Episode 52. US National Security's Sputnik Moment with Admiral William McRaven and Congressman Seth Moulton: How Diplomacy, Education, and Congress Can Meet the Challenge

Episode Transcript:

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:00:00] From the American Academy of Diplomacy. This is The General and the Ambassador. Our podcast brings together senior US diplomats and senior US military leaders to talk about their partnerships during major international crises or during challenges affecting US national security. You can find our podcast, information on our guests, and much more on our website generalambassadorpodcast.org. My name is Ambassador Deborah McCarthy, and I'm the producer and host of the series. Today on The General and the Ambassador, we will talk with two very special guests, Admiral William McRaven and Congressman Seth Moulton. Our topic will be the military and diplomatic tools required to ensure our nation's security in the face of current and future challenges. Admiral McRaven served 37 years in the United States Navy. A Navy SEAL, he commanded at every level within the special operations community, including as Commander Special Operations Command at MacDill Air Force Base. He helped plan and lead operations, which included the capture of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. He served as the chancellor of the University of Texas, and is now a professor at the Lyndon B Johnson School of Public Service at the University of Texas in Austin. Admiral McRaven recently co-chaired a report published by the Council on Foreign Relations focused on innovation and national security. Congressman Seth Moulton has served as a US representative from Massachusett's Sixth Congressional District since 2015. He is a member of the House Armed Services Committee and of the House Budget Committee. Prior to being a member of Congress, Seth Moulton served four combat tours in Iraq as a Marine infantry officer. He co-chaired the Future of Defense Task Force, which recently issued its report looking at next generation threats and the priorities for the national security community. It is the first time Congress has looked beyond the annual defense budget in the last 30 years. Gentlemen, thank you for joining the podcast series. Before we start, I want to ask you to share a little bit about yourselves beyond the official bios. How did you each become interested in foreign affairs? Congressman Moulton, I read somewhere that at one point you thought of joining the Peace Corps? Admiral McRaven, I assume it was the lure of the sea, which by the way, took my father away for many years. Congressman if we can start with you.

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:02:26] Thank you Ambassador. First of all, it's an honor to be here with you and the Admiral, two extraordinarily accomplished leaders who have worked for a long time to keep our nation safe and we should all be grateful for your service. You know, for me, it was actually my college minister who challenged each of us at Harvard to think beyond ourselves to how we can serve others, how we could make a life we'd be proud of, not just a living. And I do believe there are many ways to do that, many ways to serve. So yes, I considered several of them, including the Peace Corps, but at the end of the day, I had so much respect for the 17 and 18 year olds who choose to serve on the front lines of our nation's military that I decided that's where I want it to be.

Adm. William McRaven: [00:03:10] Let me also say what a privilege and an honor it is for me to be kind of sharing the virtual stage with the two of you. But to your question, I was raised in a military family. My father was a career Air Force Officer, but started off in the Army Air Corps. During World War One, he had been playing professional football. He was a running back for the Cleveland Rams. That's the Cleveland Rams back in the late thirties and early forties. And as the storm clouds of war were brewing, he and five of his teammates drove from Cleveland to California and signed up and he joined the Army Air Corps. So he was a fighter pilot throughout World War II, a little bit of time in Korea. And so growing up in this military family, you just got the sense, particularly from this greatest generation, frankly, both my mother and my father, incredibly patriotic, thoughtful, but they were not naive to the problems either in the United States or in the world. And so around the dinner table, a lot of times I would hear them talking, and with their friends, on serious, you know, national security issues, foreign affairs issues. And so this was just for me to gravitate towards the military and towards this life seemed to be the right thing to do.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:04:16] I want to dive into the work you each did with US diplomats during your years on active duty. Congressman Moulton, you arrived in Iraq before the system of PRTs were set up in which State Department people were paired with military colleagues. We covered the work of PRTs in an earlier podcast. How did it work on the ground with our diplomats when you were there?

