Given his age, he was meant to be a one term president. The job was to beat Trump in 2020 them help cultivate a new bench of young leaders to spring a competent candidate to beat Trump in 2024. In the end the trappings of power and his own ego seemed to have got the better of him just before old age struck and by that time it was simply too late.
Kamala Harris had failed to shine in the 2020 primaries, it was always an uphill battle when it came to the actual presidential election. And her failure to have a real agenda during the campaign, apart from not being Trump, ultimately cost her dear. She always seemed just focused on not making mistakes than actually setting the agenda and telling people what she was about and would do. Her economic agenda was bare/barren - at least with Trump it was clear what it was about in tariffs, kicking migrants out, deregulation and pumping gas.
JOIN US ON TELEGRAM
Follow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official.
But it was not just about Biden’s failure to deliver the succession.
Biden’s foreign policy cost Harris dear.
Indeed, across the board Biden’s foreign policy while in office was disastrous.
First the debacle departure from Afghanistan undermined U.S. credibility - again, I guess following similar failings in Iraq, et al.
Second, the Biden team under-estimated the risk from Putin and Russia, tilted to China almost signalling a green light to Putin who saw weakness in the West and took the opportunity to invade Ukraine. The fundamental mistake from Biden was to see China as the biggest risk - perhaps longer term it is, but Russia was the nearest existential threat to Western liberal market democracy. Putin wants to corrupt and destroy our system from within, Xi likes the global status quo as he sees it ultimately bringing Chinese hegemony through globalisation. The West had time to deal with China but might not exist if Putin was not dealt with first. Biden and team got the order of priorities wrong at the outset.
Man Pleads Guilty in UK Over Russia-Backed Arson Attack
Third, Ukraine could/should have been a win for Biden. At times during the current war, Ukraine has been presented with paths to victory but needed adequate financing and arming from the West to force through victory. But time and again Biden and team showed an abundance of caution where Putin had shown his red lines were soft - or crimson. Opportunities were not taken by Biden’s team. This breathed new life into Putin’s campaign and cost Ukraine many lives - relegating it to a sapping war of attrition.
But Ukraine could have won had the U.S. shown leadership. Always when it came to financing, munitions or sanctions, it was policy by the highest common denominator. Trying to bring all allies along in unity but the result was Ukraine always ended up with not enough support to win. Ukraine was drip fed support - barely life support. And there was a general lack of joined up thinking on Ukraine. What’s the big picture?
Fourth, the Middle East. NSC chief Sullivan’s now ironic words just before October 7 that the Middle East was the quietest it has been in decades summed the lack of foresight up a treat. The focus on the Abraham Accords was farcical and showed zero understanding of the region. Subsequently the failure to hold Israel to account for its wars of revenge in the region post October 7 cost Harris dearly with the U.S. Muslim vote. But it just appeared as the U.S. was leaderless in the region which may well have come across to US voters.
The reality is on much of foreign policy the U.S. has been leaderless - and the West because of the absence of the West.
On foreign policy at least there is nervousness about an incoming Trump administration which by pulling support for Ukraine will give the advantage back to Putin. And on the Middle East Trump surely will weigh more heavily in alongside Israel against its foes and likely Iran. That could all suggest more risks and challenges for Europe over Ukraine and the Middle East with a future U.S./Israeli war with Iran likely. And we are not even talking about the likely future U.S. - China relationship which could now easily spiral if Trump goes down the aggressive tariff route. But it is fair to ask if all this could be worse than seen under Biden - I guess the U.S. electorate have partly concluded perhaps not as far as foreign policy counted in the ballot.
Reprinted from the author’s @tashecon blog! See the original here.
The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter
