"We will continue to work together in our common fight against terror"
About this Quote
The line carries the cadence of post-9/11 diplomacy, blending reassurance with resolve. As National Security Advisor and later Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice often used such language to bind allies together after the shock of 9/11 and amid the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The rhythm of the promise matters. We signals a coalition rather than a solitary superpower. Continue acknowledges a struggle already underway and commits to endurance. Work together elevates intelligence sharing, law enforcement cooperation, financial tracking, and joint military operations as mutually reinforcing tools. Common fight builds a shared identity, casting terrorism as a universal menace that transcends borders and politics.
The phrasing reflects the early 2000s architecture of counterterrorism: NATO’s invocation of Article 5, expanded information exchanges, FATF pressure to cut off illicit financing, transatlantic agreements on airline passenger data, and training missions for partner forces. Rice deployed this vocabulary in European capitals after the Madrid bombings in 2004 and the London attacks in 2005, where solidarity required both symbolic unity and practical coordination.
Yet the language also smooths over fault lines. Allies diverged on the Iraq invasion, on detention and interrogation policies, on surveillance and rendition. By framing terror in abstract terms, the sentence avoids the messy variety of threats, motives, and theaters of operation. Fight is martial and simple; the reality encompassed police work, judicial processes, community resilience, and development programs alongside warfighting. The pledge serves multiple audiences at once: it reassures allies of American partnership, signals to adversaries that pressure will not relent, and tells domestic listeners that security depends on alliances.
The statement captures the Bush administration’s blend of moral clarity and coalition diplomacy. It is at once promise and performance, an attempt to maintain legitimacy for a long campaign while keeping disparate partners aligned under a single, durable banner.
The phrasing reflects the early 2000s architecture of counterterrorism: NATO’s invocation of Article 5, expanded information exchanges, FATF pressure to cut off illicit financing, transatlantic agreements on airline passenger data, and training missions for partner forces. Rice deployed this vocabulary in European capitals after the Madrid bombings in 2004 and the London attacks in 2005, where solidarity required both symbolic unity and practical coordination.
Yet the language also smooths over fault lines. Allies diverged on the Iraq invasion, on detention and interrogation policies, on surveillance and rendition. By framing terror in abstract terms, the sentence avoids the messy variety of threats, motives, and theaters of operation. Fight is martial and simple; the reality encompassed police work, judicial processes, community resilience, and development programs alongside warfighting. The pledge serves multiple audiences at once: it reassures allies of American partnership, signals to adversaries that pressure will not relent, and tells domestic listeners that security depends on alliances.
The statement captures the Bush administration’s blend of moral clarity and coalition diplomacy. It is at once promise and performance, an attempt to maintain legitimacy for a long campaign while keeping disparate partners aligned under a single, durable banner.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|
More Quotes by Condoleezza
Add to List
