“Peace Through Strength“

“We maintain the peace through our strength; weakness only invites aggression. Ronald Reagan, Address to the Nation on Defense and National Security, March 23, 1983

The concept of “Peace through strength” has historical roots dating back to ancient times, but it became a clearly defined school of thought in the modern era through figures like Theodore Roosevelt, who famously advocated speaking softly while carrying a big stick, and later Ronald Reagan, who used the phrase as a guiding principle during the Cold War. It is based on the idea that military and strategic power -when visibly maintained and credibly exercised- deters aggression and preserves peace by discouraging adversaries from exploiting weakness.

Applied to the present war in Ukraine, this doctrine supports the sustained military backing of Ukraine by the United States and its allies -not only to aid in Ukraine’s defense but also to signal to other authoritarian powers that the free world will resist violations of sovereignty and international law. “Peace through strength” in this context asserts that only by demonstrating resolve and capability can lasting peace and order be restored and maintained in Europe.

“Moral Clarity“

“There can be no peace without victory, and no victory without moral purpose.” Winston Churchill, wartime speeches and writings

The school of thought known as “Moral Clarity” has roots that reach back before World War II, particularly in response to the rise of fascism in Europe and the moral failures of appeasement policies in the 1930s. Thinkers and leaders like Winston Churchill, who warned early against the dangers of Nazi Germany, exemplified this emerging belief that democracies must not remain neutral or morally ambivalent in the face of clear evil. Moral Clarity rejected the idea that all political systems were morally equivalent and insisted that liberal democracies had a duty to actively oppose totalitarian regimes.

In the context of the present war in Ukraine, this tradition can guide us by framing the invasion not as a complex gray-area conflict, but as a stark case of aggression. Upholding Moral Clarity today means recognizing and confronting that aggression without hesitation or false neutrality—just as earlier proponents argued was necessary to confront fascism before World War II.

“Arsenal of Democracies“

“We must be the great arsenal of democracy. For us this is an emergency as serious as war itself.” Franklin D. Roosevelt, Fireside Chat, December 29, 1940

The notion of the “Arsenal of Democracies” originates from President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1940 address, in which he called on the United States to become the primary supplier of weapons and material support to nations resisting Axis aggression—particularly Britain—before America’s formal entry into World War II. It encapsulated the idea that industrial and military strength in service of democratic values could turn the tide against tyranny without direct combat involvement, at least initially.

Applied to the present war in Ukraine, this concept has regained relevance as Ukrainian technology—honed under wartime pressure—brings battlefield-tested innovations in drones, cybersecurity, and AI to the global defense and democratic resilience toolkit. As part of the Arsenal of Democracies, it offers agile, decentralized, and scalable solutions that empower allies to adapt faster and deter authoritarian threats more effectively.

Acting once again as the “Arsenal of Democracies,” the West is helping to ensure that sovereign democracies can resist autocratic aggression, reinforcing the belief that democracies must not only defend themselves but actively support one another against threats to freedom and international order.