Staff Reports
In the vast world of international relations, decisions made by leaders can have reverberating effects across the globe. Recently, a former vice chief of staff of the Army took a deep dive into President Biden’s foreign policy, particularly concerning Russia and Ukraine as well as complications in the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific region. The critique painted a picture of concern regarding America’s position on the world stage and raised questions about the administration’s strategic approaches.
Looking back to January 19, 2022, President Biden put forth a message, declaring, “America is back.” This proclamation came just as Russia began to threaten Ukraine, with President Biden’s suggestions about a “minor incursion” becoming infamous in political circles. If only that phrase had been effective in dissuading any advances! Instead, it appears that the statement may have signaled to leader Vladimir Putin that the U.S. would take a cautious approach, ultimately leading to significant conflict and loss of life. Reflecting on this, the former general expressed a harsh critique, asserting that Biden’s tenure has stemmed from poor decisions, particularly in national security.
The former general also pointed out how, during President Trump’s administration, the U.S. provided lethal aid to Ukraine, making it clear that aggressive acts would not be tolerated. However, upon Biden’s ascension, and with Russian troops amassing at Ukraine’s borders, the response was tepid at best. Rather than establishing a firm deterrent, Biden’s posture was described as restrained, and Putin seemingly took Biden’s cautiousness as an invitation to move forward with his aggressive plans. This lack of resolve has implications far beyond Ukraine and raises questions about the effectiveness of U.S. diplomacy.
The Middle East, once a region previously witnessing a degree of stability under Trump, faced new challenges with Biden’s approach. The termination of sanctions on Iran, intended to foster goodwill, was perceived as a weakness. Instead of peace talks advancing, Iran ramped up its emboldened actions, launching aggressive operations against Israel and once again drawing fire to an already precarious situation. The former general painted a somber picture, suggesting that discussions of cooperation and peace were overshadowed by Iran’s renewed militancy—an unfortunate outcome of what was meant to be good faith efforts.
In the Indo-Pacific, the narrative remains bleak as well. The general highlighted the expansion of the Chinese military, suggesting that under the Biden administration, the U.S. has failed to keep pace with its military counterparts. The five-star general described a concerning deficit in America’s defense budget, leading to a diminished ability to deter aggression from international adversaries. As China’s military modernizes at an unprecedented rate, questions remain about America’s capacity to navigate the complexities of this region effectively.
In summary, America’s foreign policy under President Biden continues to provoke scrutiny. The ripple effects of decisions made or not made have now led to critical security challenges that the country must face both in Europe and the broader international arena. As the general suggested, the legacy of the current administration hangs in the balance, awaiting the verdict on whether the strategy laid out will yield stability or further unrest on the global stage. It appears that navigating through these waters requires not just a steady hand but a clear vision that prioritizes strength over hesitation.
