Biden’s foreign policy lacks strategic clarity
The US is stuck in the Cold War-era thinking on Russia and lacks a roadmap on China. Partners will be concerned
Last week, the newly elected president of the United States (US), Joe Biden, delivered his first foreign policy speech, with the aim of resetting America’s foreign policy agenda after four years of Donald Trump’s disruption. Biden’s choice of the State Department as the venue for his address was a show of support to the foreign service bureaucracy, and a signal to the world that standard diplomatic engagement and multilateralism would be the preferred mode of operation.
Announcing “America is back” and declaring the return of diplomacy in US foreign policy, Biden was perhaps hoping to underscore the divergences with his predecessor. But for all the rhetoric, the speech was a mélange of the Democratic Party’s standard talking points without a cohesive agenda for the changing global realities. The fact that China was hardly mentioned in his remarks and that Russia remained the obsession was also a reminder of how sections of the American establishment are still struggling to come to terms with the post-Cold War period.
Trying to strike an explicit contrast with Trump on Russia, Biden stated:
“I made it clear to President [Vladimir] Putin, in a manner very different from my predecessor, that the days of the United States rolling over in the face of Russia’s aggressive actions… are over.” Underlining his intent “to raise the cost to Russia and defend our vital interests,” Biden linked it to America’s democratic values and the need to rebuild “the muscles of democratic alliances that have atrophied from four years of neglect”. But the Trump administration, for all of Trump’s fondness for Putin, sanctioned Russia across the spectrum for the last four years. As such, it is not entirely clear what else Biden will be able to do.
Other major announcements from Biden included ending all support for Saudi Arabia’s offensive operations in Yemen, urging Myanmar’s military leaders to halt their coup, freezing troop redeployments from Germany, raising the cap for refugees allowed into the US from 15,000 for this fiscal year — the lowest since 1980 — to up to 125,000, and reaffirming US support for LGBTQ rights worldwide. Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin is to conduct a “global force posture review” so as to ensure America’s “military footprint is appropriately aligned with our foreign policy and national security priorities”. Biden also underlined his administration’s recent decisions of elevating cyber by appointing the first national deputy security adviser for cyber and emerging technology, integrating climate as a central facet of national diplomacy, and rejoining the World Health Organization and the Paris climate agreement.
But some key issues were conspicuous either by their absence or in their framing. Iran was not mentioned, nor were the nuclear negotiations, while the broader “Middle East” geopolitical terrain was also not invoked, perhaps underscoring a shift away from the region for American foreign policy priorities.
And then there was China. Biden argued that America will confront Beijing’s “economic abuses, counter its aggressive, coercive action to push back on China’s attack on human rights, intellectual property, and global governance”. But how this will be done, once again, remains in the realm of speculation. Biden is right that China’s President Xi Jinping doesn’t have “a democratic, small D, bone in his body” and his Secretary of State is also right in letting Beijing know that Washington “will continue to stand up for human rights and democratic values, including in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong”. But if the only instrumentality they can come up with is “international rules of the road”, then it doesn’t generate much confidence in Biden’s ability to shore up a credible posture vis-à-vis an increasingly confident China.
One area where Trump’s imprint remains palpable is in making American foreign policy viable for ordinary Americans. On that, Biden was categorical: “There’s no longer a bright line between foreign and domestic policy. Every action taken in our conduct abroad, we must take with American working families in mind.” His national security adviser Jake Sullivan was equally emphatic when he suggested that “everything” the Biden administration does when it comes to foreign policy will be examined as to whether it makes life “better, safer and easier for working families,” arguing that US foreign policy has no chance of succeeding unless the middle class sees it advancing its own interests. So, for all the talk of America being back, its global footprint will be a function of the domestic consensus, which is fraying rapidly.
And as a consequence, America’s global interlocutors are left wondering what all the fuss is about of Biden bringing America back to the global stage. On Russia, there is no clarity on what Washington can do apart from its rhetorical flourishes. In Myanmar, America’s sanctimonious calls for sanctions and isolation will only make China a more potent player. On China, where actually America’s leadership has been pretty strong under Trump, platitudes won’t work anymore. In the Indo-Pacific, regional powers have to respond to China’s rise in real-time. They have little time or patience for Biden’s inability to articulate a coherent China policy.
