Q&A: Mark Green on character-driven leadership

BURLINGTON, Vt. — Mark Green, the former U.S. Agency for International Development administrator, told Devex his decision to join the McCain Institute for International Leadership — a think tank named for the late Senator who had emerged as one of President Donald Trump’s most vocal critics — was not about where he has been, but about where he hopes America will go. The former foreign aid chief also weighed in on U.S. withdrawal from the World Health Organization, USAID’s role in the COVID-19 response, and how the pandemic might change U.S. global health engagement. This conversation has been edited for length and clarity From a global development perspective, what worries you most about the coronavirus pandemic? We have the obvious when it comes to public health: not only the misery that COVID itself causes, but the potential to unwind remarkable progress that has been made on other diseases — infectious and noninfectious. So much progress has been made on polio and fighting TB [tuberculosis], AIDS, and malaria, and there is a great risk that COVID, collaterally, will cause some of that progress to be undone, and that would be a pity. Secondly, of course, there are the economic consequences: not only the strains on public budgets, but also the strains on commerce and private investment — the type of private investment that is so important to helping countries rise and lead their own future. I think when we come to the other side of this, we will, as good partners, need to reinvigorate not only our global health assistance and our food security assistance, but also look for ways to help countries recover from the economic consequences. Do you envision a dramatic reconfiguration of the way that global health and development engagement happens after the pandemic? We always need to be guided by metrics and conditions that are ground-truthed. So we need to understand what is going on in partner countries based upon sound metrics and analysis of those metrics. That's the most important thing. “We can only be safe if our partners are equipped and prepared to deal with challenges like infectious disease. It's in our interest as well as theirs.” --— Mark Green, executive director, McCain Institute for International Leadership I think on global health, what is going to be very important to us is to not simply restore what was there in terms of a global health infrastructure and some of those investments, but to learn the lessons of COVID and make sure that we help to position countries for the future. What I could foresee happening is that we think through our global health architecture more in terms of global health security than perhaps we have in the past. So testing capacity, contact-tracing capacity, very clearly more investments when it comes to animal science labs because of the obvious challenge of zoonotic diseases — not simply those which are parallel to COVID, but the full range of dangers that we've seen from those zoonotic illnesses. So I think it will require us to rethink our approach in that sense. Economically, I think it's understanding what damage has been done in terms of investment conditions. This is clearly a devastating blow to education in many countries, and so making sure that the investments are there to help equip young people for the future. So it really is going to require us to take a close look at the architecture of development and global health and listen carefully to our partners and also talk to our own teams in the field. If health security does become the framing for U.S. international engagement, would that be a wholly positive development, or might it undermine a more values-driven or altruistic approach? I don't know that a global health security approach is any less altruistic. It is helping countries better prepare themselves for the dangers that disease outbreaks and global health challenges can mean. Sure, the U.S. always has interests at stake, and we should always seek to, first things first, make sure that we are considering America's vital interests. I don't think there's a distinction. I think what we have — I won’t say we've learned, but perhaps we've been reminded of with COVID-19 is, much like terrorism did before and after 9/11, we have to care about what goes on in other parts of the world, even remote corners of the world, for our own sake. People like me also believe that we need to be concerned for other reasons, moral reasons, reasons of American leadership and character. But those who think of challenges only in America-centered terms, our interests align here. We can only be safe if our partners are equipped and prepared to deal with challenges like infectious disease. It's in our interest as well as theirs. How does this fit together with your vision for the McCain Institute? As much as anything, the McCain Institute stands for advancing effective, character-driven leadership in the world, much as [John] McCain himself believed: a) America must lead, and b) our leadership has to be principled, values-based, and we have to be that shining city on a hill. It so happens that that kind of leadership is the very kind of leadership that we need to guide the world in these tumultuous times. We need leadership that is cleareyed. We need leadership that is fact-facing. And we need leadership that can rally people at home and abroad to work together to take on great causes and