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:04:36] As we now no, there was not much of a plan for what was going to happen after the invasion of Iraq. You know, we're US Marines, we're supposed to be first in, and supposedly, we were told first out. I will note with a smile to the Admiral that, actually, even before  the SEALs. I remember the first time I saw SEALs in the invasion, it was when they turned up a few hours after my platoon had cleared one of the tallest buildings in Baghdad, and wanted to use it as a sniper position. And I think I was thinking, my gosh, it's about time you guys arrived. But in any event, You know what happened was that there was no plan. There was no robust State Department presence. And so we kind of had to figure it out on the fly. The US military, young Marines, like myself, 25 years old, platoon commander with a bunch of 18 year olds had to do a lot of the occupation duty and essentially do much of the State Department work in those early days, working with the agriculture department, the fire department, trying to stand up a local police department from the remnants of what was left. You know, we quickly learned just how critical the limited State and USAID and other development resources were to our mission. But working with them was a real challenge. And I'll give you one quick story to illustrate this. I found this amazing woman named Fern Holland who worked for USAID . I mean, she has an incredible life story, but in any event, we were working together on some things with the Iraqis. But my Battalion Commander told me that I can not work directly with diplomats. If I want it to work with USAID . It had to go through him as my Battalion Commander, up to the Regimental Commander, to the Division Commander, to Baghdad, across to the State Department, and then all the way down to the USAID  worker. And so as a practical matter, every single day, I would go over to the State Department headquarters where she was working. And if I ever heard my Battalion Commander coming down the hallway, I would literally hide in her closet, so he wouldn't see me. And that's what it took to work with the State Department on the ground in the early days in Iraq.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:06:30] Well, Admiral the State Department has a close relationship with SOCOM forged in many ways by the work that you did. We have diplomats that are foreign policy advisors that are assigned throughout the special operations community. And SOCOM has dedicated liaison officers in many embassies. I know I had them in my embassy in Lithuania. Admiral , you worked with diplomats in a lot of other incarnations as well. So can you give us some examples of how you work with them? Focusing in particular, on some challenges you may have encountered, for the cultures are very different.

Adm. William McRaven: [00:07:06] Yeah. Well, let me start off by saying, I may be the biggest fan of the State Department you'll ever meet. Seth was talking about the work that the young State Department, the Foreign Service Officers and those folks that worked for State on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, I mean, it was heroic, nothing short of heroic. They did not have a lot of the security protection that you saw with the Marines or the SEALs or the Army. I mean, they were kind of out there alone and unafraid, or at least alone in a lot of cases, having to deal with the local tribes and the leaders, the mayors they were trying to stand up. And these were young, you know, again, 25 to 30 year old State Department personnel, just doing a remarkable job and you could not help, but be inspired again. I think of them as kind of young kids, as I was an older flag officer at the time. But the work they did was incredible, but that frankly, I had seen that in my time in the military well before that. You mentioned about the relationship between SOCOM and the State Department. There has always been a deep relationship between the special operations community and the State Department, because we, the special operations community, at least  pre-9/11, we were in about 110 countries around the world. Now that may have been one or two people, or it may have been a special forces A team, or a SEAL platoon conducting training, you know, working with the locals. And we always had this relationship with the Ambassador or the Deputy Chief of Mission and the country team, as you well know, Ambassador, you know, you don't do anything without the support of the country team when you're in the military. At the end of the day, the Ambassador has the final say on whatever the military is going to do do in that particular country. The challenges that we faced a lot of times were perception. When I was running Special Operations Command Europe, at the time we also had responsibility for Africa. And as you know, sometimes the ambassadors in Africa may be a first-tour ambassador, which I encountered a number of times. And when that happens, they have this perception of special operations. Like, you're going to be these guys in black balaclavas with Blackhawk  helicopters. You're going to be cresting over to kill somebody in their country and you have to show them that, no, that's really not why we're here. We're here to do medical capabilities, med caps, and vet caps, where we work with the locals and the villages. And we bring them medical capabilities, veterinarian capabilities. We do humanitarian assistance. This is not all altruistic. A lot of times we do these things so that we can understand what's going on in the ground, but also so that we can kind of win the hearts and minds of the locals. So, what I would offer in short is that my experience with the State Department throughout my career has been absolutely magnificent. The challenges have always been where there've been challenges, kind of overcoming the perception of who we are as a special operations outfit.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:09:50] Well, since  9/11, special ops has also gone into humanitarian missions, working at the village level, et cetera. How does that de-conflict with what USAID does? I mean, is it mission creep into what USAID  does or complimentary?

