TOM ARMBRUSTER
They say in a negotiation, the lion gets the lion’s share. By that standard, one might think Russia should get the largest share of a Ukrainian settlement by virtue of its resources, war machine, and population. But when Volodymyr Zelensky said, “The fight is here, I need ammunition, not a ride,” Ukraine became the lion.
With the U.S. administration still in transition, voices from Türkiye are important. There are ongoing political, military, diplomatic, and intelligence interactions every day, and I hope Türkiye’s influence can help sway the Trump administration to be bold as a democratic leader. That includes being bold on NATO’s status as a bulwark of stability, especially in Europe but also around the world.
The Moral High Ground
Ukraine and NATO have the moral high ground. Russia ceded any high ground when it started the conflict, violating the United Nations Charter. More high ground, if there ever was any, was lost when Russia committed human rights violations against the civilian population. That unjustified violence should also not be rewarded.
Russia has tried to use the argument of NATO encirclement to justify its action. But NATO was created to defend against Russia’s and the USSR’s own history of aggression. Finland, the Baltics, Afghanistan, Georgia, Czechoslovakia, Chechnya, Crimea, and the Donbas are some examples that predate the full-scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago. Sovereign states have a right to choose their security arrangements. If Ukraine wants to pursue NATO membership, that is Ukraine’s prerogative.
Winston Churchill said, “You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have tried everything else first.” We are in that phase right now. Trump’s transactional, real estate mentality and insistence on a deal might lead to a settlement, but it will not last. Ukraine has fought too long, sacrificed too much, and come too close to victory to allow for an unjust peace. If a settlement is forced on Ukraine, it will only embolden Putin and provoke another attack elsewhere or again in Ukraine.
Russia has tried to use the argument of NATO encirclement to justify its action. But NATO was created to defend against Russia’s and the USSR’s own history of aggression. Finland, the Baltics, Afghanistan, Georgia, Czechoslovakia, Chechnya, Crimea, and the Donbas are some examples that predate the full-scale invasion of Ukraine three years ago. Sovereign states have a right to choose their security arrangements. If Ukraine wants to pursue NATO membership, that is Ukraine’s prerogative.
Winston Churchill said, “You can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have tried everything else first.” We are in that phase right now. Trump’s transactional, real estate mentality and insistence on a deal might lead to a settlement, but it will not last. Ukraine has fought too long, sacrificed too much, and come too close to victory to allow for an unjust peace. If a settlement is forced on Ukraine, it will only embolden Putin and provoke another attack elsewhere or again in Ukraine.
If a settlement is forced on Ukraine, it will only embolden Putin and provoke another attack elsewhere or again in Ukraine.
Realism is no Substitute for Idealism
There is a strain of thought in the “realism” school of foreign policy that only power matters. But power requires legitimacy. Leaders who stay in power too long lose popular support and, thus, legitimacy. Leaders who silence the opposition likewise lose legitimacy. If you can’t get the support of people through your policies and your ideals, you are not an actual leader. Ideals like democracy, the rule of law, and respecting international borders have proved to be effective means of ensuring security and stability.
There are voices in the United States from both parties advocating for Ukraine, but rational arguments only go so far with President Trump. I can’t say the road ahead will be easy for Ukraine. Simply pointing out the facts will not be enough to change Trump’s mind. His relationship with Vladimir Putin is contrary to everything his party used to stand for. Ukraine is a democracy, a sovereign country, and a contributor to world food security. Ukraine deserves a secure future, and we should be natural allies.
I worked in Russia for six years as an American diplomat. I admire the Russian people. I worked with talented people who are ready for Russia to join the modern world. Russia can be rightly proud of its culture and history, but to truly achieve greatness, Russia needs to respect the rule of law and use its resources to contribute to global security, not disrupt it. The U.S. and Russia could also be allies, and a resumption of relations is not a bad thing, as long as it is not at the expense of Ukraine.
We could work jointly on reducing nuclear weapons, climate change, emergency response, disaster relief, and sustainability—all of which we’ve cooperated on in the past. During the initial window when the U.S. was engaged with Russia, we even worked on strengthening nuclear security at weapons plants, making sure Russian scientists had career possibilities in civilian endeavors, installing cameras and alarms in nuclear facilities, and even blending highly enriched uranium into low-enriched uranium for burning in U.S. nuclear facilities. Russia walked away from that cooperation soon after the NATO Kosovo bombing. That seemed to set the whole Putin drive to return to a pseudo-Soviet path in motion.
Re-establishing full diplomatic relations also allows the consulates to get back in business. In Vladivostok, we were encouraging flights from Alaska to the Russian Far East. There should be rich trade and cultural links. It would benefit both countries. The consulates in San Francisco and St. Petersburg could also have rich cultural programs, allowing people on both sides to better understand each other and build a lasting relationship based on trust.
