Opinion | The Biden administration's foreign policy is heading for disaster

By Tom Fowdy

Once upon a time, it used to be assumed that the foreign policy of the Trump administration was unhinged, erratic and self-destructive. I was one of the staunchest advocates of that narrative, overwhelmingly opposing their decision to put the United States on a confrontation course with China and elicit all kinds of lies, falsehoods and paranoia concerning Beijing. Trump himself was not solely the perpetrator, but also those around him especially concerning Mike Pompeo and Matthew Pottinger. In a nutshell, the "Trump doctrine" was America first abrasiveness, unpredictability and extreme nationalism.

Not surprisingly, I was glad to see the back of them. When I look back, I was naïve to assume that the Biden administration would actively be something better. If Trump was defined as a low point, then surely his successor could not have been worse. I expected that the boorish, unhinged, destabilizing and utter destructive notions of Trumpism would be discarded and the Biden administration would in fact impose a more moderate and reasoned foreign policy which would stabilize the relationship with Beijing, and for that matter the world at large, avoiding taking any huger risks or moves towards global destabilization.

But I was wrong, on multiple counts. First of all, the caricature of Trump which the mainstream media played upon is simplistic and cannot account for the decisions of the US foreign policy machine, especially beyond him as an individual. Not surprisingly, the Biden administration happily and uncritically embraced the new confrontational and cold war laden outlook against Beijing, reminding us that the US foreign policy machine is not determined by "one man". Not only did they continue these "legacy policies" but as we now can assess from one year of them being office, that they have replaced what were the more pragmatic and compromising stances of Trump towards certain issues, with a new fully fledged ideological chauvinism.

The foreign policy of both administrations revolves around a perceived sense of decline in America's position in the world and aims to recover it. "Make America Great Again" and "America is Back" are essentially the same thing, but very different means of going about it. In both instances, China is perceived is the primary cause of such a decline, and suppressing it is the solution. The Trump administration turned international politics into a quid pro quo and sought to bargain its way towards achieving its objectives, which included being prepared to compromise and make deals on certain issues.

For example, Trump was willing to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and also avoided escalating antagonism with Russia. In doing so, it dealt with issues in a surprisingly careful sequential fashion and understood its priorities well. For them, confronting China was "number one" therefore it was not strategically wise to confront others simultaneously. Hence, Trump sought to deal with North Korea as an issue before he unleashed his anti-China position. Similarly, there was an acknowledgement that Russia ought to be a partner, as opposed to another adversary.

The Biden administration, however, shares no such restraint. It may be more civil in its rhetoric, yet in terms of policy action it is in practice even more belligerent and uncompromising than Trump. The Presidency does not believe in a selective orientation towards specific goals, but an all-out universalist struggle "between authoritarianism and democracy" which strives to take on every single adversary at once with maximalist goals. Across the board, Biden has sought to create "minilateral" groupings of select countries in order to dominate certain global issues, whilst shunning states who do not fulfil "American values". For example, creating anti-China blocs such as the "Indo-Pacific Economic Framework" or excluding states it disapproves of from the summit of the Americas.

With this attitude, the Biden administration quickly reembraced confrontation with Russia and initial attempts at engagement with Moscow faltered. This was primarily motivated by their longstanding goal to restore "transatlanticism", setting an immediate course to the outbreak of war in Ukraine. Yet as this goes on, the US is also attempting to force through its "Indo-Pacific" strategy in the bid to contain China, which has also involved the growing escalation of military tensions in the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea, again premised on maximalist goals. As this happens, the US is sliding again into a collision course with North Korea, who has enormously ramped up its missile testing as the Biden administration shown little interest in dialogue. On visiting Seoul on Tuesday, Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman warned of a "forceful response" if Pyongyang goes ahead with another nuclear test, although there is little clarification of such meant military action, yet the tone is ominous.

This all strikes a pessimistic narrative. The Biden administration's foreign policy is quite obviously heading for disaster. It is not more competent, level-headed, strategic or pragmatic than that of Trump's, in fact probably even less. Embroiling the US into a global ideological struggle, the White House is trying to restore its position of primacy and hegemony on multiple fronts simultaneously, espousing maximalist goals, which has not only created one major conflict, but now risks at least two others as well. In the case of both administrations, the US actively believes that because its hegemony is diluted by the emergence of other powers, the only way for it to be ascendent again is to roll back and splinter globalization and assert control over its allies again. Whilst Trump had a pragmatic way of doing this, Biden's is arguably more dangerous and more disastrous.

The author is a well-seasoned writer and analyst with a large portfolio related to China topics, especially in the field of politics, international relations and more. He graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University in 2018.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.

Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:

Opinion | Britain's semiconductor U-turn shows subservience to US interests

Opinion | Is the war starting to turn against Ukraine in the East