Kevin Rudd’s Commencement Address at the Fletcher School, Tufts University

Commencement Address

The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy

A New Generation of Global Leaders

Navigating a Changing Global Order

Tufts University

Medway, Massachusetts.

Hon Dr Kevin Rudd AC

26th Prime Minister of Australia

18 May 2025

It is an honor to deliver this Commencement Address - at this great institution - the oldest graduate school in international relations in the United States.

I congratulate you, the graduating class of 2025, for the intelligence, application and purpose you display in embracing the great challenges we face in international diplomacy in our deeply troubled world.

I also congratulate the faculty, of this great school for your pursuit of academic excellence and, in doing so, for your unflinching defence of academic freedom in the world.

My remarks today are intended as a short letter of encouragement to all of you as you launch into the world beyond these walls - to go back to work in the countries from which you have come, or here in America, or in the international institutions or global corporations that have now sought your services around the world.

This morning, I want to reflect on the pace, the trajectory and complexity of change in the world in which you will be working.

I want to reflect on a number of core beliefs, values and skills that may be helpful in navigating this complexity.

And finally I’d like to encourage you, from whichever country you have come to study here in this great American institution, to consider how greatly your skills are now needed across America and across the world.

And I say all these things in my personal capacity, as a lifelong scholar of China, a former Australian prime minister, but not as an Ambassador necessarily representing the views of the Australian government.

The hard truth for your generation is that you will face demands for innovation, creativity and leadership that we have not seen since the “greatest generation” of the Second World War.

The challenge, of course, remains the same: namely, how to preserve the peace, how to grow prosperity and how to sustain our planet.

And to do so without surrendering the universal freedoms for which our forebears fought and which remain fundamental to all. 

Changes in the Global Order

It will be 50 years next year that I began as an undergraduate at the Australian National University studying Chinese language, Classical Chinese and Chinese history.

That was the year that Mao died.

Over this long half century, I have seen China go from the ideological excesses of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, to the near-full embrace of the market (both at home and abroad) under Deng, Jiang and Hu, to what we have seen over the last decade under Xi Jinping with the return of ideology, new political restrictions on the private sector and all forms of private life, and a more aggressive approach in Chinese foreign and security policy as China now seeks vigorously to assert its interests and values into the region and the world.

The rest of the world has changed too.

The Soviet Communist Party has collapsed, the Soviet Union collapsed along with it and the Cold War, which took us to the nuclear precipice, is over.

Countries of Eastern Europe, once under the Russians iron fist, has since joined the European Union and NATO.

As for the EU itself, it went from a debate about British accession, to the European Union’s extraordinary near five-fold expansion from 6 to  28 members, to … yet another debate about British de-accession.

Meanwhile in Asia, since the fall of Saigon also 50 years ago, we have seen an enduring peace dividend after many great, bloody and destructive wars over the previous half century came to a close - wars with Japan in China and across the Pacific, with China on the Korean Peninsula, and with Vietnam in Indo-China.

Instead, the economies of Asia over the last half century have focussed on exports, growth and rising living standards and robust democracies emerged from most of them.

India too, has gone from strength to strength following its own border wars in the past, and depending on its policy choices for the future, looms as the great alternative global growth engine to China for the decades ahead.

Across the rest of the global south, economies have grown rapidly, albeit unevenly, across much of Africa in the post-colonial period.

Latin America grew as well, although not uniformly, as dictatorships gradually yielded to either liberal democratic or social democratic forms of democracy.

Only the Middle East remained the venue for invasions, revolution and rolling wars involving Israel, the Arab states, Iran and Afghanistan - where growth proved elusive for many, with the Gulf monarchies proving to be a remarkable exception rather than the rule.

Underpinning all the above, however, has been the abiding strategic ballast of the United States through its Euro-Atlantic and Indo-Pacific alliances, as well as its own formidable national military capacity to intervene in regional disputes anywhere and at any time.

So too did the world grow to depend on the strength of the US economy, the innovations of US technology, and the abiding power of the US dollar - collectively constituting the ideational and institutional underpinnings of what we have called, until recently, the age of economic globalisation and the rules-based liberal order.

And anchored in these core pillars of American security and economic power, the United States also pursued a vigorous global diplomacy - both in pursuit of US national interests, but also to navigate and, where possible, resolve crises, conflicts and wars which would otherwise disrupt the global commons.

So the question I am asked at universities across America, Australia and, as recently as last Friday at Oxford, is whether this age is coming to a close. And if so, what will replace it?

