On Sunday, the Democratic nomination gained another entry, growing the current field to an unprecedented twenty-five major candidates. Joe Sestak surprised everyone by his unexpected announcement, just days before the first primary debates.

Sestak served over three decades in the United States Navy, retiring with the rank of three-star admiral. Over the course of his military service, he graduated with a doctorate from Harvard, commanded a carrier strike group in the Persian Gulf, and served as the Director for Defense Policy on President Bill Clinton’s National Security Council.

“In 2006, Sestak's defeat of long-time Pennsylvania Congressman Curt Weldon signaled an increasing Democratic trend in suburban Philadelphia—at the time, the collar counties' support for Democratic candidates was driven by disillusionment with the Republican Party during the George W. Bush era,” explained Charles McElwee, assistant editor at City Journal. Sestak was reelected in the heavily Republican district by twenty points in 2008.

He declined reelection to the House to run for the Senate in 2010. His plan was interrupted when longtime liberal Republican incumbent Arlen Spector switched parties; then-Vice President Joe Biden had midwifed the political turnover. “By 2010, when Sestak ran for Senate, he presented himself as an unconventional, anti-establishment candidate who would fight for the working class. He defeated Arlen Specter in the primary, winning every county except Dauphin, Lackawanna, and Philadelphia Counties,” explained McElwee. “And in a year of major Republican victories statewide—from gubernatorial candidate Tom Corbett winning 63 of 67 counties to congressional victories and the party securing majorities in the state legislature—Sestak only lost to Pat Toomey by about 80,000 votes.”

Sestak attempted a rematch against Toomey in 2016, reentering the Democratic Senate primary. Despite favorable polling early in the race, he was defeated in the nomination by Katie McGinty, who had been endorsed by President Barack Obama, Vice President Biden, and other party leaders frustrated by Sestak’s tactical choices. CNN analyst Harry Enten referred to Sestak’s loss as “a victory for the party machine.” Six of the seven counties Sestak won in the primary voted for Donald Trump in the general election, and Toomey won reelection by a similar margin as 2010.

Spring-boarding from twin Senate losses to a national campaign, Joe Sestak spoke to the National Interest for an exclusive interview enumerating on several of his foreign policy positions and the general outlook of his campaign.

“I think one of the worst things that is happening today is that America is retreating from the world; almost behind walls, leaving bruised allies behind,” explained Sestak. “When in fact the world’s greatest generation, World War II, came home from having fought in the second of two world wars in twenty-six years and said, ‘This isn’t gonna happen again to us a third time,’ and built the liberal, rules’ based world order. And by liberal I don’t mean Democratic liberal or anything, I mean a world order based upon human and individual rights, where we cared about the collective duty of the world because it was in our interest. And so, our walking away from that, when it won the third world war, the Cold War, without a shot, and further permitted us as the leader of the world to pursue our interest in conjunction with those who have similar values, is what really permitted our American dream to expand.”

Sestak’s description is reminiscent of President George H.W. Bush’s promise to create a “new world order” after the Cold War, led by the United States and organized through a series of international organizations, agreements, and alliances. The concept of a “liberal, rules-based order” has been criticized as whitewashing American actions abroad, and serving as an excuse for the U.S. government to enforce rules that itself doesn’t follow. This unilateral standard has become more obvious under President Trump and the most impactful member of his administration, National Security Advisor John Bolton.

During the interview, however, Sestak seemed incredibly grounded about the limits of military power, a side effect from his decades of service. “My background has been operating in that world, all around the globe. Understanding that our engagement with the world, backed by our military but led by our diplomacy, has actually given America the protection to have an enhancement of its economy, its healthcare, its education here at home,” he said, adding that he coordinated the national security strategy from the White House in the 1990s. “But the lessons that I’ve also brought from that experience are ones that understand that militaries can stop a problem, but they never can fix a problem. Our military stopped Germany, but we only fixed fascism two years later with the Marshall Plan.”

