I also want to thank another steadfast friend of Israel, Frank Gaffney.

Churchill once famously remarked, “You have enemies. Good. That means you have stood up for something, sometime in your life.”

Well, if you have enemies, Frank, it’s because you have stood up for something, many times in your life.

And that something is freedom - an unwavering commitment to freedom – for America, for Europe, for Israel, for everyone.
I think I speak for the people here tonight and for many who are not here when I say thank you for standing up for all of us.

I also want to thank the Center for Security Policy for giving me this prestigious award. I deeply appreciate it, even though I don’t think I’ve earned an award won by the likes of Margaret Thatcher and Jean Kirkpatrick.

The magnificent Iron Lady, who once made Britain great again, and the brilliant UN Ambassador, who understood that defeating totalitarianism sometimes meant working with authoritarian regimes, were two of the West’s most powerful voices of moral clarity during the Cold War.

But while I have not earned this award, the country I have the privilege of representing certainly has.

Because since the day it was established, Israel has been proudly holding up freedom’s flame in a dark and dangerous Middle East.

During the Cold War, Israel stood faithfully by America’s side in a fight against an evil empire. We defeated Soviet client states on the battlefield. We safeguarded a vital square on the global chess board. And we created an island of liberty in a sea of tyranny.

No less important, for decades, Israel has manned freedom’s frontlines in the battle against a fanatic ideology that has taken over large swathes of the Middle East and which endangers my country, the region and the world.

That ideology is called militant Islam. I use the words militant Islam very precisely. The enemy we face is not militancy and it’s not Islam – it’s militant Islam.

There are many militant individuals and groups. Timothy McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski can be aptly described as militants. Terror groups like the FARC and the Tamil Tigers who are responsible for the murder of tens of thousands of people are militant organizations.

But while these individuals and groups are extremely dangerous, they are not part of a global movement. Militant Islam is.

The forces of militant Islam have struck in New York and Orlando, London and Paris, Bali and Bangkok, Sydney and Buenos Aires and dozens of other places across the world.

In the Middle East and North Africa, they have struck in every country between the Straights of Gibraltar and the Khyber Pass.

To be sure, militant Islam is not monolithic. There are Sunni branches, such as ISIS, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al Shabab in Somalia, and Hamas in Gaza.

There are Shia branches, such as the Ayatollah regime in Iran, the various Shiite militias in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

These branches have different theologies.

The militant Sunnis are fixated on the early 7th century. The militant Shiites are fixated on the middle of the 10th century. Perhaps one day they’ll compromise and decide to take us all back to the late 8th century.

And while militant Islamists always fight Christians, Jews, Yazidis, Kurds, and other non-Muslims, they also ferociously fight one another in their battle over who will be the king of the militant Islamic hill.

Yet for all their differences, all the branches and sub-branches of militant Islam are rooted in a similar radical ideology and fired by the same fanaticism.

They all seek to reverse history - and the rise of the West - and restore Islam to its former glory.

For all of these groups, the answer to their problems is Islam -- in one radical form or another.

That is why the seemingly disparate forces of militant Islam are in fact part of the same global threat. And that is why they must be countered as part of a global strategy.
But ladies and gentlemen,

Just as the enemy we face is not mere “militancy,” the enemy we face is also not Islam.

Islam is a faith with some 1.7 billion adherents throughout the world. And faiths - including the faith of Islam - are malleable things.

I suspect there are a few people here who disagree with me about that. They can rightly point to many differences that set Islam apart from Christianity, Judaism and other faiths. They can rightly argue that Islam has a unique theology, has been influenced by a unique culture or has been shaped by unique geopolitical forces.

But as those skeptics point to the intricacies of theology and culture, I hope they also consider the historical record – not just of Islam but of other faiths.

To the best of my knowledge, the New Testament was canonized in the fourth century.
While the text of that book has not changed since then, the faith practiced by Christians certainly has.

The Christianity that for centuries justified the slaughter of Jews all across Europe, and that spread antisemitism to every corner of the globe, is not the same Christianity that was preached by abolitionists who fought slavery in the 19th century or that is practiced by Evangelicals in the 21st century.

So too, the relatively tolerant Islam practiced in 12th century Spain and practiced for some 13 centuries in Persia until 1979 is not the Islam of ISIS or the Islam of today’s Ayatollah regime.

Admittedly, it is troubling that to find a more tolerant Christianity one only need look to the present whereas to find a more tolerant Islam one must largely look to the past.

But my point is that Islam, like other faiths, has evolved – and I see no reason why it cannot or will not evolve again.

So do not assume that the forces ascendant in the Muslim world today will be the same forces ascendant in the future.
Whether that happens or not will mostly depend on changes that will come from within the Muslim world. But the pace and extent of those changes depends partly on us as well.

It depends on not painting all Muslims with a single brush and not declaring nearly one-quarter of the world’s population irredeemable.

It depends on recognizing that the greatest victims of militant Islam are those Muslims who do not accept its unforgiving creed.

And it depends on helping those who seek to reform Islam from within.

Let me read you the words of one of those reformers.

