Charles A. Anderson/The Mossy Log
Speaking at Lewis & Clark on Monday, Feb. 23 for the sixth annual Edward J. Perkins Speaker Series Address, Ambassador Dereck J. Hogan reflected on the role of American diplomacy in the context of Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine in his lecture titled “For such a time as this: Diplomacy and Leadership in the Face of Russian Aggression.”
The series, named for former LC student and life trustee Edward J. Perkins, brings guest lecturers to campus who recognize and honor the former ambassador’s legacy in the foreign service. Perkins served a distinguished career in the U.S. State Department, ultimately becoming Ambassador to South Africa in the years before the fall of apartheid, and later Ambassador to the United Nations under President George H.W. Bush.
Hogan served in the U.S. Foreign Service for decades across Europe and Eurasia, including representing the U.S. as Ambassador to Moldova from 2018-2021. Under President Joe Biden, Hogan served as Executive Secretary of the Department of State, serving as the No. 2 official in the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, where he oversaw matters related to Europe with a particular focus on Ukraine.
Hogan was appointed to this position in 2023 in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine the previous year. As such, the war is of special significance to Hogan.
Throughout the lecture, Hogan returned to the phrase “for such a time as this,” alluding to the phrase used in the biblical story of Esther, which tells the story of a Jewish woman married to the King of Persia who saves her people from extermination. The quote comes from a critical passage in the story, when her uncle tells her she has been placed in her position of influence “for such a time as this.”
Hogan said that moments of global crisis like the Russian invasion demand leaders who are willing to align power with values rather than retreat into caution or inevitability.
Leadership is about how people wield influence, Hogan said, and that influence is most legitimate when it is used in the service of others. Circumstances sometimes require leaders to act with courage and commitment, even if that is at personal risk or cost. That is what the phrase “for such a time as this” captures, he said.
“It’s that moment when responsibility is revealed, and doing what is required becomes a personal choice rather than an impersonal concept,” Hogan said.
Hogan’s focus on responsibility and moral choice also shaped how he approached questions of power in international politics. He argued that many of the assumptions used to explain global conflict deserve more scrutiny, particularly those that frame war and diplomacy as unavoidable outcomes, rather than products of decision making.
Realism is a perspective within international politics which emphasizes the competition between states, viewing them as individual actors within an arena who are rationally self-interested and concerned of their own security, thus desiring power. Hogan referenced this view when discussing the Russian government’s current messaging.
Hogan argues that Russia framing the invasion as inevitable carries real dangers.
“Russia frames its actions as pragmatic, as inevitable and by portraying them as dictated by geography, by history and by power, rather than really by political choice. … Because in reducing realism to inevitability, sovereignty becomes conditional. That means smaller states are treated as objects rather than as actors,” Hogan said.
A key theme Hogan returned to was the importance of alliances and collective action both before and after the invasion. Hogan described how U.S. leadership prior to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine helped build unity among allies through intelligence sharing, coordination and transparency, enabling a rapid and coordinated response once the war began.
“Russia’s strategy has long depended on exploiting the visions of our allies and their partners, and preventing that outcome required leadership that treated unity not as an assumption, but really as a task. It became evident to me nearly everyday in the lead up to Russia’s full-scale invasion that alliances required constant persuasion, reassurance and example. Leadership sometimes means moving first, absorbing the risks so that others can follow,” Hogan said.
Towards the end of his speech, Hogan stated that a responsible end to the war in Ukraine must preserve both Ukraine’s security and ability to determine its own future. Hogan also added that any peace deal should be backed with strong European and U.S. security guarantees and a firm NATO commitment, while pairing the negotiations with sustained pressure on Russia.
Hogan emphasized that diplomacy without leverage is ineffective, calling for tougher, coordinated sanctions, export controls and continued military support to counter Russia’s maximalist aims. He also stressed the importance of both accountability and reconstruction, including the use of frozen Russian assets and long-term investment to rebuild Ukraine. He notes that this also ensures that Russia’s aggression carries lasting consequences that shape future international behavior.
Following the speech in a packed Smith Hall, Hogan answered a series of questions from the audience of students, faculty and community members.
During the question-and-answer session, Hogan was asked whether Russia could realistically accept a negotiated settlement that preserves Ukraine’s sovereignty.
Hogan responded that Ukraine is an existential issue for Russia’s current leadership, and that Moscow is unlikely to voluntarily abandon its maximalist objectives, arguing that sustained international pressure, not just goodwill, would be required to change Russia’s calculations.
“This is one of those issues that we must be prepared to make and take the stand and stand and stand and keep ratcheting up the pressure,” he said.
Another audience member asked whether public disagreements between the U.S. and Ukraine risk undermining Kyiv’s position against Russia.
Hogan acknowledged that public friction can embolden Russia, but argued it can also demonstrate that U.S. support is principled rather than unconditional, strengthening Washington’s credibility as a global negotiating actor.
While multiple questions reflected uncertainty about diplomacy’s limits, Hogan consistently returned to the idea at the core of his speech — that moments of crisis demand sustained resolve rather than hesitation.
In parting, Hogan reaffirmed the themes of his speech and added that the current moment must be a time of decisive action and collective responsibility in managing international conflict.
“Moments like these do not come often. And when they do, they test not only our strategy and our capability, they test our character. They test our individual character, and they test our collective character. They test where we are willing to accept responsibility when influence needs service. That is the challenge before us today. That is the challenge before us, for such a time as this,” Hogan said.
About the Author
