Positioning Biden’s America in a Post-Trump World
Elizabeth Bennett, Editor
Many global figures around the world cheered and breathed a sigh of relief when President Joe Biden emerged victorious from the US Presidential Election. However, this relief was only momentarily sweet, as leaders continue to weather the pandemic, the rise of authoritarianism, and the effects of climate change. The United States long acted as an international leader, but today we see a failure to lead the war against the pandemic, an authoritarian despot inspiring an insurrection that threatens the very institutions of our country, and a refusal to assist communities hurt by climate change. President Biden is fraught with the difficult task of connecting the desires of a torn country to the needs of the international community. Only time will tell whether he is up to the challenge.
The Trump administration’s foreign policy was framed by the “America First” mindset that Trump promoted during his candidacy. While this has been detrimental in a myriad of ways, the positive outcomes must be noted. For all Trump’s tiresome tirades about China, he recognized and stressed the importance of viewing China’s progress as a threat to U.S. national security, economic strength, and our stature as a global powerhouse. Moreover, Trump progressed in stabilizing relations with Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain. However, Foreign Policy reports that these diplomatic arrangements were continuing the work from the Obama administration. Conversely, Trump ignored imminent problem areas, even in the cases of China and the Middle East. One of his greatest mistakes was withdrawing from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), due to frustration at the supposed hypocrisy of both institutions. Trump’s followers cheered for denouncing institutions that weren’t following the U.S. wants, but critics claim that these withdrawals significantly undermined U.S. legitimacy on the global stage. Contradicting the administration’s agenda, the withdrawals from WHO and UNHRC gave China more influence in both institutions and the United Nations as a whole.
With national security being such an important element to the Trump administration, they greatly exacerbated several national security issues that President Biden cannot take lightly in the coming years. Trump abandoned several treaties with Iran, Russia, and China, all related to nuclear weapons. A prized achievement of the Obama administration, the Iran nuclear deal hindered Iran’s ability to create a nuclear weapon and mobilize Iran’s allies. However, after Trump left this agreement, Iran revived a nuclear weapon program that Foreign Policy analysts say has inched closer and closer to creating a nuclear weapon. On the other hand, Trump deserted Cold War arms treaties with Russia and China. With another arms control treaty expiring this past February, diplomats and international affairs officials are worried about the possibility of beginning a potentially deadly arms race.
Trump’s legacy in foreign affairs de-legitimized the United States as a global leader. He mocked people from different countries, minimized the gravity of important treaties and institutions, and blatantly disrespected the protocols and establishment of diplomacy. In order for the United States to restore respect and integrity in foreign affairs, President Biden has his work cut out for him. It will involve a concerted focus and prioritizing relationship building.
Biden with Sen. Barbara Boxer at a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in 2003.
Washington Post via Getty
Biden retains an impressive and respected record of involvement in foreign affairs and conflict resolution. Serving as a senator from 1972 until becoming Vice President under Barack Obama, Biden has been exposed and involved in some of the greatest international conflicts of our time: South African apartheid, the Iraq War, and the Cold War arms control in Russia. Leading to his appointment to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in the early 2000s, Biden involved himself in the Balkans ethnic conflicts and fight for Bosnian independence in the 1990s; his contribution to Bosnian independence is significant, as Biden spoke out in support of Bosnians in their campaign for independence and against the Serbian violence towards Bosnian Muslims. Further, his voice carried lots of weight in talks about divestment from apartheid; Biden led the successful opposition in the Senate to the Reagan administration’s support of corporate investment into the South African government, supposedly aimed to positively influence the oppressed Blacks under apartheid but definitively doing the opposite.
Although he is aware of the precariousness of international conflict and understands to what lengths the US will go to solve ensuing conflict, Biden’s legacy in foreign affairs is not spotless. Even though he later denounced the Iraq invasion, Biden supported the military invasion of Iraq during Senate discussions under President George Bush. Given that reverberations from the Iraq war can still be felt today across the Middle East, Biden’s involvement in the decision to go to war should not be overlooked.
All in all, Biden’s foreign affairs record is mostly ideologically consistent, except in regard to Iraq. Biden is a well-versed politician, so he knows what must be said to win elections and favor amongst American citizens. Above all else, Biden espouses his commitment to democratic values and American interests—but these disparate desires sometimes don’t align.
A recent development in Saudi Arabia demonstrates the taught relationship between American values and interests. In 2018, a Washington Post columnist and Saudi dissident named Jamal Khashoggi was violently murdered by a kill team that was closely linked to the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. At the time, President Trump refused to acknowledge that the murder likely involved the Crown Prince. According to the New York Times, at a Democratic presidential debate in 2019, Biden used strong language denouncing Trump’s non-action and said that he would punish the Saudi government if made president. Biden, in his first speech to the State Department, reasserts his claim that the crown prince must be brought to justice if confirmed guilty. Yet, even after a report came out about his role in the murder, Biden did not punish the crown prince whatsoever, profoundly disappointing Democratic leaders. This inaction is likely due to fear of rupturing relations with Saudi Arabia, one of the United States’ most loyal allies in the Middle East. Additionally, Biden is hesitant to drive the Saudis into China’s grasp, because China has shown interest in Middle East influence investing in their infrastructure; offending the Saudis would force them to turn away from Western aid to China. Thus, even though seeking justice in Saudi Arabia aligns with U.S. democratic values, Biden is skeptical to bring his hand down; retaining global influence and close allyship with Saudi Arabia are both indisputable U.S. interests, mostly in an effort to keep power in the Middle East away from China.
