Rex Tillerson’s Moral Indecision

President-elect Trump has nominated a number of outstanding men and women for top foreign policy positions in his administration. Marine Corps Gent. (Ret) James Mattis for Secretary of Defense. South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley for U.N. Ambassador. My one-time boss, former Senator Dan Coats, for Director of National Intelligence. Marine Corps Gen. (Ret) John Kelly for Director of Homeland Security. Congressman Mike Pompeo for CIA Director. Great choices, all.

Then there’s Rex Tillerson.

Former head of Exxon-Mobil, Mr. Tillerson has extensive experience in corporate management, international trade, and building a strong professional team. He is reputed to be an effective negotiator and his ability to lead a sprawling bureaucracy is not in question. No doubt he is a patriot and a highly capable individual.

Sadly, he also seems to be completely ill-suited to be Secretary of State. Listening to Mr. Tillerson at his Senate hearing was like hearing an awkward teenager talking to his girlfriend’s father.

The Tillerson Eqivocation

His refusal to acknowledge the moral ugliness of Vladimir Putin was striking. An impassioned and probing Sen. Marco Rubio asked Mr. Tillerson about Putin’s responsibility for the deaths of up to 300,000 Chechens, his murder of political opponents, his military backing of Syrian mass murder Bashir al-Assad (including missile strikes against civilians), and his invasion of the Ukraine to regain Russian control of the Crimea.

Mr. Tillerson’s equivocation was astonishing. Not just in his refusal to call Vladimir Putin a war criminal but in his insistence he needed more information to comment. As a rightly exasperated Sen. Rubio said, the information about Putin’s campaign of death is in the public domain — it is not classified.

It is one thing for a national leader to be temperate, to refuse to surrender to the pressure of the moment, and to maintain an even keel in the face of intense questioning. It is quite another to abandon moral outrage and persist in not calling evil, whether committed by the governments of Russia, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines, or anywhere else, what it is. This latter characterized Mr. Tillerson’s responses to Sen. Rubio.

Volatility is not what America needs in the chief representative of her foreign policy. In this, the steady Mr. Tillerson acquitted himself well. But an unwillingness to characterize mass murder and thuggish aggression as the brutality and moral horror they are does not indicate prudence. Rather, it is a disturbing display of weakness.

Tillerson and Religious Persecution

Concerns about Mr. Tillerson’s potential conduct as our chief diplomat extend to the growing pattern of religious persecution in many corners of the world. Reading the just-issued 2017 Open Doors’ World Watch List, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom’s Annual Report, or the State Department’s International Religious Freedom annual report gives one a sobering, arresting sense of the extent of religious persecution, much of it against Christians, throughout the world.

Defending the persecuted should be a cornerstone of American foreign policy, not only because of our nation’s founding conviction that one’s submission to God takes precedence over allegiance to the state, but because standing with those suffering for their religious beliefs is in our national interest.

As Georgetown University’s Dr. Thomas Farr, the first director of the State Department’s Office for International Religious Freedom, said recently, by upholding the right of all people to believe according to their consciences and live out their faiths freely, America fosters “stable self-governance, economic development, and the defeat of religion-based terror. If we act to rediscover those reasons ourselves, and overcome our contemporary skepticism about engaging religious ideas and actors in American diplomacy, we can avert the momentous consequences of rising religious persecution and declining global religious freedom.”

By fighting for the persecuted, America also lets them know they have a friend who cares about their dignity and liberty. This will bear great fruit over time. As many former prisoners of Cold War Communism have testified, understanding that Ronald Reagan and his team were raising their incarceration and treatment at the highest levels of their oppressive governments inspired them to carry on. And this brave allegiance to religious freedom created a loyalty to our country among the former prisoners and their fellow freedom-lovers that remains strong today.

As the eloquent closing comments of Sen. Rubio make, clear, the stakes could not be higher:

We can’t achieve moral clarity with rhetorical ambiguity … For those 1,400 people in jail in China, those dissidents in Cuba, the girls that want to drive and go to school (In Saudi Arabia), they look to the United States; they look to us, often to the Secretary of State … When they see the United States is not prepared to stand up … it demoralizes these people all over the world. And it leads people to conclude this, which is damaging and it hurt us during the Cold War and that is this: America cares about democracy and freedom as along as it is not being violated by someone that they need for something else. That cannot be who we are in the twenty-first century.

Mr. Tillerson has no background in standing against tyrants, brutes, and, yes, criminals like Vladimir Putin or Kim Jong-Il. At a time of rising international tension, America needs a Secretary of State who has a deft hand as well as a spine of steel. Dealing with dictators, cagey adversaries, and outright enemies is not like negotiating with a potential business partner. It is about standing firmly, sometimes stonily, for America’s national security and vital interests.

Our opponents appreciate resolve, strength, and courage, not sweet reason or a rather pathetic desire to be liked. The Obama foreign policy too often has been typified by a desperate eagerness for other countries to approve of us. The consequences — a newly emergent Russia, an emboldened China, a militaristic North Korea, and an uncertain NATO alliance — pose an increasingly imminent danger to the United States.

Donald Trump appreciates toughness, forthrightness, and candor. In his performance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Rex Tillerson showed none of these. (For more from the author of “Rex Tillerson’s Moral Indecision” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.