and West Berlin, for example, stands undiminished because of the identity of our vital interests. The United States will make no deal with the Soviet Union at the expense of other nations and other peoples, not merely because they are our partners, but also because their interests and ours converge. Our interests converge, however, not only in defending the frontiers of freedom, but in pursuing the paths of peace. It is our hope and the purpose of Allied policy to convince the Soviet Union that she too should let each nation choose its own future, so long as that choice does not interfere with the choices of others. The Communist drive to impose their political and economic system on others is the primary cause of world tension today, for there can be no doubt that if all nations could refrain from interfering in the self-determination of others, the peace would be much more assured. Our primary long-range interest is general and complete disarmament, designed to take place by stages, permitting parallel political developments to build the new institutions of peace which would take the place of arms. To make clear our good faith and solemn convictions on this matter, I now declare that the United States does not propose to conduct nuclear tests in the atmosphere so long as other states do not do so. We will not be the first to resume. While we proceed to safeguard our national interests, let us also safeguard human interests. And the elimination of war and arms is clearly in the interests of both. No treaty, however much it may be to the advantage of all, however tightly it may be worded can provide absolute security against the risks of deception and evasion. But it can, if it is sufficiently effective in its enforcement and it is sufficiently in the interest of its signers, offer far more security and far fewer risks than an unabated, uncontrolled, unpredictable arms race. The United States, as the world knows, will never start a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war. This generation of Americans has already had enough, more than enough of war and hate and oppression. We shall be prepared if others wish it. We shall be alert to try to stop it. But we shall also do our part to build a world of peace where the weak are safe and the strong are just. We are not helpless before that task or hopeless of its success, confident and unafraid. We must labor on, not towards a strategy of annihilation, but towards a strategy of peace.