However, London School of Economics president and vice-chancellor Larry Kramer cautioned that it must not be used as a tool to justify governmental overreach.
“If it is a national security question, the question is to what extent is it real and to how severe it is. To what extent is it being used as a justification to extend power in other ways or over other subjects?”
In an exclusive interview with FMT, Kramer noted that federal and state actors inevitably hold both shared and divergent interests.
“(Leaders) at different levels have shared and distinct political interests because they are each responsive to the situation of their office.
“Wherever (the dispute) settles within the large community, that is going to carry the day,” he said.
Resolving federal-state disputes, Kramer said, is no longer dependent on the existence of rigid rules to govern the relationship. Instead, it requires a “genuine deliberative debate” among “responsible and responsive” leaders at both levels of government, he said.
“The tendency has not actually been for national governments to overstep, but for local governments to intrude on the authority of the national levels. That’s historically been true almost everywhere.”
Kramer described democratic politics as a “conversation” that may at times result in unpopular decisions — an inevitable source of tension in any functioning democracy.
“The question isn’t whether there are tensions and hard fights on things people care about — just whether you can resolve them in ways that people can accept and move on.”
He said that while leaders across different levels of government may pursue distinct political interests, it is their “accumulated responsiveness” to national security concerns that offers the best chance of securing a favourable outcome.
Kramer also stressed the importance of knowledge and transparency among political leaders, especially in an era shaped by rapid technological change.
Leaders must remain attuned to the evolving landscape around them, he said.
“You want them to be the kind of people who will consult, learn and constantly be reshaping their ideas and their understandings in light of what’s happening.
“You also need them to be transparent — to engage the community and to be open to listening, adapting, evolving and changing their positions based on what they hear.”