the structure we build to implement our security solutions, an infrastructure that will have key management as its foundation.

If we

f we overemphasize public safety and security, we risk a world with too much government access at the cost of individual privacy. If we overemphasize the privacy issue, we risk a world with perhaps too many secrets — for example, a world in which terrorists, organized crime and hackers acquire secure command, control and communications capabilities with a degree of privacy formerly available only to advanced military forces. Both of these extremes are unpalatable. We need to strike a balance that provides adequate protection for both individuals and businesses and for society as a whole.

As a matter of public policy, the administration is pursuing the establishment of a key management infrastructure with a feature called key recovery. One of the fundamental questions on this issue is whether to include a key recovery feature. Key recovery would add complexity and arguments have been advanced to support proceeding without it. There are, however, three very good reasons for designing key recovery into the key management infra

structure.

First, key recovery is good business practice. It protects information from loss by allowing users to regain access to their encrypted data when encryption keys are lost or corrupted. Key recovery is analogous to systems administrators recovering forgotten passwords or individuals maintaining spare house or desk keys for emergency use.

This goes back to the trust issue. Key recovery will help ensure the availability of information and systems by avoiding lockout and by guaranteeing authorized access to information, thus increasing the level of trust in the security system.

of unbreakable cryptography. France, Israel and Russia recently imposed import and domestic use restrictions. Several Asian, South American and African countries have had similar restrictions in place for years. Others may impose them as strong cryptography proliferates.

For many overseas, as well as here, the logic of the need to balance business imperatives with public safety concerns argues for key recovery. The European Union and other confederations are considering key recovery-based KMIS. The world's major standards bodies are designing future standards so that key recovery can be accommodated.

International standards and protocols for key recovery may prove essential to hand off national restrictions on strong encryption, to promote a broad export market for cryptography and to establish a key management infrastructure acceptable for general international use. This would accelerate the realization of the promise of information technology, and that would be in everyone's best interest.

Second, key recovery makes it possible for law enforcement, with proper authorization, to be able to access the keys. This is an essential component of a solution that protects the public interest. There is a clear societal interest in preventing cyberspace from developing into a sanctuary for global, instantaneous and secure centers of operations for criminals, terrorists and rogue nations.

Finally, key recovery may prove essential in making encryption scalable on an international basis. We are not the only country wrestling with the public safety implications

Working in partnership, government and industry together need to lay the foundation necessary to sustain and strengthen information security for America. I wish to emphasize that the infrastructure for key management will be built by industry as a commercial venture. This task is huge. Collaboration among many partners will be essential if we are to establish a KMI that promotes the use of encryption worldwide.

Information security is essential to successfully navigating the information age. We must build the foundation components of trust, risk and liability, scalability, availability and policy which must accompany encryption to build real security into system. INFOSEC professionals will play a critical role in making this a reality. We are facing a tremendous challenge during the transition to an information society, and we can only succeed by working collaboratively to keep ahead of the breaking crest of the third

wave.

Published for internal information use by the American Forces Information Service, a field activity of the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs), Washington, D.C. Parenthetical entries are speaker/author notes; bracketed entries are editorial notes. This material is in the public domain and may be reprinted without permission. Defense Issues is available on the Internet via the World Wide Web at http://www.dtic.mil/defense link/pubs/di_index.html.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

VOLUME 12

to

We're here for reasons both joyous and solemn remember the dreams and accomplishments of a great man who was taken from us too soon. However, our young essayist, Rochelle Davis, said something very important: MLK [Martin Luther King Jr.] Day isn't merely about remembering; this holiday also should be about the future. ...

Virtually every commemoration of MLK Day features a recitation of “I Have A Dream," one of the most eloquent and morally compelling speeches in the history of American politics. Let us dwell on the words a bit. Dr. King said he dreamed of a community:

Where the "sons of former slaves and sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood;

Where “children ..... will be judged not by the color of their skin. but by the content of their character; and

Where "little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers."

NUMBER 3

claimed, African Americans actually speak a different language than the white population. We can, of course, dismiss the claim of a separate language as hyperbole. What we should take seriously, however, is the frustration and desperation that would lead people to say such a thing. No matter what one calls it, the reality is that there are parts of the country where race relations have not improved much in recent decades. Sadly, on both sides of the racial divide are those who want to preserve segregation. I reject that attitude. I think we all should reject it. Instead, we should try to recall what King's dream was and rededicate ourselves to

At the time, those things were very much a dream. I graduated from a segregated high school in the spring of 1963 and was assigned to an all-black dormitory when I enrolled at the University of Texas that fall. Throughout my four years at UT, the university's board of regents debated whether African Americans should be allowed to play on the football team.

