Courtesy of Bryce Sauvie

John Bolton ’70 LAW ’74, who served as the U.S. National Security Advisor during President Donald Trump’s first term, preached his affirmative stance on the resolution “Resolved: Don’t Be Afraid of Regime Change” to the Yale Political Union on Tuesday evening.

Bolton began the debate by arguing that regime change is a vital tool in the U.S. national security arsenal. Far from being a radical or reckless act, it is a well-established practice used throughout history to protect American interests and global stability, he said.

“History is one regime change after another,” Bolton said. He acknowledged that while regime change isn’t always successful, neither has any other national security policy always been either.

YPU President Leo Greenberg ’26 noted that Bolton was “a proud member” of the YPU Conservative Party during his time at Yale College and served as the YPU Floor Leader of the Right. In his memoir, Bolton wrote fondly of the time he spent listening to Republican thinkers in the YPU, calling it “a welcome relief from Yale’s relentless, smug, self-satisfied liberalism.”

The YPU Conservative Party of Bolton’s time changed its name to the Independent Party in 1977, with the current YPU Conservative Party founded in 1996.

On Tuesday, Bolton argued that opposition to regime change ignores the reality that the United States has long sought to influence the composition of foreign governments, whether through direct intervention, economic pressure or diplomatic maneuvering.

“The choice that decision-makers in Washington face typically is between changing a regime’s

behavior and changing the regime,” said Bolton. “Sometimes it’s easy to change a regime’s behavior, and sometimes it’s not. And if you’re not willing to consider regime change, then you put up with the same behavior over and over again no matter how damaging it is to American national security.”

He then contrasted regime change with its inverse — regime preservation — calling it “two sides of the same coin” and pointing out that the U.S. has actively supported governments that align with its interests.

Recalling history, Bolton argued that regime change has often been successful when executed decisively. He pointed to post-World War II Germany and Japan as models of effective intervention, crediting U.S.-led efforts for transforming former adversaries into stable, democratic allies.

He also referenced the U.S.-backed coup in Iran in 1953, which kept the Shah in power for over two decades and the fall of communist regimes across Eastern Europe following U.S. support for opposition movements like Poland’s Solidarity.

Bolton then acknowledged that not all regime change efforts have succeeded but attributed failures primarily to “inadequate effort” rather than flawed strategy.

He criticized the Eisenhower administration for failing to support the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and lamented the Kennedy administration’s lack of “resolve and willpower” in handling the Bay of Pigs invasion, arguing that more decisive U.S. action could have overthrown Fidel Castro and spared Cuba decades of authoritarian rule.

Bolton then lamented the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan for undoing what he viewed as a successful intervention against the Taliban in 2001. He contended that the failure was not in toppling the Taliban but in allowing them to return to power in 2021, criticizing both Donald Trump for making an “egregious agreement with the Taliban” and Joe Biden for carrying out a “bungled” exit.

Bolton then defended the 2003 Iraq War’s initial goal of removing Saddam Hussein, calling it an “unmitigated success.” However, he admitted that the subsequent nation-building efforts were flawed, arguing that the U.S. should have left governance to the Iraqis rather than attempting to reshape the country.

“Where we made a mistake was in thinking that we could build a better Iraq than the Iraqis themselves,” Bolton said. “You need to go back and look at Iraq much more carefully than the glib, superficial, arrogant analyses of many people, including those in power in Washington today.”

Bolton also reflected on his own tenure in the Trump administration, labeling the failed attempt to oust Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro in 2019 as “the worst aspect of [his] tenure at the White House.”

Connecting his argument to the 21st century, Bolton also outlined a list of regimes that he believes the U.S. should prioritize for removal. First among them was Iran, which he claimed must be overthrown to ensure stability in the Middle East and prevent nuclear proliferation.

He was equally adamant about the need to remove North Korea’s “odious dictatorship,” arguing that the U.S. had abandoned its long-standing goal of Korean reunification.

“To have allowed all this time to go by and not to have aided our allies in Korea to reunite their country, reunite their families, to get rid of this odious dictatorship that’s trying to proliferate nuclear weapons, has been a failure across administrations and both parties,” said Bolton.

Turning to Russia, Bolton advocated for regime change as a response to the war against Ukraine, arguing that removing Vladimir Putin’s government would be the best way to ensure peace and security in Europe.

Concluding his speech, Bolton also hinted at potential support for regime change in China. He suggested that dissatisfaction among the Chinese people could create opportunities for internal political shifts.

After the talk, opposing Bolton’s speech, William Barbee ’26 argued that the numerous failures globally of forced regime change by the U.S. show that “there is much to fear.” He argued that a nation’s primary goal is “to cultivate the spiritual and physical well-being of its population.” If a nation jeopardizes its citizens’ moral lives by compelling them to commit evil, he does not believe the nation to be worth fighting for.

“Utopia is not going to be obtained through the deposition of other autocratic regimes,” Barbee said. 

Also opposing Bolton’s stance, YPU Floor Leader of the Left Brock McNeel ’28 argued that, regardless of efficacy, state power must ultimately derive from popular consensus and mandate, which intervention disrupts.

In agreement with Bolton’s affirmative stance, YPU Floor Leader of the Right Max Hitchin ’28 argued that the “bad implementation” of regime changes throughout history does not mean that “we should be afraid of the principle of regime change.”

After the debate, the resolution “Don’t Be Afraid of Regime Change” failed by one vote 36-37-5.