TwitterLinkedInShare
your personal link to earn points
Whither US Foreign Policy?
Feb 8, 2021RICHARD HAASS
The central elements of US President Joe Biden's foreign policy are
becoming visible, and place him squarely in the post-World War II tradition
repudiated by his predecessor. But given the fear of many around the world that
Trump was no aberration, Biden should revive the principle that domestic
politics stops at the water’s edge.
NEW YORK – Joe Biden has been president of the United States for just a few
weeks, but the central elements of his approach to the world are already clear:
rebuilding at home, working with allies, embracing diplomacy, participating in
international institutions, and advocating for democracy. All this puts him
squarely in the largely successful post-World War II American foreign-policy
tradition repudiated by his predecessor, Donald Trump.4
Delivering his first address on foreign policy from
the State Department on February 4, Biden declared “America is back.” He
emphasized that Secretary of State Tony Blinken speaks for him and went to
great lengths to support both America’s diplomats and diplomacy.
Biden also declared that he would stop any withdrawal of US armed forces
from Germany, as Trump had ordered, presumably to help restore NATO members’
confidence in US security guarantees and to signal to Russian President
Vladimir Putin that he should not try to use foreign adventurism to distract
attention from domestic protests.
On Saudi Arabia, Biden walked a fine line. He distanced the US from
military and intelligence support for the war in Yemen, explaining how US
involvement henceforth would be diplomatic and humanitarian. At the same time,
he made clear that the Saudis were not on their own in facing Iran. Squaring
this circle will be far from easy, especially given the added complication of
US disagreements with Saudi leaders over their poor human-rights record.
Biden’s ability to succeed in the world will be limited by several factors,
many inherited. America’s ability to be an effective advocate for democracy is
much diminished in the aftermath of the January 6 insurrection at the US
Capitol, and in view of the country’s polarized politics, endemic racism, and a
year of Trump’s inept handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The good news is that progress on addressing the pandemic and its economic
fallout is already visible. The bad news is that the country’s political and
social divisions are certain to endure. Biden is fond of saying that America
will lead by the power of its example, but it may be a long time before that
example is one the world again admires.
Biden further reinforced humanitarian concerns by pledging to open the
country’s doors to a much larger number of refugees. What could also help would
be to make a significant number of doses of COVID-19 vaccines available to the
developing world. This would be not only morally right, but also in America’s
self-interest, as it would slow the emergence of mutations that threaten the
effectiveness of existing vaccines. It would also help countries everywhere
recover, leading to broad economic improvement and, ultimately, fewer refugees.
Although Biden is correct to criticize Russia and China for violating the
rule of law, he cannot force their hand. Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping
are prepared to pay the price of sanctions to maintain political control, and
the US cannot hold the entire relationship with either country hostage to human
rights. It must consider other vital interests, a reality underscored by the
Biden administration’s decision to sign a five-year extension of the New START
nuclear pact with Russia.
Similar realities (the need for help vis-à-vis North Korea just to mention
one) will limit how much pressure the US can exert on China over its behavior
in Hong Kong or toward its Uighur minority in Xinjiang. And even where Biden
can place the rule of law at the center of US policy – say, in Myanmar – he may
discover that governments can resist, especially if they have outside help. All
this raises questions about the wisdom of making democracy promotion so central
to US foreign policy.
China policy will prove easier to articulate than to implement. Biden
voiced strong criticism of Chinese behavior, but also noted a desire to work
with Xi’s regime when it is in America’s interest to do so. China will have to
decide whether it is prepared to reciprocate in the face of US criticism,
sanctions, and export restrictions on sensitive technology.
The US will likewise encounter difficulty in realizing its goal of
organizing the world to meet global challenges, from infectious disease and
climate change to nuclear proliferation and conduct in cyberspace. There is no
consensus and no international community, and the US can neither compel others
to act as it wants nor succeed on its own.
Make your inbox smarter.SELECT NEWSLETTERS
A good many difficult decisions remain. The Biden administration will need
to determine what to do about Iran’s nuclear ambitions (and whether to re-enter
the 2015 nuclear pact that many observers see as flawed). There are also
questions about what to do with the accord signed a year ago with the Taliban –
not so much a peace agreement as a cover for US military withdrawal – and about
a North Korean regime that continues to expand its nuclear and missile
arsenals.
However Biden’s foreign policy shapes up, it is important that it be
bipartisan and involve Congress when possible. US allies understandably fear that
in four years, Americans could return to Trumpism, if not the man himself. The
fear that Trump was not an aberration, but rather reflected what the US has
become, undermines US influence. The temptation to govern by executive action
is understandable, but when it comes to foreign policy, Biden should try to
revive the principle that domestic politics stops at the water’s edge.
Writing for PS since 2020
123 Commentaries
Follow
No comments:
Post a Comment