The war in Ukraine has laid bare a fundamental divide in how global powers view their responsibilities. At the heart of this contrast are two sharply different approaches: President Donald Trump’s hard-nosed individualism, rooted in economic self-interest, and Europe’s often clumsy but deeply felt commitment to collective security.

This is precisely what ceding Ukrainian territory to Russia would represent on the global stage. Ukraine is not just fighting for its land—it is fighting for the principle that borders cannot be redrawn by force. Allowing Russia to annex portions of Ukraine sends a dangerous message: that might makes right, and that sovereignty and territorial integrity are negotiable.

The year 2024 roared with seismic shifts, monumental advancements, and cultural revolutions that reverberated across the globe. From incendiary political battles to breathtaking technological leaps and cultural phenomena that captured the world's imagination, this year’s narrative is anything but ordinary.

As we get closer to a new American Presidency and increased talk of how to end the war in Ukraine, we must not forget the reason we need to continue our support for Ukraine. The conflict in Ukraine, ignited by Russia's unprovoked invasion, is not merely a regional dispute. It's a pivotal moment in history, a test of the global order and the principles of territorial integrity and national sovereignty.

Spending much of my time here, I always feel like I am teetering between overbearing collectivism and out-of-control individualism, between the past and the present, and between Ukraine and a Russia that constantly meddles in internal politics.

Ambiguity in a world with leaders like Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) will inevitably lead to them bringing their version of certainty to the conflicts and regions filled with ambiguity — and it is critical that democratic nations around the world not allow this to happen. Certainty, where and when there is none, must be defined by democratic nations, and not those whose interests are counter to freedom, fairness and human rights.

Every country has the fundamental right to set their own domestic and foreign policy. But when the actions of leaders clothed in the regalia of tyranny and oppression imperil the basic human rights of their citizens and when their actions impact the state of world affairs and the safety and security of another country and by extension the world as a whole – as in the case of a dictator like Putin - governments and defenders of the free world must speak up and act.

If we support the strong leaders of today, the legacy of the leadership values of those we have lost, and nurture future leaders, I have no doubt that the world will pull back from the precipice and instead find “peace, progress, and prosperity”.