Director Easterly's Remarks at the Third Annual George C. Marshall Award in Ethical Leadership Gala
Watch the Speech
Thank you, Ron, for your kind words, and many thanks to the George C. Marshall International Center for this tremendous honor.
I must admit that it is extremely humbling to receive an award whose namesake has been a personal idol of mine for more than four decades. That said, I am incredible grateful for this opportunity to share reflections on Secretary Marshall’s storied legacy with a captive audience. So, I thank you all for indulging me.
Today, we live in times of challenges and opportunities that are as daunting as they are defining. A time when the mantle of leadership at all levels weighs heavy, calling for not just vision, but an unshakeable moral compass to guide us. The essence of true leadership has never been more critical, and the call for ethical leadership has never been more pressing. It is a call that demands of us not just foresight and determination, but a steadfast commitment to the principles of selfless service, unwavering integrity, and visionary leadership.
It is in this context that the life and legacy of George Marshall stands as a beacon, illuminating the path of ethical leadership in times of turmoil and peace alike, demonstrating an unparalleled commitment to rebuilding not just nations, but the very fabric of international cooperation.
The Marshall Center identifies those three pillars—selfless service, unwavering integrity, and visionary leadership—as capturing what General Marshall stood for and continues to stand for. It’s useful to consider each.
Selfless service. A commitment Marshall made upon enrolling at VMI and an ethos embodied time and again during his tenure as the U.S. Army Chief of Staff during World War II, Secretary of State, and later, Secretary of Defense. Known for not caring about personal glory and political gain, but instead steadfastly motivated by a profound commitment to the collective good, perhaps most clearly evidenced by his decision to remain the Army Chief of Staff instead of assuming the role of Allied Commander during WWII, the latter role his for the taking had he expressed even the slightest preference.
Unwavering integrity. Stories from his childhood and professional life alike are filled with anecdotes of Marshall’s inability to compromise when a known right was at stake – from local kids unwilling to abide by predetermined ground rules for play, to the likes of American greats including General Pershing and President Roosevelt, Marshall never shied away from speaking truth to power. As his biographer Forrest Pogue put it, it was Marshall’s unshakable integrity that earned him a reputation as being “the one man in Washington who stood above politics…the one person no one controlled.”
It was this same reputation for being a trusted, honest broker that made Marshall a key ally for then-Vice President Truman when he was quickly sworn into office after President Roosevelt’s sudden passing nearly eight decades ago today, April 12, 1945. It was this reputation that convinced Truman to pull the newly retired Army Chief of Staff Marshall back into public service with the hope that he could accomplish diplomatic miracles. His first task was to broker a peace deal preventing a civil war in China. He was later charged with spearheading and implementing a largescale European economic recovery plan after WWII.
The first mission ultimately ended in failure; the latter became one of the most profoundly impactful global developments of the modern era.
In every position he held, Marshall's integrity was unassailable, guided by a moral compass that prioritized the welfare of others, the security of his nation, and the peace of the world. His decisions, even when unpopular or misunderstood, were made with a clear vision of their long-term impact on humanity.
Indeed—he was truly a visionary leader. The Marshall Plan played a pivotal role in the rebuilding of Europe but was also a testament to Marshall’s belief in the power of generosity, diplomacy, and foresight. It was a clear demonstration of ethical leadership, prioritizing the long-term needs of the war-torn and destitute, and laying the groundwork for a more stable and prosperous world.
At a time when the world was fragmented, and the scars of war ran deep, Marshall saw beyond the immediate horizon of victory and defeat. He understood that the true measure of success lay not in the destruction of adversaries but in the reconstruction of nations and the fostering of international cooperation.
While the occasional presence of any of these three traits in a person could sufficiently represent the mark of a strong leader, it was Marshall’s constant and combined adherence to all three—selfless service, unwavering integrity, visionary leadership—that firmly establish him as the epitome of a great ethical leader. His life reminds us that ethical leadership is not just about the decisions we make but about the values we embody. It challenges us to lead with a sense of duty to our fellow humans, a commitment to justice, and a vision that transcends our immediate self-interests.
