Don’t ‘Jeopardize Free Speech That Is Fundamental’ to Harvard, Says Prof – Newsweek

Harvard professor and international relations expert Joseph Nye has had a long and distinguished career, working on the ground in the Carter and Clinton administrations as well as many years teaching foreign policy. His new memoir, A Life in the American Century (Polity Books), is a diary of his life, including his years in the university and government and his thoughts about where the U.S. stands in today's global world order. In this Q&A, Nye talks about his advice for the interim and future president of Harvard in the wake of Claudine Gay's resignation, which countries should be highest on our radar to prevent the threat of nuclear war, what role the U.S. should play in the Russia-Ukraine war and the significance of U.S. alliances in the Middle East and more.

Q _ Has Harvard's reputation been tarnished by the controversy about campus antisemitism and allegations of plagiarism against former President Gay?

A _ Any time a president is compelled to resign, it is bound to tarnish an institution's reputation, but the fundamentals of Harvard's academic excellence have not changed.

What advice would you give to Harvard's interim and future presidents?

The next president must continue to pay attention to diversity but avoid bureaucratizing it or creating rigid rules. Since private universities are not bound by the First Amendment, a president can establish norms such as prohibiting calling for genocide of any people; but he or she must be careful that they do not jeopardize free speech that is fundamental to the institution. Private institutions can establish their own norms but should stay as close as possible to the First Amendment.

In the Carter administration, you worked on nuclear non-proliferation policy. In today's world, what should we be most concerned about relating to nuclear powers?

In the 1960s, John F. Kennedy said he expected more than 20 countries to have nuclear weapons in the 1970s. When I was put in charge of Carter's non-proliferation policy, the Arab oil embargo and ensuing energy crisis led many to believe that Kennedy's prediction would come true. Carter, a nuclear engineer, elevated the priority of non-proliferation and took a number of unpopular steps to slow down the spread I describe in my book. Today there are nine states with nuclear weapons. We have to focus on keeping numbers low, and in the immediate context that means focusing on Iran and North Korea.

You also worked on energy policy, but the world has changed a lot. Fracking has dramatically increased U.S. oil and gas production. Climate concerns also loom larger. How should the U.S. consider managing our energy needs?

In the '70s and '80s, the U.S. became increasingly dependent on imports of oil, particularly from the Middle East, and some analysts argued that the U.S. exploration had reached "peak oil." The technology of fracking (horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing) proved the skeptics wrong and the U.S. became virtually energy independent. The dilemma today is not too little oil but too much given the increasing scientific evidence of fossil fuels creating costly climate change. We have to design policies for a smooth transition away from fossil fuels, and once again technology can help.

As chair of the National Intelligence Council under President Bill Clinton, you grappled with issues related to the expansion of NATO. The possibility of membership for Ukraine was one of the reasons Russia has offered for invading. Given where we are now, what should the U.S. do about the conflict?

Vladimir Putin has used NATO expansion as an excuse to justify his invasion of Ukraine, but it was well known in Europe in 2022 that Ukraine was not about to join NATO. Putin's own writings describe how he did not regard Ukraine as a legitimate state but as a renegade that had to be reunited with the Russian world"Russkiy Mir." If Putin gets away with this effort to expand the Russian empire, it will put other states such as the Baltics and much of Europe at risk. The U.S. should continue to help Ukraine in its efforts to resist this imperialism.

You argue that the balance of power is essential for global interdependence. Which elements are the most significant in today's Middle East and how should it inform U.S. policy?

The world has benefited from an enormous increase in global trade and interdependence which continues despite wars in Ukraine and the Middle East. But every market depends on a security framework. Buyers and sellers may ignore security in the short term, but security is like oxygen. Once you start to miss it, you can think of nothing else. Since 1945, the global balance of power has depended on the role of the United States as the preeminent power. If our foreign policy turns away from the alliances and institutions we have created, there will be negative effects on the global economy and, in turn, our own prosperity and security.

Defense of its sovereign borders is one of a government's most important responsibilities. Israel's border was breached by Hamas, with over 1,200 people killed and about 250 taken hostage. The Israeli government says it didn't have a choice but to respond by attempting to dismantle Hamas in Gaza. Do you agree? Was there an alternative?

Every country has the right to defend its own borders, and the Hamas atrocity of October 7 meant that Israel had to react strongly. But overreaction is a mistake, because for every civilian killed in a counterterrorism operation, there is a danger of creating a next-generation terrorist. Terrorism is like jujitsu. The smaller player tries to exploit the strength of the stronger player against itself. This is the trap that Hamas set for Benjamin Netanyahu, and he fell into it. A smarter strategy would have involved a more targeted approach with more attention to reducing civilian casualties. As American Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said, there is a danger of winning the tactical battle and losing the strategic war.

Read more from the original source:
Don't 'Jeopardize Free Speech That Is Fundamental' to Harvard, Says Prof - Newsweek