Dear President Biden:

This is an urgent message. 

Send our M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine. And do it soon. You have about 5,000 of them. Ukrainian forces say they need 500.  Surely you can spare some.  Maybe 250 or so?  Maybe that will stimulate Germany and Poland to send their Leopard 2 tanks. Together they can play a major role in helping turn the tide of battle.

And don’t listen to your senior aides when they give you a lot of excuses why it cannot be done. “They use jet fuel and only get 3 mpg. They are too hard to maintain. It will take too long to train Ukrainian troops to use them.”  

Please remember, Mr. President, that you have 10,000 troops stationed in Poland right now. Surely among those forces are resources to train Ukrainian soldiers how to operate the M1s and to maintain them. 

The negative excuses sound like a cover up for fear and timidity. “Oh, if we send tanks to Ukraine Mr. Putin will step up his efforts to crush the Ukrainian people. And he will take his war to the rest of Europe.”  

The facts do not bear this out. Vladimir Putin is on the ropes and this is the time Ukrainian troops should strike him with the strongest force possible 

He needs to be stopped now and he can be.  Consider his panicky efforts to enlarge his armed forces.  Throwing youngsters into the front lines with little training. Opening jails and giving prisoners freedom in exchange for military service. Allowing a mercenary force—the Wagner Group—to have a free hand in its private war against Ukraine. Changing battlefield leadership frequently. Running low on ammunition. Suffering much greater losses of men and equipment than he ever could have believed possible. 

You were born in November, 1942, a little more than two years after President Franklin Roosevelt announced support of Great Britain in its fight with Hitler. 

The war was going badly for Britain. They had lost eleven destroyers to the Germans in a ten-day period. Prime Minister Winston Churchill begged President Franklin Roosevelt for help.  The two concluded a deal in which the United States sent 50 destroyers to England in exchange for use of British naval bases in the Caribbean and Newfoundland.   That action led later, in March, 1941, to legislation on Roosevelt’s creative Lend-Lease program in which the United States pledged money and material to countries fighting against the Axis governments. And he succeeded in accomplishing this while faced with an isolationist Congress and citizens leery of doing anything that might cause the United States to become involved in a European war. 

Roosevelt’s courage in standing up to Hitler by supporting Britain, became a key element in his legacy. In the face of Congressional opposition, he had demonstrated presidential leadership overflowing with creativity, perseverance and persuasive power. 

You, sir, already have demonstrated leadership in supporting Ukraine and rallying others to do the same.  But there is much more to be done. 

The majority of Americans still favor sending material support to Ukraine. Negative rumblings about decreasing aid to Ukraine already are emerging from the new Congress.

Now is the time to act, Mr. President.  Send in the M1 Abrams tanks. 

Ross Jones is a former vice president and secretary emeritus of The Johns Hopkins University. He joined the University in 1961 as assistant to President Milton S. Eisenhower. A 1953 Johns Hopkins graduate, he later earned a Master’s Degree at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism.

The recent resignation of British Prime Minister Liz Truss after only six weeks in office prompted me to think about the trauma associated with forced changes in leadership be they at the highest levels of government, in the corporate world, or at non-profit organizations. 

Over many years, as a trustee or director of several organizations I have been privileged to be a participant in, and observer of, board culture.  

There is little doubt that the most important step a board ever takes is to choose its leader—chief executive, president or whatever title may be given to the person in charge

There also is no doubt that most boards absolutely shudder at the notion of having to fire their CEO.  They have invested too much in that person, not just in money, but in time and personal relationships. They approved strategic plans presented to them, financial arrangements, deals that were recommended, and key personnel who were hired. 

But, as time went on, board members became dissatisfied with the leadership. At a business, sales were not hitting forecasts. At a college, enrollment was sharply down.   There was too much talk about process and not enough action.  Performance of certain individuals on the management team was disappointing. There was a growing sense that the organization was losing its direction, losing money or straying from its mission. 

What is the board to do?  Most boards have small subcommittees that have a special relationship with the CEO, a group that provides an annual review, advises, recommends, encourages, dissuades, flags missteps, tries to keep the leader on course. It’s a good venue for explaining concerns and renewing expectations. 