Things have changed a lot since then. In 1963, we'd never had an African American in the cabinet or in the military's most senior ranks or in the executive suites of major corporations. Indeed, African Americans were just starting to become prominent in sports. So things have changed.

There hasn't been as much change as we would like, though. Many of our institutions are still segregated — by long-standing practice, if not by law. Indeed, we heard recently of a city where segregation is so severe that, it is

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what we seem to have lost — the dream. We have no shortage of legislative agendas. We are not suffering a shortage of management plans or policy analyses. There's certainly no shortage of attorneys willing to file lawsuits. What we've lost is the ability to form a clear and overarching moral vision. Having taken our eyes off the prize, we tend to get lost in some of the details. We become susceptible to a trivialization of what Dr. King was about and of what we should be about as Americans. The recent debate over "ebonics" is one example. This is the kind of silliness you can get into when you lose your perspective. There are other examples, less obvious than that one and perhaps more insidious. Our debates over more serious topics — such as crossracial adoptions, affirmative action and school busing - also reflect a form of myopia; we've lost our long-range vision.

Martin Luther King Jr. was not the only person in the 1960s to dream bold dreams. I remember a warm spring day in 1962 when President John F. Kennedy came to my hometown of Houston. He gave a speech at Rice University stadium in which he promised that by the end of the decade, this nation would have sent a man to the moon and brought him safely back to Earth. It was an audacious goal. Remember, at that time, the United States was be

We extended medical care to millions of Americans. We sent a lot of poor kids to college. I was one of them.

So when you hear people complain about the failures of the Great Society or about the excesses of the 1960s, remember this: Much that happened during that period was good. We sent a man to the moon. We reduced poverty. We increased opportunities for millions of Americans. And for a few bright shining moments, we shared a dream of racial harmony.

But then, some awful things also happened in the 1960s. First, evil men slew our dreamers: John Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Bobby Kennedy all slain by assassins' bullets. Then, our energies were sapped by a costly and divisive war in Southeast Asia. By the early '70s, our image of ourselves as a nation of boundless promise had been replaced by foreboding; our optimism had been replaced by pessimism.

The Arab oil embargo had reminded us of our dependence on oth

ers.

Environmentalists began warning

us about the limits to growth.

the kinds of things you hear coming out of Washington. When was the last time you heard talk about marshaling this nation's resources to launch the next great space adventure or to cure dread disease or end poverty?

You don't hear much talk like that. Look at what happened to health care reform. President Clinton wanted everyone in America to have decent, affordable health care. It was a noble goal; but it got barely a hearing in Congress.

Instead of inspiring us to do great things, many of our political leaders keep lengthening the list of things that we can't do. They tell us:

That we can't afford to take care of our sick;

That we can't afford to improve education; That we can't afford to house the homeless; and That this nation of immigrants can't afford to admit more immigrants.

We can't do this, we can't do that. Can't, can't, can't. Frankly, some of our elected leaders don't sound like leaders at all. Instead, they sound like a bunch of gloomy accountants poring over the ledgers of a bankrupt corporation.

The Iranian hostage crisis increased our sense of vulnerability.

And the failure of government action to end racism and poverty had led many of us to become disillusioned.

All of those disappointments made us susceptible to a message that said, "Dream less lofty dreams, be satisfied with doing less." "Forget everybody else; look out for No. 1." The generous, open, hopeful spirit of an earlier time gave way to cynicism and self-absorption. We had moved, in the course of just a few years, from being selfless dreamers to being members of the "Me Generation."

Our insecurity and self-centeredness have profoundly affected American political life. Think for a moment about

Well, I don't think America is bankrupt! We are a great country, filled with people who, when we share a dream, can achieve great things.

For the past 31⁄2 years, I've been privileged to work with an organization that continues to reflect America's can-do spirit - the U.S. military. The military went through some tough times in the '60s and '70s, but has rebuilt itself into the world's best fighting force. It also is one of the nation's most diverse institutions in terms of race and ethnic composition.

Let's remind ourselves of what our armed forces have done in recent years:

During Desert Shield, the military moved 700,000 people halfway around the world, then launched one of the most overwhelming military operations ever conducted. The logistics alone are mind-boggling. Think about it — moving a population larger than that of Washington, D.C., to one of the world's most barren places and sustaining it for months. But President Bush was determined that Iraq's invasion of Kuwait would not stand. He united our nation behind the goal of routing Saddam Hussein's forces, and the military did it.

