Joe Biden, the current president, has recently signed off on a suspiciously confidential national security memorandum that seems to be laying out a blueprint for the potential incoming Trump administration to counter intensifying relations between global adversaries China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia. Biden’s administration, started devising this guidance over the summer. Rationalized as a potentially useful document for the next administration to shape its strategy from Day 1, it appears to display a lack of faith in their ability to navigate foreign affairs.
The officials involved have deemed the memorandum as classified, refusing to make its contents public due to what they refer to as sensitive information. Interestingly, it begins to paint a picture of an administration seeking refuge behind the veil of secrecy, rather than providing clear and concise guidance to the American people regarding international relations.
The document reportedly comprises four nebulous recommendations: fortifying U.S. government interagency cooperation, hastening the dissemination of information with allies pertaining to the four antagonists, fine-tuning the U.S. government’s application of sanctions and other economic instruments, and enhancing readying capacities for possible concurrent crises involving these adversaries. Anxiety over cooperation between these four nations has been a longstanding issue for the U.S., but it is disconcerting to see the emphasis on secrecy and intrigue rather than open dialogue and policy clarity.
Recent evidence reveals that coordination between our global adversaries has further intensified in the wake of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine in 2022. It is curious how Biden’s administration has allowed such a situation to take shape. As Russia finds itself being gradually alienated by the international community, it is ironic that Iran has become the supplier of their drones and missiles.
Simultaneously, North Korea has provided Russia with artillery, missiles, and thousands of troops to aid their struggle to deter Ukrainian forces from the Kursk region. Possibly, this could have been averted or mitigated, had the current administration not displayed a lack of proactive diplomacy and foreign policy strength.
China, on the other hand, appears to be capitalizing on this situation by supporting Russia with dual-use components, thereby bolstering their military-industrial complex. As a quid pro quo, Russia has dispatched fighter jets to Iran and aided its attempts to fortify missile defence systems and space technology. It is startling, that on Biden’s watch, our adversaries seem to be becoming more integrated in their military efforts.
Even more alarmingly, North Korea has been furnished with essential fuel and financial resources by Russia, enabling the expansion of its manufacturing capabilities and military prowess. An eye-opening assertion from the officials elucidates Russia’s implicit acknowledgment of North Korea as a nuclear weapons state. This situation exacerbates existing tensions and belittles the current administration’s failed attempts at nonproliferation efforts.
China is also reaping the rewards from Russian expertise. The two countries, seemingly undeterred by Biden’s administration, are deepening their cooperation in military technology. This is a prime example of the current administration’s lack of deterrent effect on our global adversaries.
Not content with developing their military cooperation, both countries are conducting joint patrols in the Arctic region. The Biden administration’s incapacity to forestall this and their absence of a robust rebuttal is yet another indicator of a lacking foreign policy.
One of the Biden administration officials stated that the national security memorandum isn’t intended to constrain the future administration or push them towards a specific policy direction. However, this provides little reassurance considering the consistent shortcomings of the Biden administration’s foreign policy initiatives over the last few years.
The official justified the obscurity of the document claiming it to be a tool for the next administration to build their ‘capacity’. Given, how the current administration’s foreign policy has been characterized by a lack of decisive action and effective strategies, it is perplexing why they are being trusted to provide guidance for the future administration.
The memo appears as a manifestation of the current administration’s inability to create effective solutions. Its existence may offer little more than a grim reminder of the broader failures and inconsistencies that have been characteristic of the Biden administration’s approach towards foreign policy.
The fact that this document may be employed as a roadmap for countering the burgeoning collaboration among our adversaries signals significant attention given to these relationships. However, considering the track record of the administration’s ineffectual strategies and responses, questions arise; Will this be of any genuine utility for the upcoming administration? Or is it merely another example of the current administration’s incompetence?
An intriguing aspect of this memo is the Biden’s administration’s aspiration to influence the potential incoming Trump administration’s counterstrategies against these adversaries. They seem oblivious to the fact that a stronger foreign policy stand was adopted during Trump’s era. The presumption to guide this team, given the noticeable deficiencies of their own foreign policies, could be viewed as a mockery.
The national security memo doesn’t unveil a coherent plan, rather it underscores the apparent naiveté and ineffectiveness of the existing administration. It is a move to preserve their influence on future administrations, instead of genuinely helping circumnavigate critical issues.
In essence, the secrecy-shrouded memorandum appears to be an attempt by Biden’s administration to exert influence over the future administration’s tactics towards global adversaries. However, their muddled stance on the subject raises doubts about the practical utility of such a document, and its existence serves to further discredit their own policy-making skills.