Biden’s UN Assembly Performance Exposes Uncertain Foreign Policy

President Joe Biden’s performance at the United Nations General Assembly did not meet his own expectations, clearly illustrating significant shortcoming in his strategies. His intention was to declare a truce in Gaza for the release of Israeli hostages—a move that should have provided temporary relief to the intense conflict involving Israel and Hezbollah, Iran’s Lebanese proxy militia. Yet, the desired negotiation is in gridlock, with Israel forcefully retaliating against Hezbollah through far-reaching cyber and air attacks. The implications of this could lead to a complex international issue, involving Iran and the United States.

Illustrating the same inadequate grasp on international affairs, Biden also glossed over the pressing issue of Russia’s war in Ukraine, a conflict of enormous significance to global stability. Although it could be argued that Biden attempted to maintain an optimistic front about resolving these ongoing problems, including threats posed by global warming and advancements in AI, it seems clear that his ill-directed optimism provides little comfort to those being affected by these situations.

Joe Biden’s foreign policy continues to be less effective than that of his predecessor, Donald Trump, despite assertions to the contrary. Whereas Trump gave unwavering support to Israel—so vital in these tumultuous times—Biden’s approach seems detached, lacking the strong commitment necessary to ensure Israel’s security. In particular, the possibility of Trump securing another term brings greater promise of stability to Ukraine, unlike the uncertainty presented by Biden’s policies.

Biden’s lack of direction and uncertainty were further affected by his insubstantial stance towards the proposed cease-fire and hostage deal with Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a figure of consequence in these negotiations, clearly opposed the deal—something Biden seemed unable to respond to effectively. This inaction has allowed Hamas to reject outright any form of negotiation, hampering progress towards peace.

As tension escalates between Israel and Hezbollah, the urgency of a new and effective strategy grows. The absence of such credible steps from Biden’s speech laid bare the shortcomings of his approach. Similarly, the United Nations requires a novel approach towards the issue—an aspect unfortunately missing from Biden’s perspective.

The UN’s lack of success in Lebanon further underscores this inefficiency. Despite Iran’s blatant arming of proxy militias in the Mideast, including Hezbollah, no viable action was taken. The United Nations Security Council proved incapable of enforcing Resolution 1701, a directive intended to keep northern Israel safe. Amidst all this, Biden’s silence is conspicuous.

Israel, in turn, suffers acutely from this irresolution. Following the attack of Oct. 7 by Hamas and Hezbollah, Israel found tens of thousands of its citizens displaced from their northern cities and towns, a situation to this day not fully resolved. The inaction continues to worsen these conditions for a critical ally.

Israel’s retaliation against Hezbollah may be a temporary deterrent, but the long-term threat remains, something that clearly evades Biden’s understanding. The call for a diplomatic deal that fulfills Resolution 1701, creates a buffer zone and garners support from Arab nations and Security Council sanctions against Tehran, keeps echoing but is only met with hesitation by the Biden administration.

Any potential progress in these areas necessitates parallel improvement in the conditions of Gaza. But, again, Biden’s policy appears to be hamstrung by a lack of clear direction. Despite terrible conditions for Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip, where most of the population is displaced and lives without adequate basic needs, there remains a lack of tangible action from the U.S.

The path Biden currently treads threatens both the prospect of a two-state solution he had once proposed and peace treaties between Israel, Jordan, and Egypt. Constant cycles of violence and severe hostility from right-wing factions towards Palestinians only add to the complexity of the situation—an aspect Biden seems unable to grasp.

A potential alternative would be to seek a humanitarian resolution in Gaza that includes Arab support to rein in Hezbollah and Tehran. Over half of Israelis, along with their military and intelligence officials, support a cease-fire-for-hostages deal so desperately needed. Yet, Biden appears to have done little to move this forward.

Achievement of this goal requires Biden to spur significant U.S. pressure on Netanyahu, which would include support for assertive U.N. resolutions against any party declining the Gaza deal. Such a move demands substantial U.N. and Western pressure on Iran. However, there seemed to be no indication of Biden leaning towards this necessary policy shift.

Biden’s policies also play a crucial role in attaining peace for Ukraine, a situation that calls for a substantial U.N. role. However, Biden’s wavering stance does not inspire confidence, especially in the face of Russia’s glaring violation of territorial integrity—a fundamental principle of the U.N.—through their invasion of Ukraine.

In these critical times, the U.N., and by extension the world, watches to see whether Biden will defend a principle that is vital for maintaining international order. A key test lies in whether he accedes to Ukraine’s request to use U.S. long-range missiles to target airfields and supply depots within Russia, thus presenting a vivid illustration of his foreign policy legacy.

If Biden denies Ukraine this crucial assistance, he would be allowing a dictator to vitally hamper an indispensable principle for maintaining global order—an action that would ultimately define his U.N. address as a closing speech from a President who could have done right but faltered when it mattered.