Remember our humanitarian mission on the RwandaZaire border? Within days after President Clinton gave the order, our military had built an air bridge thousands of miles into central Africa and had begun to provide the clean water and food needed to keep tens of thousands of refugees from dying of disease and starvation. President Clinton said we should do it, the nation supported him, and our

armed forces did it.

Just over a year ago, we moved some 20,000 troops across the snow-covered mountains and frozen rivers of Central Europe to protect the peace in Bosnia. President Clinton said we should stop the carnage, the nation supported him, and the military did it.

o I know that we, as a nation, can do great things- if we begin with a noble objective. We turned back aggression in Kuwait, we saved hundreds of thousands of lives in Somalia and Rwanda, we restored a democratic government in Haiti, and we are keeping the peace in Bosnia.

Now I think it is time for us to focus on some noble goals for in the ourselves in the USA.

It is time for us to dream again. It is time for us, as a nation, to envision the great things we want to achieve together, the things we need to achieve together.

race and color, and we must make their dreams part of our American dream.

Second, our dream must be about the future, not about the past. Americans have a distinctive view of time: We assume that the future will be different from the past. This is not just a descriptive notion, it also is a part of Our shared system of values. We believe that the future should be different from the past. Thus, we have a particular attitude toward history: Americans learn from the past, but we do not live in the past.

Let me stress how distinctive this attitude is, and how important. In much of the world, people assume that tomorrow will be pretty much like today, just as today was just like yesterday. In much of the world, people assume that a poor man's son will be poor, that a rich man's son will remain rich. In parts of the world Bosnia is but one example people are still fighting over an injustice committed centuries ago.

One of those things is racial harmony. We are being pushed apart by a variety of forces, including the insidious belief that this country isn't big enough for all of us. Instead of working together to produce and share a bountiful harvest, we're pecking at each other like carrion over scraps. Too few of us are trying to bridge the racial gap. And frankly, too many of our leaders are trying to exploit it.

We need to keep our eyes on the prize. We need to envision a nation where people can be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. Only after we envision what our promised land should look like can we make the plans to get there.

How do we form that vision? How can we pick up the essence of the dream that Martin Luther King shared with us more than 30 years ago and project it into the future? Here's how I think we should proceed:

First, we must dream in color, not just in black and white. Thirty years ago, it made sense to focus exclusively on relations between the two major races in the U.S. But our nation's social canvas

has many more hues today than it did then. These demographic changes have huge implications for public policy, especially in areas such as school desegregation and affirmative action. I'm not suggesting that race is unimportant; it is very important. The color line that [William Edward Burghardt] Dubois wrote about nearly a century ago remains an enduring and painful problem. But we cannot see things solely in black and white.

Unfortunately, some of us have no interest in doing anything else; we aren't interested in talking with Hispanic Americans or Asian Americans. If we're to make real progress, however, we must consider the views of fourthgeneration Chinese Americans and first-generation immigrants from India. We must find out what they think about

We Americans revere our traditions, but we do not wallow in them. We remember our ancestors, but we don't expect to live like them. We expect a future that's very different from the past. Indeed, if we don't expect it, and if we don't try to make it happen, then we'll be stuck in the rut of history.

Third, we must do what Dr. King did: share our vision with others. We need to talk about it. We need a national conversation on race. Who are we as a people, and how should America look a generation or two from now? Think about somebody in today's world who may exemplify the future:

It might be [jazz musician] Wynton Marsalis, who has mastered the European classics of Handel and Brahms and the American classics of Duke Ellington and Miles Davis. Marsalis respects both traditions and demands that his audiences respect them, too.

It might be architect Maya Lin, whose stirring Vietnam [Veterans] Memorial stands as proof that someone who was not there can feel the grief of a mother whose son has fallen and, years later, cause an entire nation to mourn with her.

Or we might derive our vision of the future from a mundane, everyday experience. For example, I grew up in Houston, Texas. One of my favorite places to eat when I was growing up was at a barbecue "joint" - we didn't call it a “restaurant." It was owned by a black family named Green. Every time I went back to Houston, I'd visit Green's barbecue. A few years ago, I went back and something had changed. Mr. Green was no longer standing behind the cash register. He'd retired and sold his place to a Vietnamese family. But it still serves the same food hot, greasy, finger-lickin' good ribs and links. “Quality” in barbecue is