The most important lesson is that diplomats cannot facilitate political solutions in conflict zones without the support of the military in shaping the negotiating landscape. Yet it seems that many of our leaders have learned precisely the opposite lesson. From Iraq to Syria to Ukraine, President Obama simply declares that “there is no military solution” as if that were an excuse not to engage the military at all in pursuit of diplomatic settlements. Manageable regional crises, one by one, have turned into grave disasters of global consequence, as U.S. adversaries press for military advantage.

At the same time, in countries such as Pakistan and Libya, where the Obama Administration has engaged in a serious manner, its approach is heavily reliant on Special Forces and drones to the exclusion of comprehensive diplomatic efforts to negotiate political settlements. Afghanistan and Iraq were uniquely challenging environments, decimated as they were by some of the worst tyrannies of the late 20th century. But the fact that the United States could not support a program to stabilize Libya, a country of 6 million people on the outskirts of Europe, raises serious questions about the efficacy of our diplomatic and military capabilities.

Bolstering diplomatic instruments and integrating them more closely with our military efforts would decrease the burden on the U.S. military and produce more decisive outcomes in state- and nation-building campaigns. The U.S. would be better-equipped to empower partners in other countries who are eager to assume greater responsibility over their own affairs and could do so with a minimal amount of U.S. assistance. No longer would Washington have to watch as dangerous vacuums emerge and U.S. ground troops are forced to intervene. Greater integration of civilian and military efforts would also allow the U.S. to address the mismatch between its rhetoric on democracy promotion and the practical investments that are necessary to build democratic institutions.

My ambassadorships in Afghanistan and Iraq coincided with a tragic period of history that one hopes will never be repeated. But in the more dangerous world we face, I am skeptical that the U.S. will be able to avoid engagements in state and nation-building operations. Greater coordination between our military and diplomatic instruments in conflict zones can help shape outcomes abroad without falling into our current regrettable cycle of great military exertions followed by hasty retreats and diplomatic setbacks.

Zalmay Khalilzad is a former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq and the United Nations. This piece is adapted from his book, The Envoy: From Kabul to the White House, My Journey Through a Turbulent World, just out from St. Martin’s Press.