Adm. William McRaven: [00:10:05] I think they're very complimentary. Now the fact of the matter is that there has often been discussion about, well, why doesn't the State Department take on this role? And the State Department just doesn't have the capacity to do what the military does in terms of humanitarian assistance. Yeah, they don't have the helicopters to move the aid packages from point a into the mountains of point B. They don't have the vehicles to move things. They don't have the security to protect the forces if they're moving into a little bit of a hostile area. But once again, when we sit down with the country team and we determine areas where we need to provide humanitarian assistance, it's always done in consultation with USAID. We don't want to double our efforts where we don't have to. And we've got to do the coordination upfront with all the members of the country team, or you don't have an effective program.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:10:49] Well, I wanted to give our listeners a better understanding of the role of Congress in US foreign policy. The US Constitution divides some foreign relations powers between the executive and legislative branches. The president is the Commander in Chief. Congress can regulate international commerce, declare war, and is in charge of the funding of all government agencies. It also approves key nominations, including combatant commanders and ambassadors. So Congressman, you've noted that the role of Congress is particularly important for you having served in battle. In a speech at Brookings in the fall of 2019, you said that , "playing politics with war and foreign policy takes on a whole new meaning, when you know some of the people who die as a result." In your view, what is the most important role for Congress in foreign policy?

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:11:38] I'd have to say the single most important role is deciding whether or not we go to war. And that is our constitutional responsibility. And that means having an honest, open debate before the American people about the trade-offs of going to war, you know, not failing to challenge the administration as the Congress did with all of President Bush's faulty intelligence that got us into Iraq. I mean, you can't just blame the administration there. Congress didn't do its job to truly question what was going on. And today it's even worse because we're not even having that debate at all. We're not even having a vote on the wars that we continue to get involved in. We're essentially just extending the same Authorization for the Use of Military Force that we used after 9/11, you know, sending young Americans to die for something that happened before they were even born, and often has very little connection to the wars that were actually involved in today overseas. That's the most fundamental requirement and we're failing at that. We're failing to have the political debate, the difficult, challenging, politically contentious debate that we need to have before the American people to meet our constitutional obligation. But there's a lot more that we can do to not just decide whether or not we go to war, but to fundamentally ensure the peace. I think much of what the Admiral was speaking about with State and the cooperation that's necessary with the military, I mean, part of the problem is that we don't provide enough funding for the State Department. One of the groups of people in Congress you will see consistently advocating for more State Department funding across party lines are us veterans. You know, we veterans understand how critical State is. We all know General, now Secretary, Mattis quote that if you're going to cut State Department funding, you better buy me more ammunition. We also need to do fundamental things like fund education, build alliances, support, strong arms control, you know, show the world that if we fight America will win, but we'd rather work for peace than for war. All that can be influenced by the budgetary decisions that Congress makes. And to be perfectly honest, I don't think we take those responsibilities seriously enough.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:13:42] Well, that gets me to the question about resources. Obviously the diplomatic side of the house is under-resourced compared to the Department of Defense. So what can be done to get more resources to advance the more peaceful side of our national security toolkit.

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:13:59] I think one of the things that helps is having more veterans in Congress, that's something that I've been fighting for because we understand the real consequences here for our troops if we don't properly resource all the things that prevent us from having to go to war, including the US State Department. One of the things that we examined in my Future of Defense Task Force was the role that things like arms control and alliances have in our national security. You know, it's significant that when the Russians launched Sputnik, Congress didn't respond by just pouring a whole bunch of money into rocket forces. We poured a whole bunch of money into graduate school education, because we knew that that was what was fundamentally necessary to meet this technological challenge that the Russians presented to us. And likewise, I think that for some of the national security challenges we have around the world, more emphasis and more resources invested in building alliances and building our diplomatic forces would prevent us from ever having to go to war. We've had so much, this remarkable run of peace in Europe because of NATO. NATO has been remarkably successful. We've had NATO to meet the challenge of the Soviet Union. And at the end of the day, we won. Russia is still a real threat, but we won the Cold War. Well, now our greatest threat is China, and yet we don't have a version of NATO in the Pacific. We have a lot of individual alliances, but not as many comprehensive alliances, the Admiral can speak in more detail to this, of course, but it's not that there's an easy solution. The point is that we need to think more about the role of diplomacy in our national security. And I think that we've not done enough of that in recent decades.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:15:38] Well, Admiral I'd wanted to ask you, you've worked closely with Congress, you know, throughout your years. What is the most helpful role Congress plays in foreign policy and what is the least helpful?