“I don’t think anybody thinks that that tragic misadventure in Iraq, where both Democrats and Republicans voted for that reckless war, was one where our military fixed Iraq. It stopped a problem: Saddam Hussein. But nobody of those Democrats or Republicans or the president, had an understanding of the world with the limitations of military power. They never knew how it would end before it began,” said the former admiral.

Neither is Sestak afraid to call out American actions that violate the liberal world order he wants to uphold. “Breaking America’s word on the deal when Iran kept theirs is unforgivable,” he said, defending the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action negotiated by President Obama in 2015. “We had convened the world, including Russia and China, to disarm the nuclear weapons capability from Iran. At most they could have rebuilt it in a year, but with the most stringent oversight on it they hadn’t done any of that.” Sestak believes the deal could have served as a starting point to address Iran’s other “nefarious behavior,” but now the United States is back to square one.

With an intricate knowledge that rivals any of the other contenders, Joe Sestak described in detail the difficulties the United States would have if it used a military strike against Iran. “[I]t would take us weeks if not months to destroy it [their nuclear facilities] if we go full bore to do so. Because part of it…is buried under three hundred feet of rock, hard rock.”

A war with Iran would imperil our strategic naval positioning in the area and force us out of the gulf. “We cannot survive in the Persian Gulf with our aircraft carriers. I know, I’ve operated there. There are about two places that we operate because the depth of water to do fight operations is the best right there. Our sonar doesn’t work there in the Persian Gulf and we cannot find their nineteen midget submarines at all. So, we will withdrawal our carrier groups out of the Strait of Hormuz before we even begin to think about striking and have to do it from a greater distance.” While the United States is flying air sorties and launching Tomahawk missiles on Iranian positions, they have the strength to return fire in kind. “[T]hey can rain hundreds of long-range missiles on Israel and our regional bases there.”

Sestak is not in doubt about eventual U.S. victory, but he is deeply skeptical about the costs and wisdom of such an action. “We can do it, to impair their nuclear capability. But after all those weeks are done, and they’re having mined the Straits of Hormuz where 20 percent of the world’s oil comes from, they can rebuild it in four years. Militaries can stop a problem; they don’t fix a problem.” He further doesn’t understand why such a cost has to be contemplated after the successful implementation of the Iran deal. “We had that problem fixed. And it’s inexcusable for America to break its word on a deal when Iran had kept theirs and we had fixed a problem. Now we have harmed our national security.”

The candidate is sensitive about the topic of Israel, having been blasted by the Emergency Committee for Israel (whose board includes former Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol) during his 2010 Senate race. “As I said during my campaign, I would have laid down my life for Israel when I was in the military,” says Sestak, adamant that his position is not misunderstood. He described working as an emissary between the Ambassador of Israel and the U.S. Chief of Naval Operations, making it available for Israel to purchase one of the then-newly commissioned littoral combat ships. As a Congressman he lobbied for Israel, on their request, to be allowed to develop their Arrow Missile system instead of having to purchase our Aegis system. “The Israeli military came to me through the Ambassador of Israel because they knew I was a true friend and ally to them,” Sestak said, while reiterating that he believes in a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Sestak had nothing but praise for former Special Counsel Robert Mueller, proudly describing him as a former marine. “I think the nation is fortunate to have a man of integrity, accountability, and nonpartisanship do that study…And I think he was accountable to the deed,” he said of Mueller’s conduct, while finding the report’s conclusions disconcerting. “I think that any indication that a nation such as Russia, who does not have our interest at heart, would even have a perception that they are somehow not being slammed down for intruding on the most blessed sanctity of American democracy, our fair and free elections, is something that goes to my point of why we need to restore U.S. leadership to the world.” Sestak added that the president should have been out in public saying “No, this does not stand.”