Are we at a new great, global inflection point of a type we have not seen since the end of the Cold War - with what we saw then with the fall of Russia, the rise of Deng’s China, and the explosion of trade and investment-driven growth across much of the world?

My answer to you all is: I do not think so.

Of course, we should not blindly dismiss the evidence.

Nor should we be Pollyannaish in simply believing that all that was will continue to be and all will be well.

But we should be deeply cautious in our evaluation of the evidence, and not simply succumb to that which is fashionable.

We should not be in the business of drawing hard, fast and possibly premature conclusions by jumping at intellectually beguiling  shadows.

First, the US is not foreshadowing the ending of its formidable array of global military alliances.

Asking various allies to pay more for their defence is not tantamount to saying that these alliances are for the high jump. They are not.

And that is because America’s alliance network is overwhelmingly in America’s own national security interests.

It extends America’s strategic reach into the world.

And it provides the US with apertures on the world in defence of its own continental security and of that of it citizens abroad that America would not otherwise have.  

Second, America is inextricably linked to the international economy.

We see that with critical supply chains that impact supermarkets shelves, inflation and interest rates.

We see it also with critical inputs into US local manufacturing and services industries which could be crippled if global supply was suddenly stopped. 

And we see it with the reaction of equity markets, bond markets and currency markets to potential convulsions in the real economy.

It is true that the President and Treasury Secretary Bessent are seeking to rebalance the US economy.

Just as it is true that we are all in the middle of complex tariff negotiations with the Administration where we all have different views.

But de-risking the US economy does not mean de-coupling it from the rest of the world - including from China.

Third, it is true that the US is seeking to reduce its global diplomatic footprint, cut its contribution to international development assistance and withdraw from a number of multilateral institutions.

But that does not mean the US has suddenly retreated from the world altogether and returned to the splendid isolation of American shores.

There is no evidence of that.

For example, in the Indo-Pacific, the US will remain active across the board, not least because US states and territories like Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, the Northern Marianas, the Aleutians and American Samoa are located across the Pacific.

The Euro-Atlantic is also home to vast American national interests.

Once again, US allies and partners will have different views on each of these proposed changes in the US global posture, and each of us engages the Administration accordingly. 

Indeed, one of the challenges we will face will be for the rest of us, in the spirit of burden-sharing, to step up our efforts to fill any gaps that might emerge from US reductions.

Fourth, in critical domains such as cyber and space, the world has no geographical boundaries.

Our potential adversaries and our current competitors are acting as strategic predators in these domains every day of the week.

They are placing all our nations, our citizens, our institutions, our critical infrastructure and our corporations at risk.

But to respond to these challenges effectively, as allies and partners, we must work seamlessly together. 

And the fact is we are, with America remaining at the centre of our global efforts to protect all our countries from attack, and where America needs us,  as much as we need America.

Finally, there is the great disruptor for us all - technology. Critical technologies in general. And artificial intelligence and quantum technologies in particular.

The pace, intensity and trajectory of technological change is already impacting the economic and military competitiveness of states.

And America and its European and Asian allies lie at the forefront of this. In semiconductor size, speed, and energy efficiency; in the application of AI to everything from intelligence analysis to advanced robotics; and in the new frontiers of quantum computing.

China of course has become the pacing challenge in most of these domains, not least because its leadership designated AI as a core determinant of future national competitiveness back in 2017.

But the US and its allies and partners are capable of extraordinary dynamism in all these technology domains.

And  that is why, for example, one of the core rationales of AUKUS and its Advanced Technologies Project is to drive innovation faster and harder - as these three countries build an unprecedented, seamless, and radically reformed regulatory environment for combined US, British and Australian innovation.

For all these reasons, I would counsel all those who are already  catastrophising about the end of Pax Americana to take a deep breath.

Yes there have been significant changes introduced by this Administration: some large, some not so large.

But let us also remember that for most of these changes, the Administration has a democratic mandate from the American people.

Therefore the responsibility of America’s democratic allies is to work creatively with Washington, to contribute to shaping American perspectives and policies, and to become more equal partners in our common endeavours, rather than simply, however fashionable it may seem to some, to throw our hands in the air in theatrical despair.

That gets us nowhere in practical terms.

The empirical reality is that America today continues to be actively engaged in the world, across global security, diplomacy, the economy and most critically technology.

Thus far, these are changes that are unfolding within the paradigm of continuing American global engagement, not beyond it.

The Impact on Diplomacy

So, what are the implications of all the above for you the graduating class of 2025.