Realism is no Substitute for Idealism
There is a strain of thought in the “realism” school of foreign policy that only power matters. But power requires legitimacy. Leaders who stay in power too long lose popular support and, thus, legitimacy. Leaders who silence the opposition likewise lose legitimacy. If you can’t get the support of people through your policies and your ideals, you are not an actual leader. Ideals like democracy, the rule of law, and respecting international borders have proved to be effective means of ensuring security and stability.
There are voices in the United States from both parties advocating for Ukraine, but rational arguments only go so far with President Trump. I can’t say the road ahead will be easy for Ukraine. Simply pointing out the facts will not be enough to change Trump’s mind. His relationship with Vladimir Putin is contrary to everything his party used to stand for. Ukraine is a democracy, a sovereign country, and a contributor to world food security. Ukraine deserves a secure future, and we should be natural allies.
I worked in Russia for six years as an American diplomat. I admire the Russian people. I worked with talented people who are ready for Russia to join the modern world. Russia can be rightly proud of its culture and history, but to truly achieve greatness, Russia needs to respect the rule of law and use its resources to contribute to global security, not disrupt it. The U.S. and Russia could also be allies, and a resumption of relations is not a bad thing, as long as it is not at the expense of Ukraine.
But that is still a step-by-step process and will take time. The Trump administration must stand up for the principles of the UN Charter and not reward aggression and human rights violations. Neither the United States nor Russia is on the right side of history with their present positions. Insistence on elections, focusing on mineral resources, and demanding territory for Russia is unacceptable. I hope the U.S. will come around again. For now, it is up to Ukraine and European allies to stand firm. And roar.
American Foreign Aid Program
Türkiye also has a huge stake in refugee programs and American assistance. As the Trump administration figures out its place in the world, allies can remind Trump of the importance of U.S. leadership, especially at a time when assistance programs are being cut. For many Germans, the indelible World War II memory is a U.S. GI handing them a chocolate bar. No doubt the candy was accompanied by a smile and maybe a few words in German. More than the sweetness, the humanity endured. The memory lasted generations, and the story was retold over and over.
That goodwill gesture was followed by the Marshall Plan, the most ambitious assistance program in history. The Marshall Plan worked. European countries devastated by the war got back on their feet thanks to American know-how, agriculture, and credit. Even more powerful than a chocolate bar is the ability to say, “My child was born in the American clinic,” or “The Americans built the road that leads to the capital, allowing farmers like me to sell in the big city.” Japan also benefited from U.S. assistance, and later, Korea—two shining examples of democracy and freedom today. The Pacific is now an ocean of competition between the United States and China. The U.S. is opening new embassies in the region while China’s humanitarian Peace Ark ship cruises into Pacific ports to treat patients and expand China’s influence. We need every bit of influence we can muster.
But the average Russian didn’t see enough from America to give us a chance to be international partners and guide Russia towards respecting international rules.”
Assistance Programs Can Shape Nations in Transition
While the U.S. passed the test in World War II, we failed after the fall of the Soviet Union. Our assistance came in the form of big capital outlays to keep the Russian government afloat. There were no American roads, hospitals, or schools built. We did a good job of securing Russian nuclear weapons and even buying highly enriched uranium to blend into low-enriched uranium to burn in American nuclear reactors. But the average Russian didn’t see enough from America to give us a chance to be international partners and guide Russia towards respecting international rules.
Part of the blame is Russia’s for turning off the assistance from USAID and the Peace Corps. If Russia falls, as someday it will, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and other American departments should be prepared to step in and guide the new government towards a better path with the West, oriented towards its neighbors as trading partners, not potential new lands to be conquered. Assistance is a tricky business. It doesn’t always work. But when it does, the results can last generations.
I counsel American soldiers getting ready to deploy to U.S. embassies worldwide. I tell them that the “Country Team,” the ambassador’s senior leaders from the agencies at the embassy, functions better than the interagency in Washington. An embassy hitting on all cylinders is a wonderful thing to experience. Public diplomacy programs with sports ambassadors create goodwill for American businesses. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) programs give the ambassador useful information about life “upcountry,” since USAID and the Peace Corps are out in the field doing their specialized work. They are the eyes and ears for the embassy, providing important political and security intelligence.
The ambassador’s knowledge of the country becomes as finely tuned as an alligator’s. If a frog jumps into the pond, the alligator knows! USAID is meant to be a lifeline for the poor but is more than that. It is an outlet for American farm goods. It responds to disasters worldwide. It plays an essential role in the triad of development, diplomacy, and defense that makes up the foreign policy effort. Yes, it can do better. We can return to building schools, roads, and hospitals. We can even start in Gaza and Ukraine. But we can’t cede this leadership role to others. The U.S. can and should lead. Let’s craft an assistance plan for the 21st century. And let’s be sure to include some chocolate.
