Senator Thom Tillis on alliances, Congress, and public service

U.S. Senator Thom Tillis returned to Duke on Friday, Feb. 20, for a wide-ranging fireside chat that moved quickly from global security to the everyday mechanics of governing. The conversation, hosted by Sanford faculty member Peter Feaver in the JB Duke Hotel ballroom, drew students and other members of the Duke community to discuss alliances, congressional authority, and what effective public leadership requires.

Image

The event was part of the Ambassador Dave and Kay Phillips Family International Lecture Series and was co-sponsored by the Provost’s Initiative on Pluralism, Free Inquiry, and Belonging and Polis: Center for Politics.

Feaver, a professor of political science and public policy and director of Duke’s Program in American Grand Strategy (AGS), guided the discussion. Tillis, North Carolina’s senior U.S. senator, has served in the Senate since 2015 after earlier leadership roles in the North Carolina General Assembly.

A “family of nations” and the stakes of alliance management

Feaver opened by asking Tillis to reflect on transatlantic relations and the role that the Senate plays in US policy toward NATO. Tillis described how his responsibilities expanded over time, from committee work to deeper involvement in international fora and delegations. In that work, he said he has seen how much U.S. credibility shapes what partners believe is possible.

“I don't think you have any earthly idea how much weight the American voice has,” he said.

Tillis framed NATO as something more intimate than a transactional arrangement. “Look, we are a family of nations,” he said, then offered an analogy that appeared throughout the conversation. “Big families argue.”

Image

In his view, leadership inside an alliance requires discipline and a sense of shared vulnerability. “Dictators and malign actors are the only ones who succeed by showing the fractures in the transatlantic partnership,” he said. The goal, he added, should be to communicate expectations in a way that strengthens cohesion and reinforces shared commitments.

Tillis also recognized the public servants who sustain those relationships. 

“You've got to have career diplomats,” he said, praising the Foreign Service as “brilliant” and describing diplomatic service as a demanding sacrifice. In the same vein, he argued for clear lines of accountability in the policymaking process and for serious attention to how the United States signals resolve.

Governing “within the 35-yard line”

Several of Tillis’s remarks focused on the incentives in modern politics, especially the way public attention can distort decision-making. He urged students to look beyond the loudest voices in the debate, arguing that lasting policy tends to come from the middle of the field.

Image

“I believe in my heart of hearts the most enduring, wise decisions that are made by government are made within the 35-yard line of government,” he said (one of several sports analogies he used). He warned that extremes can erode public trust and make problem-solving harder, adding, “We need folks like you all to recognize that and fight for” a healthier civic culture.

That message extended to how information reaches voters and leaders. “AI is going to make people smarter and lazy people dumber,” he said, urging students to stay engaged, evaluate claims, and resist the pull of echo chambers.

What effective leadership looks like in public service

Tillis repeatedly returned to the idea that public service demands both humility and preparation. In describing his own approach, he told the audience, “I'm here to do a job,” and later added, “I'm a really lousy politician.” The point, he said, was that governing requires method, discipline, and a willingness to make decisions based on evidence rather than applause.

He also urged students to treat politics as a long game and to build a foundation before seeking high office. “Go get real-world experience,” he said, recommending work that exposes future leaders to budgets, organizations, tradeoffs, and the consequences of imperfect decisions.

Questions from students on elections, misinformation, and generational change

Image

During audience Q&A, students asked about misinformation and elections, including foreign interference and the growing role of technology. Tillis encouraged vigilance and stressed the importance of institutions and evidence. Referencing his own approach to contested claims, he said, “That's what we have a court system for. That's why we have evidentiary roles.”

Another student asked about retirement and generational change in Congress. Tillis argued for a mix of perspectives and cautioned against reforms that could shift power away from elected officials. “No, I'm not for term limits,” he said, contending that frequent turnover can empower unelected actors and weaken accountability.

Still, he urged future leaders to enter public service with seriousness and preparation, and to focus on governing rather than branding. “Don't all of a sudden be worried about getting your name on the paper,” he said.

Throughout the hour, Feaver kept the focus on how policy choices take shape and how leaders can build coalitions even amid polarization. For students in the room, the event offered an applied lesson in the relationship between strategy and institutions, and in the habits that make democratic governance work.