Biden’s first foreign policy speech was certainly in tune with the changing domestic political dynamic in the US. But its lack of a strategic vision will be concerning to America’s partners. For all his desire to forge a “united front” against Beijing, Biden has not been able to articulate a compelling vision of America’s role in the world so far. Strategic patience is in short supply around the world today.
Harsh V Pant is professor, King’s College London, and director of studies, Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi The views expressed are personal
JOSHIMATH: With flood waters receding slowly and the height of the slush in NTPC Limited’s tunnel in Tapovan shrinking, rescuers said on Wednesday they were making steady progress in reaching the 37 men trapped in the tunnel. For families of people believed to be buried in a barrage nearby, hope was dimming.
As the rescue operation mounted after Sunday’s flash flood in the town in Uttarakhand’s Chamoli district entered the fourth day, several families gave up hope of reuniting with their missing kin and instead pleaded with rescuers to retrieve at least the bodies. The disaster has left at least 34 people dead, and the number of missing was 170 as of Wednesday night.
“Give me even a finger of my son and I’ll return to my village to cremate him,” a tearful Ram Daman Singh, father of welder Vijay Singh, feared to be buried in the barrage, begged army officers on Wednesday afternoon.
Like Vijay Singh, dozens of workers at NTPC’s hydroelectric project are believed to be buried several metres under debris in the barrage close to the entrance of a tunnel where multiple agencies have been working round-theclock for over 72 hours.
Difficult to retrieve bodies
On Tuesday, a rescue team used ropes to wade into the slush, but soon abandoned the effort.
Benudhar Nayak, commandant of the Indo-Tibetan Border Police’s First Batallion, who is overseeing the operations along with teams of the National Disaster Response Force and the Army, said there was no chance of recovering bodies from the barrage for the time being.
“The slush in the barrage is over 20 metres deep since the plant’s construction work was ongoing... The rescuers will themselves sink. Even if they do enter the slush, they won’t be able to recover bodies,” he said.
The officer said that while the rescuers have spared no efforts to retrieve bodies, they’ll now have to wait for an “opportune time” to resume the effort. “Maybe when the slush hardens, we will attempt again.” But when the slush hardens, the retrieval could be more difficult, said NTPC workers who survived the tragedy.“There was tons and tons of cement in the barrage. The flood brought it all down. Now, the slush is mixed with cement and it is getting watered as well. When it all dries up, the bodies will be amidst concrete, and not slush,” said Devendra Lal Khanila, a junior electrician and leader of the workers’ union.
While about four dozen workers were inside the network of tunnels when the flood hit Sunday, many more were in the barrage area.
This barrage is also a point where workers washed away from another hydroelectric plant a few kilometres up the river are believed to be stuck
Tunnel work slow but steady
With retrieval of bodies from the barrage unlikely for now, rescuers focused on making inroads into the tunnel. Until Tuesday evening, Nayak said, rescuers had cleared slush up to 110 metres into the 240-metre-long subsidiary tunnel. One batch of workers are believed to be trapped at a distance of around 100 metres from the point where the subsidiary tunnel meets the main tunnel.
On Wednesday, Nayak said, much of the work was undone with slush from inside the tunnel occupying the cleared area. “But now there is less water in the tunnel than before. So the ground is getting a bit harder, easing our operation...We hope that people inside are still alive,” said Nayak.
Ganga Singh, an ITBP constable, said another positive aspect was that the height of the slush has shrunk. “There are more air pockets inside the tunnel and more space to work now. Through the night, we worked with two earth movers inside, unlike earlier when only one would go in,” said Singh.
Families losing hope
While families of those trapped in the tunnel understood that the rescue attempt was time-consuming and waited in accommodation provided by the local government, kin of workers believed to be buried in the barrage landed up at the site in large numbers on Wednesday.
A helpdesk set up here on Tuesday evening to address their concerns wasn’t enough to keep them patient.
“My brother Jitendra Kumar was outside the tunnel when the flood hit. He made a video call to me at 10.25am. When he called again at 10.34am, I failed to take his call. My family has been constantly asking me if he is alive. How do I tell them that I may have to return without even his body. The officials here have ...asked me to return home, saying that it could take two-four months to find his body,” said Pawan Kumar, a man who arrived here from Doda in Jammu and Kashmir.