“I’m really offended when people are intimidated, terrified and killed under the pretext that such practices are part and parcel of divine teaching ordered by God.

I feel offended when destruction and sabotage are promoted as a heavenly triumph for God on earth. I swear that nothing could ever be built on destruction, demolition or murder.”

Those words were not scrawled by a dissident languishing away in some dungeon in the Middle East.

Those words were spoken last week at a religious university by Abdel Fatah al-Sisi. the President of Egypt.

And here is another voice from the Middle East commenting about terror attacks perpetrated in the name of Islam

“Their only link to Islam is the pretexts they use to justify their crimes and their folly. They have strayed from the right path, and their fate is to dwell forever in hell…They think – out of ignorance – that they are engaging in Jihad…Is it conceivable that God…could order someone to blow himself up or kill innocent people? Islam, as a matter of fact, does not permit any kind of suicide – whatever the reasons or the circumstances.
Those words were not spoken by some apologist at a liberal think tank in Washington.

They were delivered three months ago in Arabic in a televised speech by Mohammed VI, the King of Morocco.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

When the President of Egypt and the King of Morocco say things like this, something is happening in the Middle East.

It does not mean that the problem of militant Islam has suddenly vanished. But it does mean that there are serious partners in the region who are fighting militant Islam in ideological terms - partners who cannot be dismissed as secular heretics but who are themselves devout Muslims who have the credibility to challenge the Islamists’ claims to represent Islam.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The reformers within Islam are real, and we should be doing everything we can to help them.
You know what one of the best ways to help them is? To confront the Islamists they are fighting – and to defeat those Islamists again and again and again.

You know, Bin Laden said that people follow the strong horse. If you want proof of that concept, just consider how many Chicago Cubs fans have suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

You know, until a few weeks ago, I knew a grand total of four Cubs fans. Now they’re all over the place.

Like winning baseball teams, winning ideologies attract more followers and terror groups that appear to have the wind at their backs gain more recruits.

That is why the forces of militant Islam must not only be confronted. They must be routed and vanquished in every part of the world.

In the Middle East, Israel is engaged in that battle every day against Iran’s terror proxies Hezbollah and Hamas and against various other terror groups that threaten us from Syria, Sinai and elsewhere.

Israel will continue to do what is necessary to prevent the transfer of game changing weapons to Hezbollah and to ensure that Iran does not open a new terror front against us in Syria.

Israel would welcome a political settlement in Syria that would bring an end to the horrible carnage and suffering there.

But Israel will oppose a settlement that cedes Syria to Iran and its proxies – something that will only increase the threat to us and others in the future.

Israel will also do what is necessary to defend itself against Hamas. In Gaza, Iran is helping Hamas and Islamic Jihad develop an indigenous rocket manufacturing capability – making them less reliant on smuggling weapons.

To paraphrase an old saying, give a terrorist a rocket and he’ll fire for a day. Teach him how to make rockets, and he’ll fire for the rest of his life.

Besides Israel, there are others Arab states in the region that are fighting the forces of militant Islam.

This battle against a common enemy has turned many in the Arab world who were once adamantly opposed to Israel into de facto allies.

Our sincere hope is that this new alliance will enable us to build lasting bridges of coexistence – something Israel hopes to discuss with the incoming Trump administration.

But to seize those opportunities, we must work together to confront the greatest danger of all - the marriage of militant Islam and nuclear weapons. That is the ultimate game changer that could lead to the ultimate nightmare.

To assume that a militant Islamic power would obey the rules that have been obeyed by all other nuclear powers is to gamble with the security of the world.

Militant Islamists break the rules. They take over embassies. They destroy millennial old statues. They fly into skyscrapers. They make the unimaginable imaginable.

Militant Islam is capable of anything because it is fundamentally different. Huntington wrote of a clash of civilizations.

The truth is that there is a competition of civilizations. The last three decades has witnessed the rise of Asia that has brought billions of people into the global economy and resulted in a natural realignment of power between East and West.

But wedged between East and West is militant Islam. And this civilization – if you want to call it that because it’s more like an anti-civilization – this anti-civilization is in a clash with all the rest.

Militant Islam does not seek to flex its muscles within the international order. It seeks to upend that order.

Everyone who cares about peace should do everything to prevent such a fanaticism from ever arming itself with nuclear weapons.

That is why Israel so strongly opposed the nuclear deal with Iran. Had that deal blocked Iran’s path to the bomb, believe me, Israel would have been the first to support it.

But this deal does not block Iran’s path to the bomb. It ultimately paves it.

Rather than dismantle Iran’s military nuclear capability, this deal merely places restrictions on that capability for a limited time – restrictions that are automatically removed even if Iran does not change its behavior.

So in 10 to 15 years – actually now it’s 9 to 14 years - Iran could remain the foremost sponsor of terror in the world and legitimately enrich enough uranium to place it on the cusp of having the material for an entire nuclear arsenal.

In the meantime, without violating a single clause in the nuclear deal, Iran can conduct R&D on more and more advanced centrifuges.

