Biden was supposed to restore America’s global leadership after four years of Trump. By many traditional Washington standards, he has done just that. He anticipated Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and deftly rallied NATO to confront it. In Asia, he has strengthened old alliances, forged new ones, and blunted China’s economic momentum. And he has managed to support Israel after it was attacked while avoiding an all-out regional war.
Yet global leadership is more than just supporting friends and pushing back foes. True leaders not only stay ahead, they solve problems and inspire confidence. Trump doesn’t even bother pretending to show the world this kind of leadership. Yet it is precisely because most American officials do the same that America’s position today is so alarming. Never in the post-Cold War decades has the United States looked less like a world leader and more like the head of a faction — reduced to defending its preferred side against increasingly united adversaries, while most of the world looks on, wondering why Americans still think they are the boss.
When Russia invaded Ukraine, there was a sense of long-lost euphoria in Washington. After decades of questionable war-mongering, the United States would once again be the global good guy, rallying the world to resist the Kremlin’s flagrant affront to law and order. In the early months, the White House had brilliant tactical successes, brokering Ukraine’s defense, marshaling allied aid, and paving the way for Finland and Sweden to join NATO. Yet if Russia paid a huge price for its invasion, the conflict also brought strategic setbacks for the United States.
The United States now has to contend with an aggrieved and unpredictable nuclear rival in Moscow. To make matters worse, China, Iran, and North Korea have begun to band together to provide support for Russia’s war effort.supply,resistThey call it American global hegemony. This anti-American alliance has proven to be strong enough to slow down the effectiveness of Western aid to Ukraine and is alsoRaising the cost of maintaining U.S. military dominance. Russia borders six countries that the U.S. has treaty obligations to defend. Meanwhile, the Pentagon is preparing for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. It’s not that the U.S. is at a disadvantage. But it’s stretched.
advertise
Other countries have not flocked to the United States. Most have criticized Russia’s aggression and the West’s response, with both sides being criticized. Biden has not helped matters.He will this conflictDescribed as“A war between democracy and autocracy,” he made little effort to seek peace through diplomacy, and he seemed to be asking other countries to join aThe endless struggle. Except for the United States’ allies, almostNo countryImposing sanctions on Russia. If China attacks Taiwan, isolating China will be aA more difficult taskViews on Russia and China in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East since 2022Actually improved.
The Gaza war came at a very bad time, and Biden’s response to this disaster was to go all in. He quickly pledged to support Israel’s ruthless military campaign, rather than making US aid conditional on Israel finding a strategy to protect civilians. Biden chose to follow rather than lead, and could only express dissatisfaction with Israel’s behavior from his self-appointed position of spectator. In a decisive conflict, the United StatesIt was both weak and overbearing.reputationandSafetyaspectThe price paid is only beginning to be felt.
Not long ago, the United States tried to mediate between the Israelis and the Palestinians, offering terms that both sides might accept. It used diplomacy to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons and encouraged the Saudis to “live side by side” with their Iranian adversaries.”(Obama Language). Now, the Biden administration obviously only wants to consolidate an anti-Iran group. In return for the normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel, the Biden administration is trying to use a treaty to commit to defend the Saudi Kingdom with US military force. If thisprotocolIf this is achieved, the possibility of bringing peace and stability to the Middle East is very small, while the possibility of further involving the United States in regional violence is greatly increased.
Part of the problem is the president’s tendency to over-identify with America’s partners. He defers to Ukraine on whether to pursue peace talks and avoids contradicting Ukraine’s non-negotiable war goals. He publicly doubts Israel’s war plans while alsoSpeed up aid to Israel. Biden alsoFour times speakingTo defend Taiwan, it goes beyond the official U.S. commitment to provide weapons support for the island but not necessarily to fight for it.Not alwaysWith such a one-sided stance, will the United States support Taiwan?On the issue of war, the United States has always pursued “strategic ambiguity.”
Biden’s instincts, however, reflect a deeper error that has been brewing for decades. After the end of the Cold War, American policymakers confused global leadership with military superiority. The United States did have a firm grasp on theIt has both advantages. It can safely expand its military influence without facing a lethal counterattack from major countries. “The world is no longer divided into two hostile camps,” Clinton said in 1997.claimThat year he“Instead, now we are building ties with countries that were once our adversaries.”
But building relationships has never eliminated suspicion of each other, in part because the United States continues to place a high value on its global dominance. Successive administrations have expanded America’s alliances and waged frequent wars aimed at spreading liberal democracy, hoping that potential rivals would accept their fate in the American order. Today, that naive expectation is gone, but the reflex of dominance remains. The United States continues to expand farther and farther, only to encounter strong resistance—which in turn tempts Washington to redouble its efforts while much of the world pushes back. It is a losing game, and Americans will have to take greater risks and spend more money to keep playing it.
advertise
There is a better way. To regain global leadership, the United States should show a skeptical world that it wants to make peace and build resilience, not just bleed its enemies dry.Or support allies. That means standing by Ukraine, but working just as hard to end the war at the negotiating table — and gradually reducing its own role in NATO and insisting that Europe lead its own defense. President Biden’s recent proposal for a ceasefire in GazaproposalWhile this proposal is commendable, it does not threaten Israel withStop supplying weapons to Israel.
Withdrawing from Europe and the Middle East would improve U.S. engagement in Asia, where it matters most. It would make clear that the U.S. goal is not to pursue hegemony, as Beijing claims, but to prevent China from establishing its own Asian hegemony. From this perspective, the United States can become a confident leader in the Indo-Pacific even as China continues to rise. China today is far from being able to impose its will on the entire region, and even taking the extreme risk of seizing Taiwan would not allow it to do so.
None of this will be easy, of course. But compare the alternatives. Leading just one faction of the world makes the United States an anxious follower. It keeps Americans on the brink of perpetual war in the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, fearing that a loss anywhere will set off a chain reaction everywhere. Yet staking so much of global security on one country’s willingness to overcommit is the truly dangerous thing to do. True leaders know when to make room for others.