From the founding of the United States, Americans have tended to champion freedom (albeit messily at times).
Dictators, on the other hand, reject the idea of individual liberty and opportunity because it threatens their power.
By their very natures, America and dictators are opposing forces. That reality makes Washington’s policies toward authoritarian regimes a vital component of national security.
Let’s try a thought experiment. Imagine two countries.
One is governed by Person A who cut their teeth in the security agency of a declining totalitarian regime. As that government collapses and a new one emerges, Person A maneuvers through the ranks of political power until becoming the leader. Over more than two decades, they steal from the country’s people to enrich themself; crush independent media, civil society, and any political opposition; and destroy any checks and balances that might curb their authority – including free and fair elections. In fact, Person A is so threatened by any opposition that they intimidate, attack, and murder dissidents beyond their nation’s borders and invade their neighbors.
The other country is governed by Person B who was an entertainer for most of their professional life. They eventually enter politics to combat their country’s issues with corruption. Person B runs for office and through a credible election defeats the incumbent. And while their country deals with its share of internal challenges, it is working toward joining the family of advanced democracies. It is fair to note that Person B suspends their country’s elections during a period of martial law as constitutionally mandated. And martial law is in effect because Person B contends with a hostile neighboring power that, without any legitimate provocation, invades their country. With that invasion, Person B faces an ongoing war that targets their civilians, destroys vital infrastructure, and kidnaps thousands of their country’s children.
If you had to choose, which one better fits the definition of a dictator? Which is more likely to be a potential enemy of the United States?
You’ve probably guessed that I’m describing Russia’s Vladmir Putin and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy respectively. And there’s been some recent confusion over which one of these individuals deserves being called a dictator.
While people can certainly have critical views of Zelenskyy or disagree with U.S. policy toward Ukraine, it’s hard to deny that Vladimir Putin possesses all the traits of a dictator. And like all dictators, Putin is opposed to freedom, justice, and opportunity for anyone but himself.
In fact, 80% of Americans (for good reason) view Putin’s Russia as an enemy, while three quarters see Zelenskyy’s Ukraine as an ally, according to the Ronald Reagan Institute’s 2024 National Defense survey.
Clearly distinguishing friends who share America’s values from adversaries who oppose them is also a matter of national security. Authoritarian regimes – including Putin’s Russia – are increasing their cooperation with other autocratic governments to subvert U.S. interests globally.
The alliance of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea (or CRINK), in particular, represents a rogue’s gallery opposed to American values and global influence. They seek to overturn a rules-based order that makes the world safe for Americans to engage in business ventures, faith-based initiatives, travel and leisure, sporting competitions, and entertainment. In countering this threat, Washington should be invested in a comprehensive strategy that collectively weakens the autocrats who lead CRINK.
The Bush Institute released policy recommendations in January providing the Trump Administration and Congress with ideas for doing so:
- Ensure that human rights are part of an integrated strategy to address the comprehensive challenge posed by CRINK.
- Enforce strategic tools (like targeted sanctions) that penalize human rights abusers.
- Strengthen America’s democratic alliances around the vision of integrating human rights and security in the fight against CRINK
- Empower democratic advocates from CRINK to unite around their shared struggle for freedom.
Ultimately, advancing freedom, prosperity, and security in the world represents the nexus of American national interests and values. Washington should align with allies who clearly share these goals and oppose CRINK dictators who don’t.