There are many things.

First and foremost, it means that you yourselves as individuals have agency to influence change.

You are not the hapless victims of deep, dark determinist forces propelling history in a particular direction, where you can, at best, become intelligent bystanders at events, or at best the chroniclers of change.

No.

In the eternal debates between agency and structure within international relations and broader political science theory, for me as a foreign policy practitioner for most of my life, agency matters.

Political leaders matter.

Those that advise them matter.

Diplomats matter.

The decisions they take matter.

I have seen too many case studies over the decades where individual actors have changed the course of history - in large matters or in smaller ones, sometimes for the good and sometimes for ill.

I spoke on the same subject at Oxford University on Friday.

And I have written extensively on it over the years.

So, my argument is that for each of you today, this is a world of great personal and professional opportunity.

You too can help shape the world’s future.

And not just on small things, but on big things as well.

Some have asked me how is this to be done?

A decade ago, I addressed a course at the Harvard Kennedy School on a similar subject.

I recommended a number of core questions, and principles arising from thoughtful deliberation on those questions, that students might reflect on, and indeed reach conclusions on, during their university years.

First, what do you ultimately believe in? What theology? What philosophy? What ideology? And most importantly what is the epistemology for these beliefs, or are they just built on sand?   For these become the basis for both your professional and personal lives in the real world in which you live, work and have your being.

Second, what ethical framework do these core beliefs give rise to? Because we all require a moral compass. For we have all met those who have none.

Values of human dignity? Of freedom? Of opportunity? Of equality? Of sustainability? Of safety from human harm? Of security from  external threat?

And personal values of honesty? Of integrity? Of fairness?

In the 21st century, these cannot simply be assumed.

Third, what are your natural fields of intellectual fascination because my long experience of life is that the things in which you are most fascinated will invariably be the ones you are best at - as opposed to those things that you do because you think you should be doing them.

And, once having settled this in your mind, work at becoming the absolute best in your field.

Specialist knowledge within your discipline is critical, particularly language, culture, politics, economics and technology, the great change-drivers of the 21st century.

But also a capacity for not just detailed analysis but also intelligent synthesis to assist in the arduous work of policymakers.

Fourth, how do you apply the values structure in which you believe to your natural field of intellectual fascination? And what type of work in the real world, and in which professional field, best brings these two elements together?

And fifth, whatever you do, jump in and get going, rather than ruminating for half a lifetime on what a perfect life decision might look like.

Because, in my experience, there is no such thing as a perfect decision.

But if you attend to these basic steps, one decision tends to build into another as you find yourselves in what the positive psychologists call “flow”.

Each of these steps is hard.

None of them are easy.

But the investment in working them through yields its fruit in due season.

The reason I have mentioned these approaches is that professional life is rarely smooth.

It’s full of large brick walls. Sometimes you collide with them. Sometimes you climb over them. Sometimes you crash through them.

Whichever way, you will know you have been in contact with a brick wall.

And it is often painful.

And it will be for you as well.

But in navigating the future, particularly in world full of the uncertainties and exciting opportunities that I have referred to in these remarks today, having a basic set of beliefs, ethical frameworks and a clear sense of professional purpose and direction is important to see you through.

And remember, above all, in all this, you have personal agency.

You are not an anonymous pawn in the face of an immovable world.

You are instead the world’s change agents.

And given this great academic institution that has helped form you, you are the world’s change agents for good

For our common security, our prosperity, our planetary sustainability and our common good.

And it Matters Not Where You Have Come From

And it matters not where you have come from.

I’m told that this graduating class comes from every continent on earth.

From Africa, from Latin America, from Asia, from Europe, from the Middle East - and yes, from the United States of America itself.

This speaks well of this institution.

Because each of you have a decisive contribution to make: to this country, America; or to the country from which you have come; or to the world writ large.

All our countries and our institutions are made stronger by the talents we attract to our shores, the depth and diversity of skills and insights needed for the economies of the future, bringing with them new perspectives on how to solve old problems, as well as the vitality, initiative and enterprise that comes also with fresh eyes, navigating the challenges of the future, because none of us can predict how long our national or international political circumstances will remain unchanged. 

Certainly that has been our experience in Australia. And certainly that has been the experience of these United States.

So for each of you, a wide and wonderful world awaits, full of opportunity, challenge and, yes, risk, as the baton of global leadership is passed to your generation.

America remains engaged with the world. Just as the world remains engaged with America.

And your great privilege will be to help shape the patterns of that future engagement - for our common good.