Adm. William McRaven: [00:15:49] I'll echo everything that Congressman Moulton just said in terms of the role of Congress and making the decision whether or not we should go to war. And again, recognizing that Congress holds the purse strings. So at any point in time, if we are overextending our efforts, they have the power, they have the ability to reign in the military or our foreign policy, if it starts to get out ahead of itself. And I think this is an incredibly valuable role. The other role is the role of Congress to appoint both combatant commanders and ambassadors, and under secretaries, the people that are going to make the policy and conduct the foreign and the national security operations are chosen by Congress, are selected by Congress. At least the senior members are. The ambassadors that go forward, if they have problems, then maybe they weren't vetted well enough early on maybe enough hard questions weren't asked when they were going through the confirmation process. So I do think that this is another important role for Congress. In terms of what they do that complicates matters, there are times of course, when you see Congressmen and women on both sides of the aisle that have their own agenda and sometimes go forward to meet with heads of state or foreign ministers that is sometimes not aligned with what the policy of the United States is. And then we begin to send mixed signals on what is our US foreign policy. Not that they don't have the right or the latitude to do that, but I do think that that sometimes complicates matters when it comes to the mixed signaling of what is our foreign policy. I'll leave you with one last thing, which again, I want to really emphasize the things that Congressman Moulton said, but this idea about a robust debate, a robust debate on whether we are going to war, whether we are going to build a wall that separates us from Mexico, whatever the issue is that has national security implications, foreign policy implications, there needs to be a robust discussion in Congress and Congress needs to take the time to educate their constituency. You know, unfortunately today, most of the people out there get their news from social media and a lot of sources that may not be as accurate as we would like them to be. They need to hear from their representatives in Congress about the value of certain foreign policy decisions or the downfalls of certain foreign policy decisions. This education role is important as well.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:18:07] Well, there's also an education role for members of Congress, some of whom are new. Congressman, I first met you when you came to Lithuania and traveled to other places as well. These trips are very important in shaping opinions. In your travels, what has been, you know, a visit that took place that really changed the minds of the members of the delegation, such that then when they returned, they looked at things a different way?

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:18:32] Actually a great example for me was a trip that I took several years ago to Eastern Europe with Chairman Thornberry, who was the Republican Chairman of the Armed Services Committee at the time, great Congressman, great friend. We went over there to see the Russian influence in Eastern Europe. And what we discovered is that while the United States was very much prepared to fight the same Cold War fight we've been fighting for a long time, Russia was adopting a whole new approach to warfare. They call it hybrid warfare where they're attacking us, through the internet, trying to undermine the democratic institutions of countries in Eastern Europe. And this is something that we didn't really appreciate very much on the Armed Services Committee. I think I was someone who perhaps appreciated it more than others, but my eyes were opened. And I think that it helped change the minds of some of the others on the committee. As a result, we put a lot more money into countering this new type of warfare, this alternate type of aggression. Of course, even then this was 2015. I didn't appreciate that Russia would use those very tactics against us here at home in America, in the 2016 election. So that was a trip that really stands out in my mind. But I think it's important to say that there's this stigma around congressional travel, that you're, you know, an absentee Congressman that you're taking a taxpayer funded vacation. And I really wish we could break that stigma because understanding these things like understanding what Russia is doing in Eastern Europe are incredibly important to doing our jobs. John McCain did a lot of good, I mean, literally saved lives when he showed up around the world and shined the light on injustice and refugee camps, or directly relayed the concerns he heard from rank and file service members who weren't getting what they needed from Washington. And he came back and did the work. You know, we need more of that in Congress. When I went to Cambodia for the Future Defense Task Force early last year, it was the first time the government there had even met with Americans since President Trump took office. Cambodia could be a powerful ally for us against China in that part of the world, but they're being heavily courted by China. And it's hard to win that competition for their allegiance if America isn't even showing up. The Admiral mentioned that sometimes members of Congress have their own agendas. That can be a real problem. Well, I'm always very careful to coordinate closely with the ambassadors on the ground and the officials in Washington, even before we go. But an example of where I think it was really important to have a strong, a robust congressional presence overseas has been over the past few years when it was actually the administration and the President in particular, who was really not consistent with American foreign policy or even American values. And when a bi-partisan group of Congress members would show up overseas and say that look, that may be what the President is saying, but don't forget, we have a voice here too. And here are Republicans and Democrats, both telling you that we will live up to our values. We will live up to our obligations to you. We're still here. Even if the president is talking about going home. That was very important, and that's an example of where Congressional travel can make a difference in our foreign policy.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:21:36] Well, I must say in my years, 37 years in the Foreign Service, I found the congressional travel to be immensely useful. It gives perspective of what's happening in Washington, and then we can help provide and shape views as well.

