The National Interest (USA): Biden's unbalanced policy on Ukraine
Biden drove himself into a corner with inept politics, writes TNI. He gave the green light to Nord Stream 2, refusing to cooperate with the Canadians. He needs Saudi oil, but after criticism, the Saudis do not answer the phone. Ukraine — the same way, the author notes. Biden's words about Putin are "deadly," he warns.
President Biden is clumsily conducting foreign policy, and most Americans know about it. If you want to understand the real reasons for widespread concern about the Ukrainian crisis, you need to start with this.
When President Joe Biden made a rash statement last week that Vladimir Putin "cannot remain in power," the White House staff hastened to correct him. The President, the administration staff said, is pursuing a consistent, balanced and effective policy towards Ukraine.
Since dissent is patriotic when Democrats are in power, let me make a few remarks.
First, as noted by historian Robert Service in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Biden last fall created the impression that Ukraine was closer to NATO membership by signing a Charter on strategic partnership with it. But at the same time, he failed to prepare this country for self-defense. This can be called a violation of the basic rule of international politics: never insult the king. John O'Sullivan warned on February 3 in the pages of National Review magazine that the United States intends to provoke Putin. O'Sullivan was right.
<…>
Secondly, Biden is implementing a progressive agenda on climate change, the environment and the oil and gas industry, which is not just unreasonable, but also catastrophic given the current crisis. It was he who canceled the American-Canadian Keystone pipeline project and is very proud of it. At the same time, Biden gave the green light to the Russian-German Nord Stream—2 pipeline. Think about it. The current administration refused energy cooperation with the Canadians, and at the same time agreed to gas supplies from Putin's Russia to Germany.
At the same time, Biden insisted last year that the Saudis should be criticized for their actions in Yemen and for human rights violations. By doing so, he cornered himself. Now he needs Saudi oil, and the Saudis don't even answer his phone calls.
In the current conditions, prohibiting the supply of Russian oil and gas to international markets, it makes no sense to punish North American oil and gas producers at the same time. It's always been pointless. Equally, it makes no sense to suck up to the worst enemies of the United States from Iran and Venezuela for the sake of eliminating the shortage of energy resources. It is quite obvious that when solving these problems, it is necessary to work not with enemies, but with allies, as well as to establish production within the country. Such a need has been overdue for a long time.
Thirdly, it is quite possible to understand the desire of American society and (sometimes) President Biden to avoid unnecessary escalation of tensions with Moscow. Any reasonable approach takes this factor into account, because the goal is to preserve nuclear peace between the great Powers. But a reasonable approach does not provide for constant and early signaling to the Russians about what the next acceptable price border of the United States will be in matters of deterrence and coercive diplomacy. But that's exactly what Biden is doing over and over again. It's like a poker game where one player constantly shows his cards to the others. This is a vicious and self-destructive practice. Naturally, Putin takes full advantage of this.
But if you are the president of the United States, then before declaring that the head of a foreign state "cannot remain in power," think about the American experience in changing foreign regimes over the past 20 years. Are you seriously talking about such a change in this case? If your answer is yes, then what are you going to do with a country of 17 million square kilometers that has thousands of nuclear weapons? Or will your apparatchiks disavow your words again?
<…>
The United States cannot indefinitely increase pressure, even if the president stops signaling in advance about each such step. For example, the idea was expressed of creating a no-fly zone in the sky over Ukraine, which should be provided by NATO. A reasonable person will not agree with this, and I also think that this is too much. Putin's Russia is not Saddam Hussein's Iraq. The risk of accidental escalation with a major nuclear power will be extremely high, and this is absolutely unnecessary. <...>
Here it is appropriate to recall the arguments of Mac Owens, given by him recently in an excellent article. He notes that when conducting American foreign policy, considerations of prudence and prudence should occupy a central place. Prudence does not mean at all that any form of conflict and tension with foreign authoritarian aggressors should be avoided. Prudence means finding the right balance, taking the right actions at the right time and for the right reasons. In foreign policy, this means that mistakes such as excessive overstrain of strategic forces, as well as their insufficient tension, should be avoided. Liberal internationalists, with their legalistic and moralizing approach to international affairs and with their discontent with hard power, usually make mistakes simultaneously in both directions.
The Biden administration will have to decide what kind of outcome it wants in Ukraine. The president, speaking in Poland, openly stated that the American desire is the end of Putin's regime. His apparatus declares that this is not the case. The consequences of such confusion are deadly, and we'd better believe that Putin listens to the words that sound. <...>
One alternative idea was suggested on the pages of Foreign Affairs by Wess Mitchell (Wess Mitchell), who served as Undersecretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs during the first two years of the Trump administration. He called this idea "enhanced neutrality." Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky has already made it clear that he is ready to refuse Ukraine's accession to NATO. The concept of enhanced neutrality means that Ukraine will not join the alliance, but all parties guarantee its independence. In addition, it is free to develop diplomatic, economic and political ties with the West. But Mitchell notes that this condition cannot be accepted without Ukrainians. Zelensky proved that he was a strong wartime leader, and his people demonstrated amazing courage and ability to defend their homeland. By the way, this is called nationalism — love for your country and willingness to fight for it. The West should not force Zelensky to abandon the settlement if he considers that such a settlement corresponds to the interests of Ukraine.
In a purely human way, one can sympathize with American leaders from both parties who are facing the most serious geopolitical challenges for the United States since the Cold War. We must pray that this administration will eventually do everything right. I'm being quite serious. The danger of the collapse of the deterrence system and the emergence of conflict in several directions is quite real today.
Unfortunately, our Commander-in-Chief unnecessarily aggravates all these challenges. The problem is banal simple, no matter how cruel it may sound. Namely, foreign dictators are not afraid of Biden as much as they should be. Acting in accordance with the liberal format of the XXI century, he condemns and irritates them, but at the same time does not create any means of deterrence and intimidation. He sometimes admits wild exaggerations, then demonstrates confused inconsistency. Contrary to the statements of two years ago, Biden is not a tough guy on foreign policy issues. He often makes mistakes in his judgments and assessments, as former Defense Secretary Robert Gates once pointed out. Biden is a career politician and leader of the party machine, who has held important positions in Washington for almost half a century, but did not create the impression of a leader with strong political beliefs on issues of national interests. His party drifts to the left, and he drifts with it. He has set himself the task of fulfilling the wishes of his own liberal coalition. A nice person? Maybe. Most of his supporters think so. But foreign dictators who are anticipating pleasure do not care about this, and the court of history may turn out to be merciless.
Biden is clumsily conducting foreign policy, and most Americans know about it. If you want to understand the real reasons for widespread concern about the Ukrainian crisis, you need to start with this.