But many organizations, particularly small, volunteer–driven ones, don’t have such formal mechanisms. When the trustees are confronted with executive actions that make them uncomfortable there is not an easy way to deal with the leader. 

Things fester. Individual board members begin to tell themselves that the organization needs a fresh start, a new person at the helm but making that decision is so painful that action is delayed. 

Finally, the accumulating doubts about leadership are evident among nearly all board members and the difficult decision is made to sever the relationship with the CEO.

And the process begins again—searching, interviewing, vetting, negotiating, hoping that this time the new leader will be better than the one before. 

Can this trying circumstance of delay and procrastination in dismissing a chief executive be avoided? Maybe not in every instance. However, on nearly every board there are one or two, thoughtful, dedicated members who are willing to step up at the early signs of difficulty to make the case for change and urge a course correction before years of time, money and psychological energy are wasted on a leader who is not able to fulfill the opportunity he or she was given by the board.  The advice of such individuals needs to be taken seriously and acted upon without delay. 

Yes, it is difficult to dismiss a leader. It is even more difficult to retain someone who cannot meet a board’s expectations. 

Ross Jones is a former vice president and secretary emeritus of The Johns Hopkins University. He joined the University in 1961 as assistant to President Milton S. Eisenhower. A 1953 Johns Hopkins graduate, he later earned a Master’s Degree at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism.

I knew something was up when the store public address system blasted a message something like this: “Good morning shoppers. We are experiencing difficulties with our electronic systems. Most registers at our checkout stations are temporarily out of order. We appreciate your patience.”

I was in Walmart. It was mid-morning on a Saturday and the store was humming with folks eager to fill their shopping lists and get on with their day. 

The reactions on the aisles were immediate. Some were silent, a raised eyebrow or a whisper to one’s shopping companion. Others were sarcastically humorous “Just what I needed this morning.” Only a few were muttering nasty phrases that should not be repeated. 

I finally found everything my wife, Lynn, had asked me to pick up and I headed for the self-checkout area. Soon, the line of shoppers behind me was so long it snaked across the main store entrance aisle and into the fruits and vegetables department. Shoppers who decided to stand in lines for the two or three working registers were backed up across a wide aisle and into the racks of women’s and girl’s clothing where they were almost totally hidden. 

I was able to leave in about 45 minutes, taking with me an observation I found stunning.  Almost no one complained about the delay they were experiencing. In fact, there were lots of amiable conversations among strangers.  

In a word, dozens of shoppers, anxious to fill their orders and leave the store, were PATIENT. 

As I have thought about that morning, I have hoped that it might have been a small sign, a tiny case study, demonstrating that we Americans  have the capacity to be patient when things go wrong. 

As individual citizens, and as communities in a free and democratic society, we are certain to face enormous challenges in the days and weeks ahead—some we can predict, most we cannot. Our patience will be sorely tested. We will need to dig deep to find it because, with patience, we can gain that precious moment or two of time that will allow us to assess those challenges and overcome them with   thoughtful and clear-headed responses.  

Ross Jones is a former vice president and secretary emeritus of The Johns Hopkins University. He joined the University in 1961 as assistant to President Milton S. Eisenhower. A 1953 Johns Hopkins graduate, he later earned a Master’s Degree at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism.

“Who’da Thunk It?”

I don’t know why, but that vintage quip, sometimes attributed to Mortimer Snerd, the dummy for the 1940s ventriloquist and radio host Edgar Bergen, popped into my head last week when I was told that I had tested positive for Covid. 

My wife, Lynn, and I, who are pushing 90 and 91, had followed all the rules—vaccinated, boosted twice, masked for large portions of the past two years, keeping our distance at the post office and supermarket, Zooming church services, skipping the movies, vigilant about washing hands—you know the drill. 

But, truth be told, we had throttled back a bit in the past few months. Seemed to us everyone was doing that. We were shaking hands, forgetting about masks, dining out (what a joy that was). Sure, we heard the news. A new Covid variant was beginning to appear and it was highly transmissible. We did not pay much attention to the news. 

Last week, when Lynn woke up with “a scratchy throat” accompanied by a cough, and a runny nose, I thought we should take her temperature.  101+ degrees.  Not good.