challenges. Very much what the McCain Institute wants to do is to give voice to those principles that drove McCain, and McCain believed passionately that America must be a force for good and that we let ourselves down if we fail to pursue that. Those same principles, it would seem, drove Sen. McCain to become one of the most vocal Republican critics of President Trump's. Should we read anything into your decision to align yourself with that particular figure? The way I've looked at this — and I've known [McCain’s widow and chair of the McCain Institute’s board] Cindy McCain a long time; obviously, I knew the late senator rather well — I believe that leadership is at the heart of the great challenges that we face these days. Whether it be taking on authoritarianism as it is on the rise in some parts of the world or leadership that ask tough questions in foreign policy, I believe that American leadership is essential, and coming to the McCain Institute gives me an opportunity to dedicate myself to that cause. So it's not about where I have been. It's about where I hope to go and where I hope America will go. At the risk of asking a question about where you have been, when you left USAID you expressed confidence that the agency had the tools and leadership in place to play an effective and important role in the global response to the pandemic. Do you feel those have been fully utilized? Well, what I can say is I was disappointed that USAID was not part of the White House [Coronavirus] Task Force. But I believe in the professionals at USAID, those that I had the chance to work directly with and those that I have seen in my visits around the world. It's a fantastic team of purpose-driven professionals — very mission-oriented. They lead America's humanitarian response to crises around the world, from natural disasters like hurricanes and earthquakes to increasingly — sadly — man-made, regime-driven crises from Yemen to Venezuela to South Sudan. And so I think that American leadership is stronger when it fully harnesses those professionals. It was a great privilege to lead the team that I did, and I was very impressed with what I saw. I think one of the stories that is not told often enough are the remarkable contributions made by our foreign service nationals — as you know, the largest part of [the USAID] workforce, essentially. I saw in the field, around the world, truly talented individuals who believe in American leadership and are the ones who will accelerate their own country's growth and rise in ways that will turn our friends into true allies and partners for progress. So the more that we turn to these professionals, the more effective that we are. To not only get through the crisis of COVID that we see on our television screens every day but also to build from it in the future, it's critical that we turn to these professionals. Since your departure, USAID has emerged as a favored destination for controversial political appointees from the White House. What do you think is driving this recent burst of appointments, and do you think it has significant repercussions? You know, it wouldn't be fair for me to comment. I'm one step removed from it. What I can say is I had a great team, and they were all mission-driven. I think they served America well. I think they served our partner countries well. I think they served the president well. “I believe that leadership is at the heart of the great challenges that we face these days.” --— Mark Green, executive director, McCain Institute for International Leadership When I entered USAID, or more precisely when the White House, when the president-elect, the transition team was talking to me about USAID, the commitment that I made to them was that we would work to build a more effective agency, to build an agency that everybody could and should be proud of, and that we would advance American leadership around the world. None of that would have been possible if not for the fantastic team that we had, both career, of course — predominantly career — but also our noncareer teams that joined. So all I can say is that my experience was very positive. And I'll continue to support the agency and the team that's there. Do you feel that the Trump administration's decision to withdraw from the World Health Organization reflects an evidence-based approach and sends the right message to the world about American global health leadership? What I will say is I think there is broad recognition — not just here in the US, but elsewhere — that we need to build institutions capable of leading us in the future, that WHO needs to be strengthened. But all of those things, I think, are better dealt with in calmer times. What I often tell people when I'm asked about WHO is that, if for no other reason, the fact that we can provide support to WHO, who will provide health care professionals and assistance in places where we don't want to put Americans because it's unsafe or insecure — that's in our interest. And so we need a strong WHO. Can we boost it? Yes. I don't want to yield any territory to China in multilateral organizations or in global leadership. Secretary [of State Mike] Pompeo, I think, has really stepped up America's strategic approach in terms of leadership roles in the U.N. [United Nations] family and the multilateral organizations. Any time that we leave a vacancy or we pull away, we have to be certain that we are not strengthening the hand of rival powers.