We could work jointly on reducing nuclear weapons, climate change, emergency response, disaster relief, and sustainability—all of which we’ve cooperated on in the past. During the initial window when the U.S. was engaged with Russia, we even worked on strengthening nuclear security at
weapons plants, making sure Russian scientists had career possibilities in civilian endeavors, installing cameras and alarms in nuclear facilities, and even blending highly enriched uranium into low-enriched uranium for burning in U.S. nuclear facilities. Russia walked away from that cooperation soon after the NATO Kosovo bombing. That seemed to set the whole Putin drive to return to a pseudo-Soviet path in motion.
Russian Normalization Could be Beneficial: But not at Ukraine’s Expense
Re-establishing full diplomatic relations also allows the consulates to get back in business. In Vladivostok, we were encouraging flights from Alaska to the Russian Far East. There should be rich trade and cultural links. It would benefit both countries. The consulates in San Francisco and St. Petersburg could also have rich cultural programs, allowing people on both sides to better understand each other and build a lasting relationship based on trust.
But that is still a step-by-step process and will take time. The Trump administration must stand up for the principles of the UN Charter and not reward aggression and human rights violations. Neither the United States nor Russia is on the right side of history with their present positions. Insistence on elections, focusing on mineral resources, and demanding territory for Russia is unacceptable. I hope the U.S. will come around again. For now, it is up to Ukraine and European allies to stand firm. And roar.
American Foreign Aid Program
Türkiye also has a huge stake in refugee programs and American assistance. As the Trump administration figures out its place in the world, allies can remind Trump of the importance of U.S. leadership, especially at a time when assistance programs are being cut. For many Germans, the indelible World War II memory is a U.S. GI handing them a chocolate bar. No doubt the candy was accompanied by a smile and maybe a few words in German. More than the sweetness, the humanity endured. The memory lasted generations, and the story was retold over and over.
That goodwill gesture was followed by the Marshall Plan, the most ambitious assistance program in history. The Marshall Plan worked. European countries devastated by the war got back on their feet thanks to American know-how, agriculture, and credit. Even more powerful than a chocolate bar is the ability to say, “My child was born in the American clinic,” or “The
Americans built the road that leads to the capital, allowing farmers like me to sell in the big city.” Japan also benefited from U.S. assistance, and later, Korea—two shining examples of democracy and freedom today. The Pacific is now an ocean of competition between the United States and China. The U.S. is opening new embassies in the region while China’s humanitarian Peace Ark ship cruises into Pacific ports to treat patients and expand China’s influence. We need every bit of influence we can muster.
Assistance Programs Can Shape Nations in Transition
While the U.S. passed the test in World War II, we failed after the fall of the Soviet Union. Our assistance came in the form of big capital outlays to keep the Russian government afloat. There were no American roads, hospitals, or schools built. We did a good job of securing Russian nuclear weapons and even buying highly enriched uranium to blend into low-enriched uranium to burn in American nuclear reactors. But the average Russian didn’t see enough from America to give us a chance to be international partners and guide Russia towards respecting international rules.
Part of the blame is Russia’s for turning off the assistance from USAID and the Peace Corps. If Russia falls, as someday it will, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and other American departments should be prepared to step in and guide the new government towards a better path with the West, oriented towards its neighbors as trading partners, not potential new lands to be conquered. Assistance is a tricky business. It doesn’t always work. But when it does, the results can last generations.
I counsel American soldiers getting ready to deploy to U.S. embassies worldwide. I tell them that the “Country Team,” the ambassador’s senior leaders from the agencies at the embassy, functions better than the interagency in Washington. An embassy hitting on all cylinders is a wonderful thing to experience. Public diplomacy programs with sports ambassadors create goodwill for American businesses. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) programs give the ambassador useful information about life “upcountry,” since USAID and the Peace Corps are out in the field doing their specialized work. They are the eyes and ears for the embassy, providing important political and security intelligence.
The ambassador’s knowledge of the country becomes as finely tuned as an alligator’s. If a frog jumps into the pond, the alligator knows! USAID is meant to be a lifeline for the poor but is more than that. It is an outlet for American farm goods. It responds to disasters worldwide. It plays an essential role in the triad of development, diplomacy, and defense that makes up the foreign policy effort. Yes, it can do better. We can return to building schools, roads, and hospitals. We can even start in Gaza and Ukraine. But we can’t cede this leadership role to others. The U.S. can and should lead. Let’s craft an assistance plan for the 21st century. And let’s be sure to include some chocolate.
Tom Armbruster served as Consul General in Vladivostok, Russia from 2007 to 2010 and in U.S. Embassy Moscow as a Political and Nuclear Affairs Officer from 1997 to 2000. He retired as U.S. Ambassador to the Marshall Islands.