While favoring President Trump’s opening negotiations with North Korea, Sestak believes the president faltered on the execution. “I think engagement with North Korea is a positive thing, but I don’t think we went into that negotiation at the highest level of our government prepared for exactly how we wanted to come out,” he said. “I am not criticizing that he went to that meeting, I just feel that he did not go in with his full preparations by his team of having worked certain issues to know what we wanted the result to be.”

Sestak described how, as president, he would change our diplomatic strategy on the Korean Peninsula to include more regional players. “To some degree I feel that America’s greatest power is the power to convene, to bring together others for a common cause that serves us all. And I think that surprising the leaders of South Korea or Japan, who are absolutely instrumental to our security (not just their own), I think is something that is dismissive of their rightful place at the table to help negotiate with us. That doesn’t mean you can’t go forward on your own, it means you need to bring them in the process and not surprise them.”

“Do I believe engagement is the right thing? Absolutely. Do I believe the goal should be denuclearization? Absolutely. Do I think it can be achieved? It’s gonna be extraordinarily difficult this time. It has for decades been an issue that has eluded many Commanders-in-Chief, but I think this is one where you should not be trusting of the leader of North Korea. Ronald Reagan said it well: trust but verify. And I feel that that approach is not being taken,” concluded Sestak. As an example, he says he would not have suspended joint military exercises without the North Koreans showing they were taking actions (not just intentions) to move towards U.S. goals first.

Joe Sestak believes he’s uniquely equipped to deal with a rising China. That starts with challenging the idea that a bigger military is necessarily a better military. As an admiral he proposed downsizing the navy from 275 ships to 260. “[W]e need to move in cyberspace and censors…and so we have a force structure that the congressional-military-industrial complex likes, and I said no, we’ve got to move into cyber and the other areas. It’s less cost, but it’s much more effective,” he told TNI. Sestak described China’s Belt and Road Initiative and their plans to create a 5G network as (quoting the Prime Minister of Malaysia) “neocolonialism.” We have to “understand that we’ve been giving away, by the lack of leadership in the world, to an illiberal, might-makes-right world order.”

Sestak agrees with the proposition that if the United States cedes dominance of the world, it will be replaced my malcontents. “[W]e have walked away from our leadership of a rules-based world order, to now where autocrats from Turkey to Venezuela, Philippines to Hungary, feel like the [Saudi Arabian] Crown Prince as he high-fives Putin and feels that he doesn’t have to have any concern about murdering an American resident in an embassy because there’s no consequences from a rules-based world order.”

In the fall of 2007, during Joe Sestak’s freshman year in Congress, an article from The Hill claimed Sestak had “fast developed a reputation for being a temperamental and demanding boss.” According to the reporting, “Aides are expected to work seven days a week, including holidays, often 14 hours each day, going for months without a day off. These are very long hours even by Capitol Hill standards.” Furthermore, it quotes The Navy Times, which reported in 2005 that Sestak had been relieved as Deputy Chief of Naval Operations due to “poor command climate.” Fellow 2020 competitor Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota has also come under fire for her management style and treatment of her staff.

When asked about this issue, Sestak’s response was clear and direct. “My temperament never went beyond my expectations to move America to a better position. And everyone who worked for me was very good…[A]t times, with this recession, [I] asked a lot of my people but never more than I put in myself. And if you do look at all four years of our staff, you will find that our turnover rate the last couple years was below anywhere else.” Sestak claimed the long hours were required for constituent services in the aftermath of the recession. He says everyone on his current presidential campaign has worked for him in the past.

There was confusion when the former Congressman said in his announcement, “if one had any feel for how Americans felt that 2016 election year, you would have sided with the Republicans, as I did.” The candidate clarified that he had not voted for the Republican ticket: “I supported the Democratic presidency, but you can’t find a comment out there where I ever put down the Republican Party.” In his words, he would rather work with the opposite side, “not beat up on” them.