Another ongoing issue for the Biden administration is the struggle for democracy in Myanmar. This country has had a turbulent political environment over the last few years, due to the genocide of Rohingya Muslims, presence of a feeble military democracy, and most recently, a military coup and detainment of Aung San Suu Kyi, who remains beloved in Myanmar, despite her complicity in the genocide of the Rohingya Muslims. Domestic tensions have reached levels not seen since the Rohingya genocide and refugee crisis, leaving citizens to protest the return to military rule. President Biden quickly placed sanctions on Myanmar, preventing $1 billion in U.S. aid from being dispersed. This shows Biden’s commitment to the U.S. values of justice and religious tolerance that must be upheld in foreign engagements—hopefully setting a precedent for their foreign policy. Likely, the Biden administration will face four years of difficulty in Myanmar, as they strive towards a democratic government not reliant on the military junta.
Biden and Merkel share a warm handshake in 2013, but mending trans-Atlantic relations will take more than a handshake.
Maurizio Gambarini Picture Alliance
The aforementioned problem areas are hotbeds for conflict escalation that require attending to, but mending relationships with allies needs to be at the forefront of Biden’s foreign affairs agenda. If reconnecting with allies is a priority, Biden needs to start with the European Union. Angela Merkel’s tolerance of President Trump was admirable, but as the Chancellor of the European powerhouse, she must be able to trust that the leader of the U.S. will not undermine the prized relationship between the EU and U.S.. European ambassadors in Washington state that Trump has obliterated trust and shared values, and even denounced European integration and transatlantic cooperation as a whole. Since the Cold War, the relationship between the EU and U.S. has been characterized by unwavering trust, honesty, and cooperation to achieve the goals of both entities. Now, that relationship is broken and could lead to greater threat from Russia. With Trump gone, the EU could finally breathe again; Biden bears the burden of recreating a constructive relationship built on stability and morality.
Notably, there is a lingering question in the international community: does the U.S. have the legitimacy to take up the mantle of global leadership going forward? Within the past century, the U.S. has led the globe in foreign relations, sitting at every table where decisions are being made. However, in the past four years, the nation has ruined its reputation for democracratic rule and morality. This came to a head when Trump refused to admit that Biden won in a fair election, not beginning the transfer of power until months later. The world was a spectator to this outrage, and won’t simply forget the likeness of authoritarian rule. Regaining legitimacy and trust will take time, especially among the once tight knit allies of the European Union. The U.S. is far more unpredictable than it was 100 years ago, with its own citizens arguing over universal healthcare and even the existence of climate change. If the U.S. cannot sort out its own problems, why should it resume its post as international diplomat?
When mentioning U.S. legitimacy, one cannot ignore the response to COVID-19. Countries like New Zealand and Singapore have all but eradicated the virus and are returning to normality. Yes, New Zealand is an island with only a fraction of the population of the United States, but their government sprung into action at the first sight of COVID-19 and mobilized government agencies to promote mask wearing and social distancing right from the start, which the U.S. failed to take seriously. Moreover, legitimacy has not only been lost in the U.S. government, but in its people as well. The partisanship of citizens is visible to other nations, as Americans are not able to agree on the simplest issues. The Capitol raid of January 6th demonstrated that democracy no longer has a strong grasp in the U.S., because anarchy and authoritarian undertones reigned that day. Therefore, the international community justifiably hesitates to trust the U.S. as a global powerhouse, but what Biden does in the upcoming years could drastically change this.
The laundry list of items Biden must attend to is anything but short. Even so, the focus on foreign affairs must be prioritized among healthcare, housing, and climate change, which top his agenda. Biden does have hefty goals of reinventing American foreign policy to return respectability to the U.S. Department of State, particularly by eliminating travel bans from Muslim-majority countries, ending family separation at the U.S.-Mexico border, and forwarding international climate change goals--already reentering the Paris Climate Agreement. Seeing his expansive foreign affairs goals for the next four years, it is clear that Biden is eager to reframe America’s image. On issues of foreign policy, the relationship between progressive and conservative desires is less contentious than domestic issues; the decision between what is just, what is easy, and what is helpful—and to whom—always plagues foreign affairs with moral questions. However, with the “America First” philosophy prevailing in previous years, we may see more polarized views on U.S. action on the global front.
Even with the controversies he faces, President Biden and his administration are equipped to handle international conflicts far better than his predecessor. The Biden administration appointed diverse voices within the foreign affairs sector, aiming to bring many perspectives to the table. In less than 3 months, Biden’s moves signify a readiness for what is coming. U.S. citizens, fatigued from the former president’s unpredictability, can find cautious optimism with the Biden administration.