[I]f treaties like the one aimed at banning biological weapons are not in America's interest, there's reason to believe that such agreements do not serve the interest of our allies either. Why not argue the case?

After all, how does the administration expect to convince the French to forgo lucrative oil contracts with Iraq, for example, if France's own benchmark is such a narrow definition of national interest? How will Mr. Bush persuade the Germans, who are owed billions by Iran, to take a hard line with Tehran for the cause of international security? If America defines its interests too narrowly, it cedes its claim to moral leadership—a remarkable but perishable American asset. Such a definition would also embolden other countries to define their interests in the same way. Ultimately, this would restrict American power and reduce American opportunities.

Our national interest, properly understood, must embrace the principles that tie us to our liberal democratic allies. Effective leadership requires decisiveness and a common vision. The Bush administration has the first, but neglects the second at the nation's peril.