Secretary Marshall issued such a challenge in his 1953 Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, drawing a comparison between NATO troop deployments in the 20th century and Roman troop deployments during the years of Pax Romana. He noted that “the threat today is quite different, but I do think that this remarkable historical repetition does suggest that we have walked blindly, ignoring the lessons of the past, with, in our century, the tragic consequences of two world wars and the Korean struggle as a result.”
If the Secretary were alive today, I fear he would feel his observation was validated. In some of the very worst ways imaginable, history repeats, or at the very least, rhymes. But the counterpoint is that history is also riddled with flashpoints before and after the General’s time that have been positively defined by the emergence of strong leaders embodying what we now associate with the Marshall ethos.
It was Martin Luther King Jr.’s selflessness and unwavering commitment to a desegrated nation that led to his participation in the Good Friday demonstrations on April 12, 1963—a move which resulted in his arrest and inspired him to pen the seminal civil rights text, ‘Letter from Birmingham Jail.’ Exactly 330 years before that to the day, it was Galileo’s uncompromising views on, as Marshall would put it, a belief in scientific “facts and not fancies or prejudice” about the Earth’s rotation around the sun that landed him on trial as a heretic against the Catholic Church. And it was also Jonas Salk’s disciplined but inspired vision that actualized the dream of producing and widely distributing a polio vaccine—a medical breakthrough that was publicly announced to the world as safe for use on April 12, 1955. In the words of Dr. Salk, “Our greatest responsibility is to be good ancestors.”
Salk, like Marshall, like all the hundreds of other ethical leaders in history, carried with them a belief and courage that they were serving a higher purpose, and working towards some greater good. Theirs is a collective legacy that we must all aspire to learn from and build on.
In my own life, I have had the great fortune of working alongside and learning from a number of ethical leaders. I was taught early what it means to devote your life to selfless, high-integrity service, an ethic that was instilled in me at West Point and poignantly captured in the Cadet Prayer that hangs in my office: “Make us to choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong, and never to be content with a half-truth when the whole truth can be won. Endow us with the courage that is born of loyalty to all that is noble and worthy, that scorns to compromise with vice and injustice and knows no fear when truth and right are in jeopardy.”
And while, for some of us, our collective service might have started with the military, it has been incredible to see all the ways in which so many, including my dear friends and West Point classmates Ron and CJ, have continued to selflessly serve the nation even after their military commitments formally ended.
I am also very proud that I get to lead an agency like CISA, America’s cyber defense agency, where so many individuals have elected to serve, to raise their hand, swearing to support and defend the Constitution of the United States from all enemies, foreign and domestic. I’m very glad to have some of my team with me here tonight—they are the best of the best.
But of course, there are many ways to selflessly serve our great country. Top of mind for me this year are the state and local election officials CISA works with across 8,800 jurisdictions in our role as the lead government agency supporting election security. These election officials stand on the front lines of our democracy, protecting the sanctity of the electoral process amid increasing pressures and very real threats.
The parallels between Marshall’s era and our own are striking. Just as Marshall faced the monumental task of rebuilding war-torn societies on the principles of democracy and cooperation, today’s election officials are tasked with defending the bedrock of our democracy under the shadow of skepticism and hostility—hostility faced, notably, by my predecessor Chris Krebs for his moral courage in defending the integrity of the 2020 election.
I also think of the leaders serving today in war-torn Ukraine. I had an opportunity to visit Kyiv a few months back with my friend Nate Fick, our Ambassador for Cyber. In meetings with cyber leaders across the Ukrainian government, we saw firsthand the power of resilience, the bravery of the Ukrainian people, the spirit of innovation, and most clearly—the absolute criticality of continued U.S. support for the defense of Ukraine.
