[ad_1]
Regardless of what next year holds, the world is indebted to U.S. President Joe Biden for the past three years. Against long odds, he has managed to contain the turmoil that has gripped American politics for years. But the Biden dam is cracking, and the next year, and perhaps beyond, is set to be chaotic for U.S. foreign policy.
Regardless of what next year holds, the world is indebted to U.S. President Joe Biden for the past three years. Against long odds, he has managed to contain the turmoil that has gripped American politics for years. But the Biden dam is cracking, and the next year, and perhaps beyond, is set to be chaotic for U.S. foreign policy.
Last week, the U.S. Senate passed a well-intentioned two-pronged bill that would address the crisis on the Mexican border while also approving nearly $60 billion in desperately needed aid to Ukraine in its war against Russia. It put an end to the pretense. Despite an unprecedented concession from Democrats to allow tougher measures against asylum seekers, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump called the bill “a great gift to Democrats and a death wish to Republicans.” As soon as the bill was criticized, it disappeared as soon as it arrived. ” Failure of the bill means border chaos is certain to continue, likely raising the prospects for Trump’s presidential election in November.
The bill’s failure is also the clearest sign yet that Mr. Biden is losing control over the direction of U.S. foreign policy, and other countries are taking notice. “The new harsh reality is that the U.S. political system is rapidly morphing into a less benevolent partner,” veteran Canadian diplomat George Heinal wrote last week. The choice of words is instructive. The problem lies not only in a particularly bad leader like Trump, but also in a “political system” that has produced dozens of people like him. It is wishful thinking to believe that extremism in the United States is a passing fad.
The outcome is difficult to predict, and the future may oscillate between reassuringly normal and shockingly extreme situations. Another government shutdown looms in early March due to Congress’ inability to pass a simple spending bill. The Senate is reconvening to pass unilateral support for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan without border provisions, but the outlook for the chaotic House is very uncertain. Even military aid to Israel, a perennial bipartisan issue, has become dysfunctional and is now in doubt. It has become impossible for other countries to make decisions based on expectations of what the world’s most powerful country will do.
In many ways, we live in the most unpredictable international political order in a century. In the 1920s, the United States had the capacity for global leadership, but Congress rejected it. The ensuing turmoil in Europe and East Asia sparked a new world war. Today, the United States still has leadership, but it is wavering between constructive engagement and destructive withdrawal. Meanwhile, countries such as Russia and China are actively working to sideline the United States.
The best outcome for Europe over the next few years may be for the United States, while not actively isolationist, to become increasingly less willing and able to play a global leadership role. In the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine two years ago next week, Europe is becoming more coherent and united, sooner than many expected. Earlier this month, the European Union passed its own $54 billion aid package for Ukraine that at least maintains the current stalemate with Russia. At the annual Munich Security Conference this week, we expect to hear much discussion about how Europe needs to do more, especially on defense, to compensate for US recklessness.
If President Trump wins in November, it will be even more devastating. Republican Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, a Trump acolyte, used his first visit to the Munich conference to argue that European countries are “effectively turning NATO into a client of American welfare.” I’m going to criticize. He will warn that even if the Senate were able to pass a new military aid bill, “there is clearly no appetite for another blank check for Ukraine.” Many believe that Trump will completely abandon the alliance once he returns to the White House. President Trump himself said over the weekend that he would refuse to defend Russia from NATO allies in Europe if they failed to increase their defense spending sufficiently. “In fact, I recommend that [the Russians] “We will do whatever they want,” he warned, a barely veiled invitation for Russia to attack another European country. Anne Applebaum, a veteran European observer, said such threats would resonate far beyond Europe, saying, “If President Trump says he no longer supports NATO, it will also affect America’s other security alliances.” All will be equally at risk.” Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, and even Israel will no longer be able to rely on automatic support from the United States. ”
The same could be said of America’s neighbors Canada and Mexico. President Trump is reportedly considering imposing a 10% “universal” tariff on all imported goods. Mexico and Canada, which send about three-quarters of their exports to the United States, will be hardest hit. They may be hoping for special treatment under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement negotiated by the first Trump administration, but there is no sign of such a waiver. For example, President Trump’s steel and aluminum tariffs targeted both Canada and Mexico. The latter also faces the credible threat of borders being closed again, as they were during the coronavirus pandemic. And Trump has made no secret of his distaste for Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
In other parts of the world, the disruption of the U.S. political system could lead to more bellicose and aggressive policies. Let’s take China as an example. The Biden administration’s most notable bipartisan successes, the $280 billion CHIPS and Science Act to restore domestic semiconductor production, and the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Act to boost U.S. competitiveness, , motivated by a common fear of China. The Biden administration is trying to find a balance. U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said last month that the U.S. will continue to compete fiercely with China, but that “the U.S. and China will [China] They are economically interdependent and share interests in addressing cross-border issues and reducing the risk of conflict. ”
But many Republicans are calling for more aggressive action. President Trump has imposed a 60% tariff on all imports from China, which borders on economic warfare. A bipartisan Senate committee has proposed broader measures to sever economic ties with China. Similarly, we can expect more vocal support from the United States for an independent Taiwan and a more assertive military posture in Asia. While the US is likely to withdraw from Europe, those in Beijing who were hoping for a quiet US withdrawal from Asia are likely to be disappointed.
A Biden victory in November would avoid these worst outcomes, but it would likely involve a loss in the Senate, leaving the administration even weaker than it currently is. And there is little confidence that the threat of Trump-style extremism has completely passed. Barring a landslide electoral defeat, which seems practically impossible given the current close margins of U.S. electoral districts, the Republican Party appears poised to consolidate Trumpism for years to come. .
For the rest of the world, the aftermath of US foreign policy chaos is unacceptable. Expensive and provocative rearmament in Europe and Japan, acceptance of Russia and China’s expanding spheres of influence, and a world economy that continues to collapse. Other countries will have no choice but to avoid risk and begin preparing for a world the United States can no longer support. Perhaps if Biden is re-elected, he will be able to piece together the pieces of the old order long enough for the heat to cool down in American politics. However, such benign consequences can become increasingly long-lasting.
[ad_2]
Source link