Adm. William McRaven: [00:21:49] I was testifying before the House Armed Services Committee, many years ago and one of the Congressmen asked me, what could Congress do, what could they do better for us? And I said, send me more CoDel's (Congressional Delegations), and people just about fell out of their chairs. And I said, no, you don't understand. One, the soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines, we actually like to see these Congressional Delegations come over. The soldiers take great pride in being able to show the members of Congress the work they're doing. But more importantly to Congressman Moulton's point, you have an opportunity to kind of educate and showcase the things that you were doing on the ground. And if they are not consistent with foreign policy, with what the appropriate foreign policy is, then that's a message the Congressmen need to take back to the Hill and to their constituents. I want to make sure that my previous remarks weren't misconstrued though. I'm all about bipartisanship coming forward. And again, to the congressman's point, Congress has an equal role in foreign policy as the executive branch does. And it is important when one or the other branch is not aligned with American values, then somebody needs to stand up. And make that known. And so I've always appreciated the great bi-partisan nature of the CoDel's and as the Congressman knows, and as you know, they are bipartisan I don't know that I've ever seen a CoDel that is one side of the aisle or the other. They always come in a bipartisan manner and they have always been well appreciated and very supportive of the troops on the ground. So I was always thrilled to have them.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:23:09] Well, I want it to turn now to a discussion of the need for new tools in the national security toolkit. You've both recently been involved in the publication of separate reports on the future of national security. Congressman, you were co-chair of the House Armed Services Committee's, Future Defense Task Force, which we mentioned earlier, and Admiral you co-chaired the report by the Council on Foreign Relations, entitled Innovation and National Security:

Keeping Our Edge. In these reports, gentlemen, you compare the current challenge to the Manhattan Project and the space program, why is this sort of a Sputnik moment for US national security?

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:23:46] Because if we don't respond by dramatically changing what we're doing and how fast we're doing it, we will lose this race. Sputnik showed America that we could lose the Space Race to Russia. We are trying to show America that we can lose the race for our entire nation's security, indeed, the race for global leadership and the future of democracy, to China. The stakes are astronomically high. And while we absolutely can win, we are not currently on a winning trajectory, we're on a losing one. And so this is a pivotal moment and it's critical that we actually pivot.

Adm. William McRaven: [00:24:23] I think the Congressman's exactly right. You pulled that term Deborah, as you know, that is what we led with, the CFR report, was that it was a Sputnik moment. We had to wake up and realize that, yes, we still have a lead at this point in time, certainly in AI and machine learning in genomics, but in the next 10 years, if we don't take some dramatic action today, then we are not going to be the leaders five or 10 years from now. We do need to wake up and make some bold moves now.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:24:51] Well in the reports there's obviously, as you mentioned, much emphasis on technology and the need for new alliances and agreements. In the CFR report Admiral , you recommend that the State Department, as well as Treasury create a Technology Alliance. And in the report on the Future of Defense, Congressman, you call for the  US to negotiate a new treaty on artificial intelligence. Going into the new administration of President Biden, does the national security structure have the staffing and the bandwidth to both repair relations that have been damaged in recent years, as well as establish new ones.