In a speech at Harvard discussing what would become the European Recovery Plan, Marshall spoke of the distance between Americans and the troubled areas of the earth, noting it was hard to comprehend their plight, but emphasizing that US support to Europe was just as critical for our own economy, for global stability, for a lasting peace. This is just as true today with Ukraine. Our steadfast support for Ukraine is not just an act of international solidarity, or a display of American leadership in the world, or a demonstration that we will continue to honor our commitments to our allies—our support for Ukraine is inextricably linked to U.S. national security and the security of our homeland. It is also the right thing to do.
Now, I am aware of the privilege that my life that has afforded me with opportunities to study and work with leaders of great moral fortitude. My strong hope is that by being exposed to such environments, some of that virtue has rubbed off on me. From my perspective, I constantly work to adapt and improve upon my leadership style, referencing the stories of leaders like General Marshall as my guideposts for progress.
A few weeks back, Tom and Valerie graciously gave me a tour of the Marshall family home, Dodona Manor. I left the visit with new stories—thoughts on ways to further enhance my leadership style, and even some parenting tips. I also learned how Marshall “managed his energies”—a more apt approach to work and life that never actually achieve real balance.
But as I walked through Dodona Manor, it was also apparent that the Marshall Center is providing a great service to the community, and to the country, by doing its part to institutionalize ethical leadership. They give it a face, a language, a framework—making it possible for more of us to internalize the merit of emulating Marshall’s leadership style and conceptualize what the world might look like if we all take it upon ourselves to grow into ethical leaders.
In reflecting on the legacy of George Marshall, we are reminded of the weighty decisions and ethical dilemmas that defined his career—choices that were often fraught with complexity yet guided by an unyielding commitment to the greater good.
And today, we are confronted with our own set of difficult choices, and no shortage of consequential challenges. In fact, today we find ourselves faced with both global instability and moral uncertainty. To address these challenges, we need to identify ways, like the Marshall Center has, to bring more people formally and informally into public service.
From the military, we hear warnings that there are and will continue to be shortfalls in military recruitment. Moreover, in recent decades we have seen sharp declines in the number of Veterans serving in elected positions. There is an urgent need to reinvigorate the call to public service.
Our current defense of democracy also calls for a commitment to protect the sanctity of the electoral process, to stand against foreign interference, to support those election officials who, with courage and integrity, ensure the continuation of our democratic traditions.
While he famously never voted, you can imagine his support to those election officials who are charged with administering, managing, and defending our most sacred democratic process. As a man with a strong commitment to the truth, I am sure he would recognize that these officials ran a secure election in 2020. That there is no evidence that malicious actors changed, deleted, or altered votes, or had any impact on the outcome of that election—a fact that is has been validated time and again, including in multiple court challenges.
As the U.S. federal lead for election infrastructure security, I have had the great honor of working with Chief Election Officials across the nation, most recently speaking on a panel with Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger last weekend. They work tirelessly to ensure their citizens votes are counted as cast. It is because of them that I have trust and confidence in the integrity of our election processes, and why the American people should as well.
As for the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, I hear echoes of the West Point Cadet Prayer with regard to our obligation to stand in the fight. The harder right of the present moment is to boldly, without reservation, stand with the people of Ukraine—to provide additional security assistance now. It is the responsibility of all of us as leaders to recognize how the fall of Ukraine will affect the security and prosperity of every American. In addition to strengthening the Sino-Russian alliance and potentially increasing the likelihood of China’s invasion of Taiwan, the costs of a Russian victory in Ukraine could be astronomical for the US. After absorbing Ukraine, Putin would likely absorb Belarus into a new Russian empire that would threaten the borders of Romania, Slovakia and Poland—a new map that would likely require the redeployment of U.S. troops to Europe, and major increases in overall U.S. defense spending as the US would now have to once again help defend Europe from a growing Russian threat while also preparing to defend its partners, allies, and its own territory from Chinese aggression. In other words, arming Ukraine is not just the right thing to do; it is a bargain compared with the alternative—something General Marshall would surely have recognized.
