Following are questions posed to the Honorable Samantha Power, the 2026 featured speaker of the Hesburgh Lecture in Ethics and Public Policy, and her responses by email.
This annual event, now in its 32nd year, will take place Thursday, March 5 at 4 p.m. in McKenna Hall, Rms. 215-216, and will be livestreamed.
On the Intersection of Ethics and Policy
Q: Your lecture is part of an annual series founded in 1995 and honoring Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., former president of the University of Notre Dame and a global champion of peace and justice. In this spirit – and in today's complex geopolitical landscape – what do you believe is the most critical public policy challenge facing the next generation of global leaders?
A: My heart goes out to the next generation of leaders because we live in the age of the so-called “poly-crises,” where the challenges of global hunger, spiraling conflict, extreme poverty, climate change, and even the latest technological revolution are interlinked. It is easy to feel small or powerless when staring out at the magnitude of these challenges. The key is for the next generation to recognize that, while they are inheriting a very messy world, they each have a key role to play in making a difference. That will almost certainly entail “shrinking the change” and seeking to impact a specific aspect of a specific challenge, but I would encourage students to take their pick – there are sadly plenty of problems-in-need-of-solving to go around!
On the Future of Democracy and Technology
Q: How can universities like Notre Dame help ensure that emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence, protect rather than undermine democratic values?
A: I would probably start by generating more awareness – and seeking to forge greater consensus – around the democratic values themselves. For example, if we can agree on the importance of the integrity of information as a foundation for informed democratic choice, then perhaps there can be an embrace of labeling deep fakes. If we can agree on the importance of deliberation across political divides, maybe voters will be more alert to the risk of tech companies using LLMs (Large Language Models) and their algorithms to precisely tailor information to fan prejudices or push people to extremes. In the near term, it seems easier to imagine constructive actions by institutions and citizens than by gridlocked and often captured individuals in Congress or the White House. The technology will be as democracy-eroding or democracy-enhancing as the American people demand.
On Lessons from Global Development
Q: Drawing on your experience as Administrator of USAID, what distinguishes foreign assistance that builds long-term resilience from aid that delivers either short-term results or long-term dependency?
A: Let me first note that it has been more than a year since Donald Trump and Elon Musk dismantled USAID, an agency that since it was created by President Kennedy in 1961 had been eradicating poverty and disease and supporting education and the rule of law around the world. A peer-reviewed estimate in The Lancet estimates that "feeding USAID to the wood-chipper" (as Musk described it) will result in the deaths of around 14 million individuals between now and 2030. This destruction is inflicting colossal short-term pain, but it is also doing nothing to build long-term resilience. We had instituted a set of reforms at USAID that had the agency on a solid path – increasing private sector contributions by 42%, scrutinizing our investments to be sure they were cost-effective, sunsetting key programs and shifting more resources toward host governments and local organizations and away from large international organizations and U.S.-based contractors. Emergency humanitarian assistance is important because it keeps people alive amid conflicts like those in Gaza, Sudan and Ukraine, but longer-term investments in development are the kind that helped eradicate smallpox and nearly rid the world of polio. They are also the kind that helped spur India’s Green Revolution and were positioning USAID to support farmers around the world to withstand the horrific effects of increased flooding and drought. Without these development investments, the world is not only less compassionate – it is becoming a lot more dangerous.
On Individual Agency and Public Service
Q: In your memoir, “The Education of an Idealist,” you address the question, "What can one person do?" What specific advice would you give to Notre Dame students as they go out into the 'real world' after graduation, especially those interested in pursuing a career in public service? How can they maintain resolve to be a force for good in the world, and not become disillusioned or overwhelmed by the many global crises and unrest at play today?
A: As I described in “The Education of an Idealist,” I have been blessed to have had many kinds of rewarding roles outside of government – war correspondent, magazine columnist, human rights advocate, and professor. But no role has been more meaningful than the opportunities I have been given to serve my country – first as a human rights adviser to President Obama, then as UN Ambassador and most recently as USAID Administrator. Some people go into public service out of a sense of responsibility – perhaps abiding by the biblical saying from Luke, “those to whom much is given, much is required” – and that is admirable. But one way people can maintain resilience through the ups and downs is to focus on the joy one feels working with colleagues to solve the toughest problems of our time and to try to improve the circumstances of others. Waking up every day and knowing that the work you do has a chance to matter to specific individuals can put a spring in your step, no matter how slow progress can sometimes feel. When I was at USAID, and my kids would ask me where I was going in the morning, instead of saying, “I have to go to work,” I would say, “I get to go to work.” I believe that spirit – of joy and gratitude – can carry a person through even dark and difficult days. But I admit it can sometimes take discipline to summon that spirit.
On the Future and Focus of American Peacebuilding
Q: The Kroc Institute is convening a gathering at the Keough School of Global Affairs office in Washington, DC on March 10 called "American Peacebuilding at a Crossroads." From your perspective having worked inside and outside government, where should the U.S. focus its efforts to best support local sustainable peace today?
A: Both Democratic and Republican administrations have focused on the three Ds – Defense, Diplomacy, and Development – essential for peace around the world and our own national security. If we care about peace and security, we need to make investments in all three domains. General Jim Mattis once famously said, “If you don't fund the State Department fully, then I need to buy more ammunition.” He and other military leaders have echoed this perspective when it comes to foreign assistance. Yet the current administration has made mammoth cuts in both diplomacy and economic development overseas, at the very time that China is expanding its engagements. I would offer a few reflections.
First, we obviously need to do a better job bridging our partisan political divides – and cooling temperatures – here at home. Political disagreement is not only increasingly entrenched; we are seeing a growing number of acts of political violence. We have to nip that in the bud, and our political leaders have to add balm – not gasoline – to our disagreements.
Second, while it is important to adapt our diplomatic training and our development assistance to better meet the current moment, that is a medium-term enterprise. We cannot await significant structural change before we show up for vulnerable communities in the way that we had been for more than six decades. When U.S. officials play a key role in brokering a ceasefire, as they did in Gaza, we need to be able to make swift investments in order to rapidly improve conditions on the ground. One reason the Gaza ceasefire is fraying is the U.S. had destroyed the infrastructure at USAID that could have supported the peace.
And third, peace can’t only be the work of governments. The United States government must use its convening power to enlist the private sector, diaspora groups, and other nations in this demanding cause. I always felt my responsibility at USAID was to turn every taxpayer dollar into at least $3 dollars by leveraging our investments to get others to contribute. I believe that hustle and “development diplomacy” will be essential going forward given the scale of the challenges and resource demands confronting the world.
The Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies, part of the Keough School of Global Affairs, established the annual Hesburgh Lecture in Ethics and Public Policy in 1995 to honor the Rev. Theodore M. Hesburgh, C.S.C., president emeritus of Notre Dame, a global champion of peace and justice, and the founder of the Kroc Institute. Each year a distinguished scholar, policymaker, and/or peace advocate is invited by the Kroc Institute director to deliver a major lecture on an issue related to ethics and public policy in the context of peace and justice.
Originally published by at kroc.nd.edu on February 26, 2026.