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:25:29] And that's where you would know the answer to this question better than I, but I don't think so. I think that this is a tall order. If I can just take a minute to talk about why I think some of these new treaties and alliances are so important. Artificial intelligence is going to change the way that we fight. All of a sudden, it's not just going to be humans, making life or death decisions about who dies in warfare. To be very transparent, we're at a disadvantage because some of our enemies are more willing because they don't have as strong values. They don't care as much about human rights. They're more willing to give robots free reign. So what is to our national security advantage to set the rules of the road? We need to be setting the standards for how AI is used, not leaving that up to China, because if we leave it up to China, they're likely to have an advantage over us because, we, for good reason, just might not be willing to give as much autonomy to do some of the things that they're willing to do. So this is a place where it is to our national security advantage, it will make our military stronger, if we set the rules of the road. And that means we've got to win this race, so we're the first to the table. And that means we have to have a robust effort, a diplomatic effort to actually pursue these agreements. I'd love to hear Admiral what you think about this. I do think this is  incredibly important.

Adm. William McRaven: [00:26:47] I couldn't agree with you more. You take a look at our alliances around the world. NATO probably being the strongest one we've had. The report was talking about how do we build this kind of technological alliance with our European allies, with our Asian allies, with our allies around the world. If you take the recent pandemic and you look at how it was so horribly mishandled, frankly, had we had a health Alliance around the world, had we worked with our European colleagues and others around the world to get to a vaccine faster, to figure out how we were going to distribute the vaccine, we might have been , you know, miles ahead of where we are today. Well, technology is the same way. There are brilliant minds all around the world that could easily collaborate with us to figure out how we are going to deal with a rising China or an aggressive Russia. How we are going to kind of confront the rise of a malfeasant aI or machine learning. But if we haven't built the kind of technological alliances that we need to, then companies like Huawei are going to be out there building 5g networks that have embedded protocols in them that can capture some of our intelligence. We've got to think through this. And again, I get back to the, kind of the role of Congress. This is an important role for Congress and making sure we're doing this correctly.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:27:59] Well, Russia presents an immediate threat to our national security. China's a longer-term threat yet already a peer competitor in many ways. You've argued that we need to make changes to how we meet these threats. Can you share your thoughts on the tools we should be adding to the national security toolbox and what investments we need to make as a nation in such issues like civic education, cyber defense, to keep our nation strong?

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:28:25] It seems like the obvious way to answer this question would be to rattle off a list of new weapons systems that we need those additional tools in our toolbox. But I think more fundamentally it's things like investing in federal research so that we can build the basic science that underpins these technologies that we will use not only for our national security, but for our economic security. That's a consistent recommendation. There's a lot of parallels between the Admiral's report and ours here in Congress. And that's one of the first things that come out of it is that we need to invest more federal dollars in basic research, in science. There are a lot of things like that, understanding that when we're making an investment in young Americans' education, it's fundamentally a long-term investment in our national security. When we're investing in cyber defense, not just for the military, but for our entire nation, including the private sector, who's losing a lot of talent and ideas to China as they're being stolen through the internet. And that's an investment in our national security as well. We have to think much more holistically about our national security, take a much more whole of government approach to how we keep our nation safe.

Adm. William McRaven: [00:29:37] I was often asked when I was the Chancellor of the University of Texas, invariably we'd have kind of town hall meetings or meetings with donors or constituents, and they would always kind of turn to national security and they would say, well, Chancellor, what do you think the greatest national security threat to the United States is? And they always assumed that I would answer, you know, North Korea or China or Russia or Iran. And my answer was always the same, "K through 12 education". And they say, "No, no, no, I mean, national security issues". I would say, "k through 12 education". If we are not educating the youth of America to be prepared, to deal with the challenges of the future, if we're not educating them about different cultures and different ideas, if we're not teaching them how to think critically, if we're not giving them the STEM skills that they need to be able to do the technology, the AI, and the machine learning, and the genomics, then we are not going to have to worry about national security 20 or 30 years from now because we'll be challenged so badly because we haven't educated the youth of America. So we really do have to invest in education early on. If we're going to build the kind of national security expertise we need in the State Department and the Department of Defense and Congress for the future.

