Today’s world is the most tumultuous it's been since the Cold War. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, growing tensions with China, and the continued saber-rattling of North Korea and Iran have all combined to make global affairs a ticking time bomb just waiting to explode. Now more than ever, wise leadership under pressure is required from the leaders of our Western society. The brief but tumultuous time that President John F. Kennedy spent in the White House can provide an insightful blueprint for navigating the treacherous waters of our time. Leaders of today’s Western societies would be well served to adopt three major aspects that guided Kennedy’s foreign policy: the ability to learn and adapt from previous mistakes, building meaningful relationships with our adversaries to achieve peace, and remaining skeptical of the military industrial complex. 

On April 17, 1961, a covert invasion force of 1,400 Cuban exiles stormed the beaches along the Bay of Pigs. Trained and supervised by the CIA, their goal was to gain a foothold within Cuba and link up with other anti-Communist dissidents before ultimately marching on Havana to overthrow the Castro regime. The invasion force encountered heavy resistance, and within just a few hours, everyone was killed or captured. The Bay of Pigs was a disaster that emblazoned the front pages of newspapers around the world and brought deep embarrassment to the newly elected Kennedy administration. Instead of reinforcing the exiles with American airstrikes and troops and thereby drawing the United States into a full scale war, Kennedy realized his grave mistake of granting the CIA such unprecedented leeway in military operations, and worked to ensure that such an operation would never happen again. “It’s a hell of a way to learn things,” he remarked, “but I have learned one thing from this business–that is, that we will have to deal with the CIA…no one has dealt with the CIA.” In the days after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Kennedy took actions to adapt and overcome his error. He issued National Security Action Memorandum 55 and 57, which prohibited the agency from planning future military operations. The President also fired CIA Director Allen Dulles and Deputy Director Richard Bissell, the duo who were largely responsible for the invasion. The ability to recognize one’s mistakes and overcome them is a hallmark feature of effective leadership. Today’s world leaders such as President Biden would do themselves much good by thoroughly examining the mistakes of their administrations, such as the disastrous withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, and pursuing efforts to ensure that they will never be repeated.

During the fall of 1961, Russian Premier Niktika Khruschev wrote the first of twenty-one letters that would be exchanged between himself and President Kennedy. Private and personal in nature, these letters consisted of intimate stories and even some jokes, but most importantly, they allowed the two leaders to see how much they surprisingly had in common. The President viewed these letters as a way to “give us each a chance to address the other in frank, realistic, and fundamental terms.” Kennedy made a conscious effort to relate to Khrushchev in order to try to see the world through his eyes. His efforts ultimately paid off during the Cuban Missile Crisis, when early on the morning of Saturday, October 27, 1962, Khrushchev informed Kennedy through their private letter route that the USSR had come to an agreement to remove its nuclear warheads from Cuba in exchange for the U.S. doing the same in Turkey. To help calm tensions and avert a potential World War 3, leaders of our Western society should make a serious effort to improve diplomatic relations with our adversaries. Instead of instantly dismissing an adversary’s stance as flawed and nonsensical, leaders should try to empathize with their position. In doing so, they might even discover that the Western view of the world is not always as right as it seems. An intense staring contest between two nuclear armed nations is never a good thing, and by reaching out to the other side, the prospect of peace for our world will vastly improve.

Ever since the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy’s skepticism of America’s military industrial complex only grew. It reached its peak during the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis when the President came under heavy pressure from his military advisors, Curtis LeMay in particular, to order a full scale invasion of Cuba, an action which would have almost certainly ignited a nuclear holocaust. “There was the feeling,” Robert Kennedy later reflected, “that the noose was tightening on all of us, on Americans, on mankind, and that the bridges to escape were crumbling. But again, the President pulled everyone back.” Knowing that his refusal to invade Cuba would severely alienate his military advisors, even to the point where they might no longer obey his orders, Kennedy chose to forsake war in order to continue his diplomatic overtures with Khruschev in the hopes of reaching a settlement. The President’s prudence under pressure would ultimately be vindicated, as both sides came to an agreement that saved the world from catastrophe. Had Kennedy not been sufficiently skeptical of the advice given to him by the top military brass, the world would be a much different place. With the fast paced events of the 21st century and the high tensions associated with them, it is imperative that Western leaders remain rational during risky standoffs and always maintain a healthy dose of skepticism toward their military advisors. While war might sound like a fine endeavor from the comfortable confines of the West Wing, our leaders must never lose sight of the horrific cost that it imposes on thousands of families.

Though President Kennedy would be tragically killed the following year, the lessons and legacy of his life survived the assassin’s bullet. As the third decade of the 21st century continues to tumultuously progress, Western leaders should analyze the key aspects of Kennedy's remarkable leadership and put them into practice before it is too late.