“The point I was trying to make is that starting with the year of the Tea Party, 2010, the DNA of America has changed as we came out of that Great Recession. When I first got in, people wanted to know who I was. Who’s this navy admiral who’s an independent who became a Democrat? Who are you, what do you believe in, what’s going on? But by the time I ran in 2010, it was different. After having gone through that recession, they wanted to know, did I know them and what they had gone through? ‘Do you know what it’s like here?’”

Joe Sestak is incredibly proud that during his 2016 Senate primary race, he walked 422 miles across Pennsylvania speaking to voters and holding town halls. “And halfway through it I was called by Senate leadership and [they] said ‘Stop, just fundraise,’ and I said ‘No.’ I said I’m fine on fundraising, but the issue is people want to know that I know them.” Admiral Joe, as his presidential campaign is attempting to nickname him, preferred “being with the people, not being told to go back by the establishment in Washington, DC and sit in my office and fundraise.”

Sestak showed an intuitive understanding of the same populist impulses that have riled not just the United States, but politics around the world. “The people understood, even though they couldn’t tell you specifics, that Washington, DC had become a restricted circle of entrenched political elites who thought they knew better in determining in their own interest of what was best for America, combined with corporate lobbying power that has now outsourced not only jobs but our national security to China.”

“This is the issue. Sometimes Americans, they just want to believe and trust you. But then they can’t believe because they’ve been let down,” Sestak said. That’s why his campaign is being built around the word “accountability.” “Who’s ever been held accountable for their vote on that tragic misadventure in Iraq…And who’s ever been held accountable for that meltdown on Wall Street…And that’s why people today don’t trust. That’s the biggest deficit we have in America today. And that’s why I…[ran] against my party’s establishment. It doesn’t mean I’m not a Democrat. It just means people above party. People above self-interest. People above self, if you’re a public servant.”

“We cannot meet the defining challenges of our time without a united America. It’s the epic challenge of our time, to gain the trust of Americans,” said Sestak, elucidating his conclusion with a naval analogy. “The captain of the ship, they don’t always have to agree with him. But they know he’s willing to be accountable for them. Because if anybody ever feels that the leader is above accountability, like it has happened with Iraq and the results, like Wall Street and the results, then you lose the trust of your crew because they know you’re not going to be held accountable. And that’s what’s happened to the U.S. ship of state. That’s why I didn’t like running against my party’s elite, but it was the right thing to do because I wanted people to trust me, to know I was being accountable. Because I didn’t want to just win, I wanted to govern.”

While originally planning a March announcement, Sestak’s campaign was delayed by a family health scare. As a child, his daughter developed brain cancer, and the medical services provided by the military were a strong motivating factor in Sestak’s original run for Congress. After a false alarm earlier this year, his daughter is in good health.

Already campaigning in Iowa, Joe Sestak will have to walk a lot more miles to catch up to the rest of the field and have the possibility of standing on the July debate stage. When asked if his longshot presidential campaign was a way to apply for a separate office, such as Defense Secretary in a new Democratic administration, Sestak denied it. “I am running for the Presidency of the United States of America. Period.”

Describing his motivation in 2010 to challenge Arlen Specter, Sestak said “I could not abide that he was not going to answer for thirty years of bad voting record or his humiliation of Anita Hill.” These criticisms can also apply to current frontrunner Joe Biden, who voted for the Iraq War and regrets his treatment of Anita Hill while he chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee. Although from Delaware, Biden is happy to promote his Scranton roots, and his campaign is based in Philadelphia. On top of his vocal support for both Specter and McGinty, this gives Sestak special motivation to go up against Joe Biden.

“Sestak is known for his indefatigable campaign style, though this has not resulted in victories since his time in Congress,” concludes McElwee. “But walking across the United States, working to build name recognition and a campaign, will be much harder than traversing Pennsylvania. It's likely that Sestak's 2020 Democratic primary will be as much of a political footnote as the 1996 GOP primary run of his former opponent, Arlen Specter.”

Hunter DeRensis is a reporter at The National Interest. He Tweets @HunterDeRensis.

Image: Reuters.