The undeniable truth is that General Marshall was a unique product of his time. Born at the heels of a Civil War that began 163 years ago on this day, he was raised in a country struggling to simultaneously establish itself on the world stage, and more importantly, struggling to find its new, unified identity here at home. Today’s challenges are such that we cannot afford to just admire Marshall as a one in a million leader, passively hoping for others to emerge just as he did. Instead, our efforts need to be placed in ensuring he is remembered as the first of a million ethical leaders thoroughly well-versed in and actively building on his legacy of selfless service, unwavering integrity, and visionary leadership—why the work of the Marshall Foundation is so critically important.
Now, I will admit there is one thing I disagree with Marshall on. But I share this thought in the true Marshall spirit of speaking truth to power, so I hope he’d forgive me. In a VMI address, Marshall once issued the following warning: “Don’t be a deep feeler and a shallow thinker.” I frankly don’t love the sentiment.
I understand what he may have been getting at, and by most accounts, Marshall was a stoic man unmoved by passion and opinion. His charge was directed by facts alone.
However, I would push back on the statement for two reasons: one, because I disagree with the premise that we should not be ‘deep feelers’, and two, because despite his own admonition, I think Marshall himself was indeed a deep feeler, as evidenced by his compassionate actions not only towards his fellow countrymen, but also the larger humanity.
He felt deeply for the broken and downtrodden, making it his mission to help Americans understand why they have a role and responsibility to help those in need. As he stated in that 1947 speech at Harvard that previewed what would eventually become the Marshall Plan, he acknowledged that because Americans are so “distant from troubled areas of the earth” it becomes harder for them to “comprehend the plight and consequent reactions of the long-suffering peoples.” Over the next 10 months he made it his mission to make the case to Americans across the country, the end result being the passage of the Marshall Plan.
So, I don’t believe that he wasn’t a deep feeler. His moral compass was always perfectly calibrated towards good and right because he had, as a foundation, a deep love of country and humanity.
It’s just that those emotions were never at the expense of or in contradiction with the irrefutable truths that clearly guided his daily actions.
And I think the nuance is captured powerfully in one of the early scenes of the movie ‘Saving Private Ryan.’ I’m sure everyone here knows what scene I’m talking about. The entire movie essentially hinges on a scene where General Marshall has to justify and then orders the mission to bring Private Ryan home: “The boy’s alive. We are going to send somebody to find him. And we are going to get him the hell out of there.”
The story is fiction, of course, but resonates because Marshall as a symbol, as an icon, is so well recognized. The scene works because the source material, the real General Marshall, served his country with an unmistakable brand of compassionate and determined leadership that resonates with people all these decades later, and will for many more to come.
Indeed, Marshall's legacy teaches us that ethical leadership is not merely about making decisions that are right in the short term. It's about setting a course that, while difficult, leads to a better, more inclusive future.
It's about recognizing our shared humanity and our shared destiny on this planet. It demands of us a willingness to look beyond our own interests, to break from the seductive lure of populism, and to embrace policies and practices that serve the greater good. It requires us to build bridges where there are walls, to seek dialogue over division, and to approach our global challenges with humility and openness to learning.
It asks of us to lead not by the example of our power, but by the power of our example. So, with that, my sincere thanks to the Marshall Center for selecting me for this tremendous honor, and in so doing, giving me a renewed charge to further reflect on and refine my own leadership style as I look towards the future. And thank you all for coming and being a part of this special night.
Let the legacy of George Marshall remind us of the power of ethical leadership in navigating the challenges of our time. May we draw inspiration from his example as we work to defend and preserve our democracy, with the same unwavering commitment to principle and justice. In doing so, we honor not only the memory of Marshall but the enduring values of democracy itself. Thank you.