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:30:47] You know what the Admiral just said may be the most important point in this entire podcast. And I think more Americans need to hear that and they need to hear it coming from true national security experts, like Admiral McRaven. It's so critical for our future. And I can tell you it's something that a lot of members of Congress need to hear as well.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:31:05] To wrap up. I wanted to ask you one last question. You both have served in combat and seen both its devastating consequences and the power of hope and sacrifice. In your words, Admiral, the good outweighs the evil. Those who serve, whether in the military, the diplomatic service, the Peace Corps do so because they feel a purpose and that they are part of something bigger than themselves, something they can be proud of, their country and its values. The question is, some argue that our moral leadership has declined. It has been degraded. What would you say to inspire more people to join public service in particular to represent the United States overseas?

Adm. William McRaven: [00:31:48] The country has always had these times in history where people have questioned the moral leadership of a president or the country. But the fact of the matter is we need great young men and women in the Foreign Service, in the Department of Defense, in the intelligence community, in law enforcement, in the Peace Corps, because our values are the things that are transmissible to other countries. They are fungible across the world and everywhere I've gone in the world, the people that you meet, they believe in American values. And so we have to continue to put forth and let people know that we really are men and women of integrity. We really do believe in these universal rights, of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We really do believe that people ought to be treated with respect. And when you see that in the young USAID workers and the young Foreign Service Officers and the young officers like Seth was over in Iraq, when the locals see that they believe in America. They don't have to look at a president. They don't have to look at Congress. They don't have to look at a Secretary of Defense. They've got to look at the people that are on the ground, meeting with them every day. That's who represents America, anybody that thinks otherwise has never spent time overseas. It isn't all the people with all of the flash and flair. It's the young men and women who espoused and who lived the American values. That's what makes a difference. I would encourage anybody graduating from high school or college find an opportunity to serve. You'll never, ever regret it.

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:33:25] I couldn't agree more. I'll also say that I can't tell you how many young Americans from both sides of the political aisle, backgrounds all across the country, have come up to me over the past few years and said, you know, I wanted to serve, but I don't see how I can serve under a president like Donald Trump. And I've always responded by saying now is the time our country needs  you more than before. Now's the time when we need moral leaders out there on the front lines, doing exactly what the Admiral was just talking about. And think about those Americans who answered the call to serve during the Civil War, when our nation was literally being torn apart, America was even weaker then, and talk about a lack of moral leadership, we still allowed slavery. And yet thousands of Americans answered the call to serve and to preserve our nation. I didn't agree with the Iraq war. I was openly critical of it at times, but every single day I was in Iraq, I made a difference in the lives of others. And that's the thing I'll never forget. That's why I was proud to go back four times to a war I disagreed with. I don't want more Americans to have to go to war, but I do want more Americans to have the experience of serving our amazing country that will make us a stronger nation.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:34:42] Thank you, gentlemen. I really appreciate you participating, and the effort that we're making to explain across America, why it is important to be globally engaged. We are a country to be proud of, and we need to stay engaged in terms of projecting our values across the world.

Rep. Seth Moulton: [00:35:01] Thank you Ambassador. Thanks for your leadership and your service and Admiral, it's always an honor.

Adm. William McRaven: [00:35:05] Thank you, Congressman, always great to be with you, and Ambassador, thank you very much. I enjoyed it.

Amb. Deborah McCarthy: [00:35:10] This has been a new episode in the series, The General and the Ambassador: a Conversation. Thank you so much for listening. Our series is a production of the American Academy of Diplomacy, with the generous support of that Una Chapman Cox Foundation. You can find our podcasts on all major podcast sites, as well as on our website, generalambassadorpodcast.org. Please follow us on Twitter and Facebook, and we welcome all input and suggestions. We can be reached directly at general.ambassador.podcast@gmail.com.