The following is adapted from a speech delivered at Hillsdale College on October 21, 2025, sponsored by Hillsdale’s Center for Military History and Strategy.
"The Trump administration has also had success resolving a number of seemingly intractable regional conflicts, including Azerbaijan–Armenia, India–Pakistan, Egypt–Ethiopia, Thailand–Cambodia, and Rwanda–DRC. And Secretary of State Rubio’s reforms are refocusing the State Department on its core mission. We are on the right track, and it is important that we stay on it."
"Diplomacy is an instrument of strategy that great powers use to survive and gain an advantage in competition with other powerful states. Excellence in diplomacy is a vital prerequisite to the success and endurance of great powers. Diplomatic skills atrophied in the United States after the end of the Cold War, as we came to rely on military technology and economic sanctions as the main tools of our foreign policy. But now we are entering a dangerous age in which great powers are competing for the things they have competed over from the beginning of time: territory, resources, influence, and prestige. In this setting, the United States will need to recover the lost art of diplomacy.
"First, let me clarify that by diplomacy, I don’t mean John Kerry landing in Davos, Switzerland to give a lecture to the world’s political and business leaders about climate change. I mean the use of negotiations to reconcile conflicting interests on matters of war and peace. Diplomacy is an art and is best defined by its outcomes rather than by its processes. The most consequential outcome by far is the constraint of the power of one’s adversaries—in other words, setting limits to the hostile accumulation of power. Powerful states are naturally constrained by all kinds of things, such as geography, fearful neighbors, and limitations of military technology. Diplomacy works to maximize these constraints in order to restrict an aggressive opponent’s options for conquest. Of all forms of diplomacy between great powers, the most important concerns itself with limiting, avoiding, or preparing for war.
"I should also define what I mean by strategy: it is the matching of national means, in the form of military and economic resources, to national ends, in the form of foreign threats and opportunities. Danger arises when gaps emerge between the means at a nation’s disposal and the ends to which those means must be applied. Diplomacy is critical when a state faces enemies too numerous or powerful to be deterred or defeated by military means alone. Diplomacy’s role in strategy is to increase the external means at the nation’s disposal by building coalitions and to reduce the threats arrayed against it through détente. Effective diplomacy permits states to avoid tests of strength that are beyond their ability to bear.
"There are two erroneous conceptions of diplomacy that have become entrenched in the modern mind, one mostly on the left and the other mostly on the right. The main error on the left is thinking that diplomacy’s purpose is to build rule-making institutions that transcend nation-states and that will eventually expunge war from the human experience. A historical example of this is seen in the policies of President Woodrow Wilson after the First World War, as in his promotion of a League of Nations. This way of thinking persists today in the liberal institutionalism of those who advocate for a rules-based international order." . . .
