ASHINGTON - In an era of extraordinary American wealth and influence in the world, Vice President Al Gore will say today that the United States should advance its security and economic interests abroad by giving more help to impoverished and repressed nations.
In his first major foreign-policy speech since he became a presidential candidate, Gore urges a ''new security agenda'' based on what he calls ''forward engagement.''
The policy would expand the definition of national security to include such issues as health, education for women and girls, and environmental protection abroad. All are problems that if unchecked could escalate into a military crisis later, Gore says in remarks for a forum today in Boston at the International Press Institute.
Gore's foreign-policy vision, his aides said, would mean an increase in foreign aid. This is an unpopular idea in Congress, which must approve such assistance. It also calls for expanded US involvement abroad at a time when many favor reduced commitments and a more stringent standard for the use of US troops.
The thrust of Gore's speech is this: With the advent of technology and international trade, it is impossible to retreat from the world. Isolating misbehaving countries, except in extreme cases, will only make them less stable and thus, a greater threat later to the United States. And the United States, with its overwhelming advantages, must take the lead to make the world a better, healthier, safer place.
With a new ''global age'' replacing the post-Cold War era, ''we need not only a new generation of weapons,'' Gore says. ''We need a new way of thinking.''
Gore's ambitious vision includes expanding NATO, engaging in peace-brokering in the Middle East, Northern Ireland, and the Balkans, and aiding the poorest nations of the world.
But the United States must get involved in regional conflicts ''selectively,'' and then only where success is virtually assured and when US allies are present to share the burden, he says.
''We cannot be the global policeman, but we must reject the new isolationism that says, `Don't help anywhere, because we can't help everywhere,''' Gore's prepared text says.
Gore makes only passing references to rights violations, chiding China for its record but insisting that engagement with China is the best way to bring about change.
The vice president criticizes Governor George W. Bush of Texas, his Republican opponent, whom he calls inexperienced and ''stuck in a Cold War mindset'' for his suspicion of former Cold War nemeses Russia and China.
While Gore, in his speech, urges a close relationship with these countries, Bush has warned against getting too cozy with either. China in particular should be held accountable for its rights abuses, Bush has said, echoing the concerns of both liberal and conservative critics of Beijing.
''China is a competitor, not a strategic partner,'' Bush said in a speech last year. ''We must deal with China without ill will, but without illusions.''
But Gore, while acknowledging China's troubles with its neighbor Taiwan and with rights at home, says in his speech that ''it is wrong to isolate and demonize China, to build a wall when we need to build a bridge.''
''Can we really isolate a nation with 1.2 billion people and nuclear weapons?'' Gore asks. ''Can we turn our backs on one of the most dynamic economies?''
''The reality of the global age is that Russia and China are indeed competitors, but also vital partners in our efforts to tackle problems menacing to us all,'' Gore concludes.
Despite Gore's criticisms, Gore and Bush agree on several important foreign-policy issues. Both want to include China in the World Trade Organization and to have permanent, normal trade relations with China. Both want to continue sanctions against Cuba and Iraq, and both favor an increase in military spending.
They disagree on the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which would prohibit atomic testing. Gore backs the treaty; Bush opposes it. The Russian Duma recently approved the document; the Clinton administration has been unable to persuade the US Senate to ratify it.
Bush also wants to cut off aid to Russia over its military campaign in the Russian republic of Chechnya, while Gore wants to continue to engage with Russia, hoping the cooperation will encourage reform there.
The problem with Bush, Gore says, is his lack of experience in foreign policy.
Last week, Bush visited Mexico, where he drew attention to the Clinton administration's failure to get ''fast-track'' legislation passed to ease trade barriers with Mexico. Bush also met with the Russian foreign minister, Igor Ivanov, apparently trying to boost his foreign policy image.
But Bush, Gore says, proposes a ''risky foreign policy scheme'' that does not ''meet the grand challenges of both the classic and new security agendas.''
The Texas governor, Gore says, almost ignores Africa, a continent perpetually suffering from war and famine.
''When it comes to the challenges of the New Security Agenda, Governor Bush's foreign policy is noticeably blank,'' Gore says in his address.
During the campaign, Bush has outlined a foreign policy that rejects ''protectionism and isolationism.'' But Gore contends that the Texas governor's policies will succumb to pressures from some elements of the GOP.
''One has to assume that these gaps in Governor Bush's foreign-policy views and experience will be filled by the ideologies and inveterate antipathies of his party - the right wing, partisan isolationism of the Republican congressional leadership,'' Gore says in the speech.
''Is Governor Bush willing to put partisanship aside for the cause of peace?'' Gore adds. ''I believe America can do better, for our own security, and for the ideals we must model to the world.''