And unless it is stopped, Iran will continue to defy UN Security Council resolutions to build intercontinental ballistic missiles for its future nuclear arsenal.

Here’s a news flash. Iran and Israel are on the same continent. So those ICBMs are not for Israel. They’re for you.

As Prime Minister Netanyahu said on 60 minutes this Sunday, Israel looks forward to discussing with the Trump administration the nuclear deal with Iran as well as a dangerous Iranian regime it has helped strengthen. We hope to forge a common policy with the administration that can help advance stability and security in our region.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Defeating militant Islam will require more than confronting and defeating its forces in the Middle East. It will also require not allowing people in our own countries to keep us from identifying and understanding the enemy.

Because an enemy you refuse to name is an enemy you will never understand. And an enemy you do not understand is an enemy you will never defeat.

I recognize that there are those who believe that by naming the enemy militant Islam people will mistakenly believe that the enemy is Islam itself rather than a virulent ideology now ascendant in the Muslim world.

But those who speak euphemistically of “militants” or “violent extremists” should not be surprised if others reject such political correctness and respond by mistakenly replacing militant Islam with Islam itself.

We must also reject the shameful efforts of some to prevent any serious discussion about the nature of the enemy we face.

I realized the full extent of those efforts only after a controversy erupted over my being here tonight.

The day you announced that I was being given this award, the spokesman at my Embassy received an email from the Southern Poverty Law Center asking me why I was accepting an award from what they called an anti-Muslim hate group.

I was a bit surprised. First, because I have known Frank Gaffney for many years. And while I don’t agree with every single thing he says and believes, Frank is no hater and no bigot.

Second, because I have followed the work of the CSP for many years. And while I do not agree with every policy position you have taken or every view expressed by every member of your organization, the CSP is not only an unabashed defender of Israel, it is also no hate group.

But I must admit, the fact that it was the Southern Poverty Law Center that was making this allegation got my attention.

Because I always thought highly of that organization. After all, when I was growing up in this country, the SPLC went after the KKK. They used the courts to fight against the evil of racial segregation and systematic discrimination. In my mind, they were the ones who targeted the real haters of the world.
So I read with great interest what they sent me. And when it came to their allegations against you, there was nothing that justified the wholesale defamation of this organization or its leadership.

But then I read some more. I discovered that the SPLC had made up a list of those whom they label anti-Muslim extremists.

And as I read this list, I was simply stunned.

Daniel Pipes, one of the great scholars of the Middle East, was on it.

So too was Maajid Nawaz, a former Islamist who now fights against Islamists.

But the biggest shock of all came when I saw a name on that list of someone I regard as a hero - Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

For those of you who do not know Ayaan, she was the Dutch parliamentarian who in 2004 produced a film with Theo Van Gogh called Submission, which focused on the oppression of women in the Muslim world.

Because of that film, Van Gogh was assassinated by a fanatic Muslim and Ayaan was forced into hiding. She has had to live with death threats and under constant protection ever since.

Yet rather than cower in anonymity, Ayaan writes books, publishes articles, makes speeches and fights for her ideas – in particular the need for sweeping reform in the Muslim world.

Today, Ayaan Hirsi Ali is one of the world’s great champions of freedom, pluralism and tolerance.

And every self-respecting group that claims to value any of those things should be defending her not defaming her.

Yet in an Orwellian inversion of reality, a woman whose life is threatened every day by extremist Muslims is labeled by the SPLC an anti-Muslim extremist.
Have those who put Ayaan on that list no shame? Have they no decency?

The SPLC and others who asked me not to come here tonight claim to support free and open debate. But in reality, they seem to want to stifle debate.

They preach tolerance for those who look different. But they are in effect practicing intolerance to those who think different.

Unfortunately, some have amended that famous Voltairian dictum to be “I hate what you say and I will never defend your right to say it.”

I will defame you as an extremist. I will label you a racist and a bigot. I will put you on the blackest of lists that should be reserved for Nazis, for the Klan, and for the true enemies of mankind.

Well, ladies and Gentlemen, I don’t stand with the defamers and the blacklisters.
I stand with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. We all should stand with Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

For if we do not stand with her, then the values she champions - the same values we cherish - will be under threat and the dangers we face will only grow.

We must not let the defamers and blacklisters succeed. We must not let them turn into pariahs those erudite scholars and courageous reformers who are trying to enlighten us about ideologies that threaten our way of life.

For more than our values are at stake. Our lives are at stake. Because without the wisdom of those scholars, without the courage of those reformers, we will have a much more difficult time winning the fateful battle that is underway.

That is why I am truly honored to accept this freedom flame award tonight.

I accept it in the name of a country that has proudly held up a light of liberty and decency in a dark and cruel corner of the world.
Israel will continue to hold that torch high, steeled by our values and confident in our destiny.

But like free countries everywhere, Israel needs America to hold up its torch even higher.

The battle is far from over. I am not even sure that we’ve reached the end of the beginning.

But I am confident that with the help of organizations like this, with the clarity and courage of people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and with the support of millions of Americans across this great country, that the flame of this last best hope on earth will burn brighter than ever and help secure our common future.

Center for Security Policy