A Crisis of Leadership

Photo: National Archives

Argument by Alexander Gellos | April 22, 2025

In April 1949, at the signing ceremony for the North Atlantic Treaty (NATO’s founding document) in Washington D.C., Secretary of State Dean Acheson made a wry note of the orchestra’s choice of songs from the George Gershwin opera Porgy and Bess: “I’ve Got Plenty of Nothin’” and “It Ain’t Necessarily So.” Given that NATO had only just been founded and had yet to build up its capabilities, it was an apt remark. 

Lately, however, this particular anecdote hasn’t been a piece of trivia or an object of curiosity. Instead, it has felt more like a warning, a frightening reflection of where our foreign policy now stands. 

Currently, both the world and U.S. foreign policy are in chaos. The Trump administration’s abandonment of allies and appeasement of enemies is not just immoral and disgraceful; it is a reckless and dangerous course which will fundamentally weaken American global leadership and embolden Russia and China. I’m not entirely certain that Americans fully understand the damage that has been done to our foreign policy, national reputation, and the security of the United States and the Free World. 

To say the last few weeks have been a boon to Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping is a gross understatement. At the Munich Security Conference, Vice President J.D. Vance denigrated America’s European allies, and met with the leadership of the far-right Alternative for Germany party. With diplomatic talks in Saudi Arabia – an appropriate setting for such an odious farce – senior U.S. officials handed Russia a diplomatic windfall. Predictably, Kyiv was wholly excluded from any discussions about its own future. The administration’s statements have ranged from pressuring Ukraine into relinquishing its hopes of liberating its occupied territories to lifting sanctions on Moscow. News reports of possible NATO troop withdrawals from the Baltic States to sweeping cuts in the U.S. defense budget, will only exacerbate this deplorable course. 

Most appallingly, President Donald Trump took to social media to both blame Ukraine for being invaded and label Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a dictator. This moral equivalence and amplification of Kremlin propaganda constitutes some of the most shameful and reprehensible statements ever made by an American President. To abandon Ukraine, a free and courageous nation, as we once abandoned South Vietnam and Afghanistan, is unworthy of the United States. To vote with Russia at the U.N. is a deplorable and infamous action. Passé as it might seem to some, an eternal truth must be stated again: America’s national honor means something. 

The implications of this drastic shift cannot be overstated: by openly siding with the world’s dictatorships, the Trump administration has signaled to allies and adversaries alike that aggression will be tolerated, and that America’s word and bond are conditional. The longstanding foundations of our foreign policy – active American leadership, alliances and collective security, a strong defense, free trade, and the promotion of democracy – are in grave danger. 

The American-led liberal order has provided the foundation for the most peaceful and prosperous period in human history. A fundamental truth was stated pithily by former House Speaker Sam Rayburn: “Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a good carpenter to build one.” Such sentiments bear remembering. It took great effort to build this system but will take very little time to tear down. 

By throwing American policy into doubt, the Trump administration has ensured that our European allies are already questioning whether they can still rely on Washington. Should they doubt U.S. leadership and reliability and all it entails – everything from forward troop deployments to the nuclear umbrella – our friends might seek alternative paths, such as forming inter-European security organizations, or perhaps pursuing nuclear weapons programs. While this is an understandable impulse, it is unwise: with the exceptions of countries such as Poland, the Baltic States, and Finland (nations that have known Russian tyranny and expansionism), most NATO allies (particularly in Western Europe), are not adequately prepared for the major war which looks increasingly likely, and only the U.S. military is capable of fighting and winning a major conventional war. 

It is true that since the start of Russia’s war against Ukraine in 2014, little was done to deter something worse from happening in the future. But this is no time to be obsessing about past mistakes. Since the full-scale invasion three years ago, the Biden administration’s excellent and admirable bipartisan work ensured military and economic support for Ukraine, and welcomed Finland and Sweden to NATO. Yes, there is valid criticism to be leveled regarding the loitering and excessive caution in supplying weapons and munitions, but the fact remains that support for our courageous allies was provided.

The same principles apply today as they did yesterday: the United States must supply Kyiv with everything needed not just to survive, but to win. 

There is an especially erroneous line of thinking today that insists that relations with allies be viewed through the prism of absolutes, where everything is viewed as a zero-sum game. A strong transatlantic alliance ensures that American influence and interests extend beyond the realm of hard power, into soft power as well. Economic and diplomatic ties are just as vital to maintaining the postwar order as military bases. Moreover, many forget the most important component of this union: shared principles and values of democratic government, personal liberty, and human dignity. 

Lastly, the effects of American weakness today will extend far beyond Europe. Should Ukraine fall to Putin’s imperialism, a wider war will follow. Eastern Europe will doubtless be attacked, and China will be emboldened to invade Taiwan. Indeed, the outbreak of a major war is not a question of “if,” but “when.” Reminding a listless and anemic American electorate of this fact with vigorous moral clarity is long overdue.

When the Korean War broke out on June 25th, 1950, nearly every figure in government recognized the significance of the moment. John Foster Dulles (later to be Dwight D. Eisenhower’s Secretary of State), then in Japan negotiating the Treaty of San Francisco, sent a cable to Dean Acheson. Said Dulles: “to sit by while Korea is overrun by unprovoked armed attack would start a disastrous chain of events leading most probably to world war.” 

What must be done in the present – bolstering NATO and increasing aid for Kyiv, increasing military, economic, and diplomatic ties with allies, and combating Russia’s subversion and espionage – is the obvious course. So too, is raising defense spending to a minimum of at least 6% of GDP, as the only way to prevent a war is to be prepared to win one. 

This is not merely a debate over foreign policy preferences; it is a test of American resolve and the survival of the Free World. The choices made in the coming months will be far more important than the average voter realizes – if they realize. 

History is replete with examples of nations that declined not because of defeats during war, but because they withdrew from responsibilities during peace. The United States, always the indispensable nation, faces such a moment. 

There’s a silver lining though: we must remember that the present administration’s actions do not reflect this nation and its people. The United States has both the strength and the will to defend its values – the preservation, expansion, and victory of freedom, everywhere on earth.