We have the good fortune of living in a retirement community with excellent in-house medical assistance. We called the clinic. Chad, a tell-it-like-it-is, indefatigable nurse practitioner, came to our cottage door. “I don’t want to come in,” he said. So, while standing just outside our door, he reached out to test us with nasal swabs. Lynn was positive.  I was negative. “You’re next. Positive tomorrow,” he said to me.  And I was, just as he predicted. 

Just as Covid invaded our lives that morning we learned that on the same day it had worked its way into the White House and captured President Biden. It turns out that our progress toward recovery seems to be moving at about the same pace as his own journey back to good health.  We chuckled when newscasters reported that his sore throat had healed. “Mine, too,” I said to Lynn.

We don’t know what cutting edge medicines and therapies the President has been receiving—only the very best, we presume.  But, for us, the new drug, Paxlovid, Acetaminophen, lots of liquids, rest and the elixir of the ages, chicken soup, seem to have stopped this weird illness in about five days. 

All in all, a good outcome for a trio of old timers–the President and us. “Who’da Thunk It?”

Ross Jones is a former vice president and secretary emeritus of The Johns Hopkins University. He joined the University in 1961 as assistant to President Milton S. Eisenhower. A 1953 Johns Hopkins graduate, he later earned a Master’s Degree at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism.

I have an odd, uneasy feeling about President Biden’s decision to head to Scotland this week for the international summit on climate change. 

He flew away from an exceedingly fractious Congress and much public unhappiness with his leadership.  I wish he had stayed home. 

Dr. Lincoln Gordon

His trip conjures up my memory of a Johns Hopkins University president, Dr. Lincoln Gordon, who, back in the early 1970s, took an official trip to India at a time when there was widespread discontent among faculty, staff and students about a host of issues. 

A general sense of malaise and restlessness hung over the university’s campus. 

If pollsters had been interviewing the Hopkins community in those days it is likely that Dr. Gordon would have had the same unsatisfactory poll ratings that President Biden had among the American people as he headed overseas. 

But President Gordon ignored the festering problems issues on his doorstep and left the university anyhow, traveling to India with the dean of the School of Public Health to inspect some sort of cooperative health project Hopkins had in India.  

In the few days that President Gordon was away the unrest continued to mount, so much so that shortly after he returned, a delegation of faculty marched into his office saying they had lost confidence in his leadership and suggested he should resign. Later that day they delivered the same message to the Chair of the Board of Trustees. In a matter of hours, President Gordon resigned. 

Could any such scenario occur on President Biden’s return? Of course not. 

But I think I see similarities.

Dr. Gordon, despite unrest at the university, undertook what he thought was an important mission to India or at least he rationalized it that way. 

President Biden believes it is important for him to be in Scotland for the climate summit but can he deliver an energizing, compelling and believable message about climate to world leaders given all the uncertainties that exist in Washington on that and other subjects. 

In his Build Back Better plan the Climate Change still is a top priority, and that’s good but endless debate about it continues and seems likely to continue.   What can he possibly say in Glasgow about our country’s commitment to reducing carbon emissions that is certain, rock solid? 

How can he plead for world unity in addressing climate change when he does not have unity at home?

Given his preoccupation with the struggles in his own party, not to mention the opposition party, how seriously will delegates in Glasgow respond to whatever pledges and promises he makes when they know how unsettled and restless his colleagues in the House and Senate are.

When it comes to climate leadership on the international stage, the President’s proclamations may sound hollow and be overshadowed by what’s going on in Washington.  I wish he had decided to stay home and taken care of business here, including the critical need to advance our own climate agenda. Such a decision would have underscored, in a dramatic way, his earnest commitment to leadership on the number one issue facing our country and the world. 

Right now, the old saying seems timey:  “When the cat’s away, the mice will play.”  Let’s hope they don’t do too much damage in the President’s absence.  

Ross Jones is a former vice president and secretary emeritus of The Johns Hopkins University. He joined the University in 1961 as assistant to President Milton S. Eisenhower. A 1953 Johns Hopkins graduate, he later earned a Master’s Degree at Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism.