Trump's National Security Strategy Redefines Peace via Concessions

Key Quotes

"President Trump has been pushing a peace plan for Ukraine. He says he wants to end the bloodshed in that conflict involving Ukraine and Russia. European allies suggest that this peace deal will only make the world more dangerous and less peaceful, emboldening Russia, forcing a country, Ukraine, that is fighting for peace to throw in the towel and let a bully win--a bully who might well keep on bullying."

David Greene highlights the contrasting perspectives on President Trump's proposed peace plan for Ukraine. Greene points out that while Trump aims to end bloodshed, European allies fear this approach emboldens Russia and compromises Ukraine's fight for sovereignty. This quote encapsulates the core tension between a desire for immediate peace and the long-term implications of appeasing an aggressor.

"I think long term listeners of this show will know that I think peace through strength is a real thing. I'm a Reagan era girl and a Trump era world, I suppose, but I don't think it counts as peace simply to not be at war if the cost of that is stability and you know, for instance, one can have peace if you give the bully everything that they want. One can have peace if you're under the control of an authoritarian tyrannical regime. That's not the definition of peace. Peace has to be on your own terms, protecting your own liberty interests, and it has to be stable."

Sarah Isgur articulates her definition of peace, emphasizing that it must be achieved on one's own terms and be stable, rather than merely the absence of conflict. Isgur contrasts this with a peace that comes at the cost of liberty or by conceding to a bully's demands. This quote underscores her belief in "peace through strength" and rejects a superficial understanding of peace that ignores underlying oppression or instability.

"For me, I think it is multi-layered. I think it is the absence of hostility and freedom for a people to enjoy a certain amount of self-determination in pursuit of prosperity. That's kind of how I think about it. So totally agree with Sarah when she says just because there is no, where there's stability and the absence of kinetic hostility, but you're living in an oppressed state, like that's not peace."

Mo Eleftheri expands on the concept of peace, defining it as more than just the absence of conflict. Eleftheri includes the crucial elements of freedom and self-determination for a people to pursue prosperity. He aligns with Sarah Isgur's view, asserting that stability under an oppressive regime does not constitute true peace, highlighting the importance of agency and liberty.

"I always think on the foreign policy stage and the domestic policy stage to some extent as well, it is a little bit hard to separate out someone's public comments from what's happening behind the scenes, which we do not know. And so I think we should have a bit of humility in talking about this as well because sometimes what you need to say publicly to get both sides to the table to be willing to make the kind of concessions that they're going to need to make for the type of peace that, let's say, we all agree on the definition of, nevertheless, your public statements may sound different."

Sarah Isgur introduces a nuanced perspective on political communication, suggesting that public statements may not always reflect the full reality of behind-the-scenes negotiations. Isgur advocates for humility in analyzing political actions, positing that leaders might employ different public rhetoric to facilitate peace talks and encourage concessions. This quote emphasizes the potential disconnect between public pronouncements and private diplomatic efforts.

"When you're using that to put pressure on your ally or allies, and the rhetoric you're using totally and completely aligns with the rhetoric of your adversary, I don't see that applying. Like, in the case of Ukraine, the United States under President Trump is changing its long-standing principles of standing up with European allies against the threat of first Soviet and now Russian aggression. It is putting pressure on our European ally, Ukraine, to give up territory that was stolen by Russia, the aggressor, and saying, in the interest of peace, you're just going to have to deal, Zelenskyy, you're just going to have to learn to live with this new reality."

Mo Eleftheri critiques President Trump's approach to pressuring allies, arguing that aligning rhetoric with adversaries is counterproductive. Eleftheri contends that under Trump, the U.S. is abandoning its principles by pressuring Ukraine to cede territory to Russia. This quote highlights Eleftheri's concern that such actions undermine long-standing alliances and reward aggression, potentially creating a dangerous precedent.

"I think that virtue has always come and gone from American politics. I think this is what the founders were very aware of, that there would be people elected to office who were not purely virtuous. If men were angels, we would need no government. So the concept isn't new."

Sarah Isgur addresses the question of virtue in American politics, stating that it has always been a fluctuating element. Isgur references the founders' understanding that leaders would not be perfectly virtuous, citing the principle that government is necessary precisely because humans are not angels. This quote suggests that the presence or absence of virtue in leaders is not a novel issue in American political history.