At a Council on Foreign Relations conversation filmed by DRM News, Hillary Clinton sat alongside Ambassador John Sullivan and Dean Keren Yarhi-Milo to unpack two shocking failures of modern conflict: Russia’s flailing invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s October 7 intelligence disaster. Clinton’s through-line was blunt: when political leaders corrupt or ignore professional judgment, militaries atrophy and intelligence systems go blind. The takeaways weren’t just retrospective – they were a call for accountability even during war.
A Parable from the Battlefield
Ambassador John Sullivan opened with a defining early image from the war in Ukraine: an older Ukrainian woman confronting Russian paratroopers, shoving sunflower seeds at them – “Put these in your pockets so when you’re killed and buried here, something good will grow.” Sullivan said he immediately told colleagues, if this is how Ukrainians resist, Vladimir Putin is in trouble. It was a human moment that, as he framed it, foretold Russia’s miscalculation: they expected capitulation, found defiance.
The Surprise of October 7
Keren Yarhi-Milo, dean of Columbia’s School of International and Public Affairs and a former Israeli intelligence officer, offered a different jolt: she had been focused, just one day earlier, on the geopolitics of Saudi-Israel normalization and the risk of unrest in the West Bank – not Gaza. She didn’t discount Hamas’s intentions; she simply believed Israel’s famed collection and real-time response capacity would deter or detect an attack of that magnitude. “That,” she said, is exactly what failed. Her framing captured the intellectual blind spot that can form when systems seem too competent to be surprised.
Clinton’s Two Big Shockers
Hillary Clinton said she shared both shocks: first, how poorly the Russian military performed in Ukraine; second, the scale of Israel’s October 7 breakdown. On Russia, she recalled reports that Putin told Xi Jinping he would be in Kyiv within a week – an astonishing misread of Ukrainian resolve and Russian readiness. The result, Clinton argued, is a case study in how politicizing a military breeds incompetence: “You get corruption. You get yes men and women. You get people who forget how to fight because they’re too busy looking over their shoulder.” In her telling, that’s the Russian story in a sentence.
The Danger of Politicized Militaries
Clinton’s warning about politicization is as old as the Praetorian Guard and as current as modern autocracies. When promotion depends on loyalty rather than competence, procurement decays into grift, training turns ceremonial, and battlefield feedback is sanitized. Her argument, grounded in Russia’s visible failures, is that institutions – not strongmen – win wars. My view: this is the lesson many capitals forget once peacetime resumes; it’s easier to reward loyalists than to empower contrarians who deliver bad news. But war punishes that shortcut ruthlessly.
A Historical Echo for Israel
Turning to Israel, Clinton invoked the Yom Kippur War. Back then, she noted, Golda Meir’s government reportedly had an agent in Anwar Sadat’s office warning of an impending invasion. The warning was discounted – Egyptians were deemed incapable of such success. The result was strategic surprise, eventual recovery, and ultimately Meir’s resignation six months after the war. Clinton’s analogy wasn’t casual; it was a diagnosis. “With October 7,” she said, “there is no doubt that there was a massive intelligence and leadership failure in Israel.” The echo is not precise – but it’s close enough to sting.
Complacency, Arrogance, and the Cost of Success
Clinton’s broader claim was that complacency – fed by past success – can turn cutting-edge intelligence into a ritual. Israel’s reputation for SIGINT dominance, infiltration, and lightning response bred a belief that core assumptions were safe. Yarhi-Milo’s account backs this up: she expected instability, just not from Gaza and not at that tempo, because Israeli detection-and-response systems were presumed to be airtight. My take: when doctrine becomes dogma, red flags look like outliers. In both Russia and Israel, the problem wasn’t just capability – it was culture.
The Accountability Question – Even in Wartime
Clinton’s most controversial claim was also her clearest: someone must be held accountable in Israel. She cited Golda Meir’s resignation as precedent, adding that accountability should come “when the war stops,” which she hopes will be soon. Critics often argue accountability during conflict undermines cohesion; Clinton flipped that logic – without accountability, the system that failed remains unrepaired. It’s a hard truth. Democracies win in the long run precisely because they punish failure and learn quickly. Wartime discipline requires it.
What Putin Misread – and What Ukraine Proved
On Ukraine, Clinton suggested Putin believed his own myth-making: a decayed West, a feeble Kyiv, and a docile, Russophile population. The reality, amplified by Sullivan’s story, was the opposite: mobilized civil society, improvisational leadership, and Western support that hardened rather than wilted. Politically captured militaries are brittle; politically mobilized societies are resilient. In my view, this is why Russia’s early failures snowballed – there was no honest feedback loop to correct course, only more propaganda to mask disaster.
The Intelligence Trap: Seeing the Enemy as They See Themselves
Clinton’s sharpest line may be the most useful: Israel’s leadership “did not see the enemy as the enemy saw themselves.” That critique applies far beyond the Middle East. Adversaries adapt. They probe doctrine, exploit seams, and use the romance of past victories against you. Israel’s technological edge likely created a blind spot; Russia’s mythology of military greatness did the same. If there’s a shared lesson from Kyiv and Gaza, it’s this: assume your opponent is studying you more honestly than you’re studying yourself – and plan accordingly.
Why Corruption is a Combat Multiplier – For the Other Side
Clinton’s link between politicization and corruption matters. Corruption isn’t just a moral failing; it’s a combat multiplier for your adversary. Every skimmed contract, every bought promotion, every falsified readiness report translates into broken logistics, failing comms, and units that can’t execute under fire. Russia’s invasion exposed that rot. Clinton’s caution implicitly warns other governments – friends and foes – that you can’t tweet your way to military effectiveness or outsource competence to cronies. Soldiers fight; systems win.
The Hard Part: Reform Without Hubris
If Clinton’s message is accountability, Yarhi-Milo’s is humility, and Sullivan’s is resolve. Together they point toward the hard work after headlines fade: stress-testing assumptions, empowering dissent within intelligence and defense, and reinvesting in the unglamorous work of readiness. My opinion: reform that starts by congratulating itself is doomed. The fix begins with the premise that if Ukraine’s resistance surprised Moscow and October 7 surprised Jerusalem, there’s nothing magical about your own system either. Prove it works – don’t assume it does.
A Closing Note on Timing and Truth
Clinton ended the segment by returning to timing: accountability for Israel should follow a ceasefire, but it must come. That’s the democratic compact – security and scrutiny together. Russia, for its part, is living proof of the alternative: a system that cannot admit error compounds it. If these CFR remarks captured anything essential, it’s that wars are ultimately tests of governance. In Ukraine and Israel, the verdicts diverged – but the underlying lesson echoes: politicize your institutions, and you stop learning; stop learning, and your enemies teach you on the battlefield.
UP NEXT: “Heavily Armed” — See Which States Are The Most Strapped
Image Credit: Survival World
Americans have long debated the role of firearms, but one thing is sure — some states are far more armed than others. See where your state ranks in this new report on firearm ownership across the U.S.
Growing up in the Pacific Northwest, John developed a love for the great outdoors early on. With years of experience as a wilderness guide, he’s navigated rugged terrains and unpredictable weather patterns. John is also an avid hunter and fisherman who believes in sustainable living. His focus on practical survival skills, from building shelters to purifying water, reflects his passion for preparedness. When he’s not out in the wild, you can find him sharing his knowledge through writing, hoping to inspire others to embrace self-reliance.
