On November 11th, America will observe Veteran’s Day, so named in 1954 by President Eisenhower. For 35 years, Americans had celebrated Armistice Day in recognition of the end of World War I, and as a day dedicated to the “cause of world peace.” Following the massive mobilizations and sacrifices of World War II and the Korean War, however, Congress renamed Armistice Day as Veteran’s Day, and by so doing honored the millions more who had sacrificed for the common good.

Bugler in front of capitol

In his proclamation recognizing Armistice Day, President Wilson said:

“To us in America, the reflections of Armistice Day will be filled with solemn pride in the heroism of those who died in the country’s service and with gratitude for the victory, both because of the thing from which it has freed us and because of the opportunity it has given America to show her sympathy with peace and justice in the councils of the nations…"

Wilson’s call to recognize those who served in the “War to End All Wars” came on the heels of his failed effort to establish the League of Nations, and have America join it. Not until the end of World War II did America choose to join an international organization dedicated to the maintenance of peace and security, the United Nations. And in an effort to improve its abilities to prevent, mitigate and transform violent conflict, the United States established the United States Institute of Peace (USIP) in 1984 to complement the work of America’s soldiers and diplomats at the State and Defense departments.

Today’s complex global environment poses security challenges that transcend the roles and responsibilities of our military forces. America’s conflicts have traditionally been military-dominated activities, but increasingly it is the diplomats and organizations like USIP who work in tandem with the military to achieve and maintain the desired result: the re-establishment and sustainability of peace.   

Since 1984, USIP has worked with both our diplomatic corps and military in our efforts to prevent and resolve international conflict. I saw this work from both angles. In 2003, as an active duty Army colonel I worked closely with USIP as it provided significant immediate conflict stabilization support to the American mission in Iraq. A few years later, as a retired Army officer, I was privileged to serve as USIP’s Iraq program director where we joined forces with the military and diplomats to 2007 to stabilize the violent “Triangle of Death” in Mahmoudiyah. Our institute staff of local Iraqi civilians and U.S. “peacebuilders” played a critical role in training conflict reconciliation facilitators who helped Iraqis peacefully resolve hot button issues. Since then, senior military leaders have recognized the value of USIP’s work in Iraq and several other countries in the region, including Libya and Tunisia. And the State Department has also welcomed USIP’s assistance in dealing with inter-ethnic and gender-based conflict in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Up close we see the very real sacrifices and commitment of all our colleagues on the ground. We value our work with them, now and in the future.

So, on this Veterans Day as the nation justifiably honors those members of the military who have served and died in defense of the United States, I wish to extend my own keen appreciation to fellow veterans and all the others who “show sympathy with peace and justice” in dangerous and remote places on behalf of the American people.


Latest Publications

India Elections: Foreign Policy Rhetoric Mixes Bluster and Real Differences

India Elections: Foreign Policy Rhetoric Mixes Bluster and Real Differences

Monday, May 20, 2024

Historically, foreign policy has rarely been a core area for political debate in India’s national elections. This year, the BJP is again widely anticipated to win a parliamentary majority, however, as hundreds of millions of Indian voters head to the polls, both Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the opposition INDIA alliance, headed by the Congress Party’s Rahul Gandhi, have made a point to highlight their differences on several high-profile national security issues.

Type: Analysis

Global Elections & Conflict

In Europe, Xi Looks to Boost Ties — and Sow Divisions

In Europe, Xi Looks to Boost Ties — and Sow Divisions

Thursday, May 16, 2024

Chinese leader Xi Jinping last week made his first trip to the European continent in five years, visiting France, Hungary and Serbia. In Paris, Xi faced tough questions over trade and China’s support for Russia and its war in Ukraine, but met a much friendlier reception in Budapest and Belgrade, both of which view China as a key economic and political partner. Still, the visit demonstrated the obstacles Beijing faces in fostering deeper ties across Europe, where resentment is simmering over China’s moral and materiel aid to Russia and what Europe views as unfair trade practices.

Type: Question and Answer

Global Policy

Traumatic Decarbonization in Fragile States

Traumatic Decarbonization in Fragile States

Wednesday, May 15, 2024

The process of decarbonization—that is, the replacement of fossil fuels with non-hydrocarbon-based forms of energy—is essential for meeting the climate goals articulated by international agreements. But in fragile, oil-dependent nations, where hydrocarbon revenues are often a key means of political control, decarbonization can spell the difference between peace and conflict. This report examines the consequences of the sudden loss of oil revenues for fragile, conflict-affected states and provides recommendations for policymakers on how to manage future decarbonization peacefully.

Type: Peaceworks

Conflict Analysis & PreventionEconomicsEnvironmentFragility & Resilience

China’s Edge in the Pacific Islands: Xi Jinping Makes Time for Leaders

China’s Edge in the Pacific Islands: Xi Jinping Makes Time for Leaders

Wednesday, May 15, 2024

If the U.S. government wants an edge over China in the Pacific Islands, it needs to facilitate more meetings between the president of the United States and regional leaders, preferably one-on-one. When Pacific Island leaders fly to Beijing, they often have a one-on-one meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping, but such a meeting between the leader of a Pacific Island country and a sitting president of the United States has never taken place. The White House has only conducted joint meetings with Pacific Island leaders. Sometimes even joint meetings don’t make the cut.

Type: Analysis

Global Policy

View All Publications