Why the world is more chaotic under Biden than under Trump
By: Rachel Marsden
PARIS — With Joe Biden’s seemingly tenuous grasp on the cockpit controls,
we’re currently witnessing the result of U.S. foreign policy governance piloted
by establishment civil servants. Is anyone really surprised that we’re caught in
a death spiral?
Sometimes pejoratively referred to as the “deep state”, the U.S. foreign policy
establishment tends toward interventionism, with few who rise to senior
positions favoring a hands-off approach to the rest of the world. It’s precisely
that attitude — that the U.S. has to constantly intervene militarily everywhere
— that contributed to the election of former President Donald Trump. The former
Oval Office occupant is the only president in decades not to have started a new
war.
What globalist interventionists deem beneficial to citizens of the world often
isn’t.
For instance, Trump’s establishment detractors argued that his very existence
was a boon to worldwide populism — as though that’s a bad thing. Consider the
damage done by the straitjackets imposed in a supra-nationally coordinated
manner on citizens of the so-called “free world” in the interests of “security”
of all kinds, including climate, information, health, and the homeland.
Trump’s establishment critics spent his entire presidency looking for ways to
scrap with Russia while ignoring the general public’s appetite for doing so.
They blamed Moscow for Hillary Clinton’s campaign loss to Trump rather than her
establishment cronyism. The fact that Special Council Robert Mueller’s report on
alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election didn’t jibe with their
delusions hardly seemed to matter.
Trump simply didn’t appear interested in getting involved in military
entanglements — much to the dismay of the establishment war hawks, including his
own former National Security Advisor John Bolton, whose inclusion in Trump’s
administration remains perplexing.
It’s not like Trump completely avoided military force. Indeed, he ordered
limited military strikes that risked unforeseen consequences. Those that
resulted in the assassination of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in January
2020. The Trump-ordered airstrike at Baghdad airport, prompted by Trump’s
apparent perception of the commander’s role in the region, failed to recognize
the role of western-backed forces in the region against which Soleimani was
helping Iran’s neighbors fight, and could have sparked a larger conflict. But
the reality is that it didn’t.
Trump’s foreign policy blind spots seem to have been tempered by a gut instinct
that favored negotiation, blustery rhetoric, or, at most, limited “symbolic
strikes” over actual war — much to the disappointment of neoconservatives of all
political stripes.
Joe Biden, on the other hand, was supposed to be some kind of foreign policy
mastermind with a deep bench of sophisticated diplomatic experts who were going
to bring peace and prosperity to the U.S., its allies, and the world.
If that’s the case, then why are we now regularly hearing terms like nuclear war
or World War III being bandied about on Biden’s watch?
Trump was fond of saying that he a decent rapport with Russian President
Vladimir Putin – which displeased establishment hacks, apparently oblivious that
even Ronald Reagan had former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev over to his ranch
in Santa Barbara not long after the end of the Cold War between the two
superpowers.
And looking back now, was it really so bad that when Trump met with Ukrainian
President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in the White House, Trump expressed a desire to
see Russia and Ukraine get along and cooperate — even as Zelenskyy appeared
unenthused by the idea? “I really hope that you and President Putin get together
and can solve your problem. That would be a tremendous achievement,” Trump said
to Zelenskyy.
It’s hard to imagine that Trump would have authorized a U.S.-backed proxy war
against Russia — which is what Biden has effectively done — with little return
on investment for average Americans (or Europeans).
Under foreign policy guru Biden, we were supposed to at least be closer to
normalized relations with America’s nation-state competitors. As former
President Barack Obama’s vice president when the “nuclear deal” with Iran was
negotiated to trade sanctions relief for limits on the country’s nuclear program
(and from which Trump withdrew), you’d think that by now Biden would have easily
defused the Iran issue. But the Washington Post reported just last month that
nonproliferation experts “have urged President Biden to successfully complete
negotiations for a return to the nuclear deal with Iran, warning that Tehran is
a week or two away from producing sufficient weapons-grade uranium to fuel a
bomb.”
Meanwhile, to illustrate just how rudderless Team Biden is, consider its stance
on oil-rich Venezuela. Biden State Department officials are still calling
Venezuelan opposition figure, Juan Guaido, “President Guaido”, while
simultaneously meeting with actual Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro — perhaps
just coincidentally in the wake of Washington deciding to ban Russian oil, gas,
and coal imports.
Biden’s administration is an example of what can occur when the Washington
establishment isn’t reeled in like it was under Trump. And the result is global
chaos.
COPYRIGHT 2022 RACHEL MARSDEN