On Feb. 24, 2022, Amb. Julianne Smith was the U.S. Permanent Representative to NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) as Vladimir Putin launched his invasion of Ukraine.
As explosions rocked Kyiv, Smith and her NATO colleagues in Brussels were already coordinating the alliance's response to Russia's aggression, which had been anticipated for weeks. The conflict would dominate the remainder of her term.
"The invasion completely transformed everything we did inside the alliance from that day going forward," said Smith, who served as NATO ambassador from 2021 to 2024. "All of our work became almost exclusively focused on the war in Ukraine."
This fall, Smith joined the Yale Jackson School of Global Affairs as a senior fellow at the school's Blue Center for Global Strategic Assessment, which unites leading scholars and practitioners in the study and teaching of statecraft and security. She is teaching a course on the "Future of NATO," a graduate seminar that examines the internal and external challenges facing the 77-year-old alliance, created by the U.S., Canada, and allies in Western Europe in the aftermath of World War II.
Recently, the class was joined by retired U.S. Army Gen. Christopher Cavoli '97 M.A., who served as the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe from 2022 to 2025. Later, in a "fireside chat" at the Blue Center, Smith and Cavoli shared their insights about the transatlantic alliance, providing students an up-close perspective on what unfolded behind the scenes as NATO addressed the Russia-Ukraine War.
"To have Ambassador Smith and General Cavoli together on the same stage to talk about NATO represents the very best of what the Blue Center can do to bring relevant policy makers to the Jackson School," said Phil Kaplan, executive director of the Blue Center.
Smith, who has held senior leadership roles at the White House, the Department of Defense, and the Department of State during her more than 20-year career as a diplomat and foreign policy advisor, recently spoke to Yale News about her decision to come to Yale, the inspiration she derives from teaching, and what it was like at NATO headquarters on the morning of the Ukraine invasion.
The conversation has been edited and condensed.
What appealed to you about coming to Yale to teach at the Jackson School and the Blue Center?
Julianne Smith: Since I left government, I had been thinking a lot about how to continue contributing to questions of national security and the future of the transatlantic relationship. When I got the call from the Jackson School, it just felt like a perfect fit. Jackson is a world-class institution with a tremendously talented student body and a wonderful reputation for preparing young people for careers in public service if they so desire. And the Blue Center has brought an exciting new dynamic and new perspectives to the school's community by bringing in practitioners like me to share firsthand insights on policymaking and policy dilemmas. I couldn't be more excited about this program and proud to be a part of it. Honestly, teaching the seminar has become the highlight of my week.
Your seminar is called the "Future of NATO." What is your approach to that topic?
Smith: We've designed the class to be forward-looking. We're exploring several long-standing debates within NATO on subjects like burden sharing among members and the possibility of enlarging the alliance even further.
We're also looking at a series of NATO missions that have unfolded around the world, including its operations in Libya, Afghanistan, and in the western Balkans. We're taking that 77-year history and looking forward to what the alliance's next chapter could look like, both in terms of threat perceptions, but more importantly, in terms of shifts in burden sharing as European countries take on greater responsibility for providing for their own security. It is a moment of tremendous transformation for the alliance, one worth examining.
We start every class by looking at news of the week. Somewhat tragically, there's almost always some piece of breaking news tied to NATO due to the ongoing war in Ukraine and the hybrid warfare that Putin is instigating against NATO territories, which includes things like disinformation campaigns, cyberattacks, the cutting of undersea cables, and even an attempted drone attack last August on an airport in Germany. So, there's no shortage of news to discuss.
At its founding in 1949, NATO's primary purpose was to deter and counter threats posed by the Soviet Union. More than a generation after the fall of communism in Europe, how is the alliance still relevant?
Smith: The reasons for creating NATO 77 years ago still ring true today, although the threat environment has shifted slightly. When we founded the alliance, we were confronting the Soviet threat. Today, allies still categorize Russia as a direct threat to NATO territory. So, from a threat perspective, there is a lot of overlap as well as some additional threats in new domains, such as cyber- and space-based warfare.
Also, the United States has understood intuitively since 1949 that it pays to have capable friends and allies around the world. And there's no place better to find capable military partners than in Europe. Not all of them are "best in class," not all of them can match the U.S. military's capabilities, but when we take on operations, it's always better to work closely with our capable European partners that also share our values.
The ties that bind us remain strong. I understand that we're going through a transformative period, but I'm hopeful that we'll emerge from it clear-eyed about the utility and value of the transatlantic relationship.
Your recent discussion with General Cavoli made it clear that there are no easy answers when it comes to dealing with international crises. What's it like to confront these real-world challenges in real time?
Smith: Any issues that rise to the level of deputies in the U.S. government are essentially questions without easy answers. Otherwise, they're solved at lower levels. The deputy secretaries and the deputy national security advisor are only handed the toughest nuts to crack. Questions that rise above that and require a National Security Council meeting are the ones that feel almost impossible to solve.
And so, yes, when you get to that level, when you enter the Situation Room and join a deputy's meeting, you immediately have a deeper appreciation for the importance of these dedicated public servants and the professionalism and depth of knowledge that they bring each and every day to the table. Joining discussions like that while I served in government was one of the greatest honors of my lifetime, but it was also some of the most challenging work I have ever encountered.
You were the NATO ambassador when Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine. What was it like to serve in that role at that moment?
Smith: It's a morning I'll never forget. I'd been on high alert from early-February to the actual start of the war. I was waiting for a call to come in the middle of the night. I had been sleeping in a separate bedroom from my husband because I anticipated having to get up in the middle of the night.
As ambassador, I had a driver, and he had moved into the residence so that he would be able to take me into an emergency session when the invasion began. And sure enough, at about 4 a.m. on February 24, my phone rang. The White House Situation Room notified me that the war was underway. I took four or five or additional calls after that, and I was told to notify the NATO secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, and depart immediately to NATO headquarters for an emergency session at 8 a.m.
I arrived at NATO's political headquarters about an hour or two later. It was still dark outside. The mood was somber. But because we had anticipated the invasion, the actual meeting itself unfolded smoothly and predictably. We had rehearsed it. We knew what steps we would be taking that morning. To me, it felt like an orchestrated production because we had prepared for all the potential outcomes in advance, activating the NATO Response Force and a whole series of additional steps that needed to be taken to enhance deterrence on the eastern flank.
It completely transformed everything we did inside the alliance from that day going forward. Nearly everything we did was focused on the war in Ukraine.
Now that you've settled in at Jackson, what's your impression of your students?
Smith: It's an incredibly talented group. They bring intellectual heft and practical professional experience to every discussion. Some of them are currently serving in the military. Others have worked in the private sector. A few of them have worked in the public sector, either for our government or, for those from abroad, the governments of their own countries. I genuinely enjoy engaging with them, and I regularly learn from them.
They just finished a series of policy memos for me, and I am considering sharing two or three of those with actual policymakers because they applied such innovative ideas and approaches to age-old problems. It underscores the importance of always bringing the next generation's fresh perspectives into these conversations.
