Ever since the Afghanistan withdrawal, Biden’s foreign policy has been one big mess

It is no coincidence that President Biden’s net approval rating tipped irrevocably negative during America’s withdrawal from Afghanistan two years ago.

Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign was premised in large part on putting the adults back in charge. But his administration’s slapdash handling of the Afghanistan withdrawal, which cost the lives of 13 American service members and left thousands of U.S. citizens and Afghan allies behind Taliban lines, extinguished any notion that he would be an effective foreign policy president.

Ever since August 2021, it has been apparent that Biden does not exhibit the principled, responsible, and effective statesmanship on the world stage that Americans expect and deserve from their leaders.  

Two years ago this month, the world watched as the U.S. military hurried to evacuate civilians from the Kabul airport, racing against an arbitrary political deadline for withdrawal imposed from on high. For those old enough to remember, the scene was reminiscent of the Fall of Saigon.

Television screens and Twitter feeds were filled with images of chaos and disorder, from Afghan refugees clinging to the outside of Air Force transports to the aftermath of a deadly ISIS-K suicide bombing that claimed over 180 lives. Although Biden administration spokespeople continue to claim they “just didn’t see” any chaos in our withdrawal from Afghanistan, the public knew better.

Afghanistan is part and parcel of Biden’s weak strategy in the Middle East and around the world. From day one, Biden has appeased Iran’s terrorist regime, abandoning the leverage gained through his predecessor’s “maximum pressure” policy, paying over a billion dollars each for the release of U.S. hostages, and bending over backward to coax Tehran back into a sweetheart nuclear deal. The result: an Islamic Republic on the verge of nuclear weapons, free to send Russia drones and missiles to fire at Ukrainian civilians, and growing ever closer to China.

The war in Ukraine will likely define Biden’s foreign policy legacy more than anything else. While his administration has commendably provided weapons and other aid to Kyiv to resist Russia’s unprovoked invasion, decisions that the Biden team presents as examples of strength and leadership are actually rife with feebleness and buck-passing.

At every possible junction, Biden and his deputies have slow-rolled support for Ukraine and withheld critical aid out of a misplaced fear of provoking Russia — a state whose armies are already engaged in a war of aggression and committing war crimes against Ukraine’s civilian population. From trying to cut Ukraine loose in the opening days of the war to stalling the provision of long-range missiles, as well as Western armor and aircraft, Biden has failed to demonstrate American resolve and leadership, instead acting only when circumstances force his hand or allies provide political top-cover for decisions.

Americans are rightly frustrated by the Biden administration’s Ukraine policy. While voters left, right and center say that they support Ukraine and believe the U.S. should help Ukrainians resist Russian aggression, far fewer believe the administration’s approach has been “worth the cost.” Biden’s open-ended promise that we “will support Ukraine as long as it takes” and unwillingness to provide a clear statement of America’s aims or a roadmap to Ukrainian victory cannot be helping those numbers.

When it comes to competition against America’s most potent adversary, China, Biden’s approach is even more incoherent. While professing that China “presents America’s most consequential geopolitical challenge” and continuing and expanding on many of his predecessor’s policies to contain its growing influence, Biden and his team cannot seem to shake the desire for comity and collaboration with Beijing.

Instead of marshaling our allies behind a comprehensive strategy to maintain American leadership in the world in the face of Chinese aggression, Biden remains captivated by the illusory promise of “engagement for engagement’s sake”, which gives China carte blanche for bad behavior and leaves friendly countries to strike their own deals with Beijing. Meanwhile, the Chinese use the promise of diplomatic engagement to extract concessions from the Biden team, and dangles the prospect of cooperation on progressive priorities such as climate change for leverage in negotiations.

Has Biden’s tenure made Americans safer? Is our country’s name more respected than it was when he took office? At the beginning of this month, Biden ordered the evacuation of the U.S. embassy in Niger — the third evacuation in the past four months and the sixth in the past two years. Embassy evacuations are sometimes necessary to protect our nation’s diplomats, but a president evacuating American diplomats at twice the rate of his predecessors hardly betokens an administration that is respected by foreign governments and capable of protecting American citizens and the country’s interests abroad.

What was Joe Biden’s first embassy evacuation? The U.S. mission to Afghanistan, of course, two years ago this month.

Samuel Byers, a former policy analyst in the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, is a foreign policy researcher for the Vandenberg Coalition. He previously worked as a research assistant in the International Security Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.