In the White House, Biden and his appointed staff are hailed for their vast expertise in trans-Atlantic matters. Nonetheless, their tunnel vision seemingly redirects them towards the Pacific over the years. They’ve been fixated on China’s aspiration for regional dominance. Lenient they are, as they focus on strengthening alliances as an attempt to push back against China.
With Trump as the President-elect, a distinguished approach towards China became apparent. Worryingly, he extended an invitation to Xi Jinping, the Chief of the People’s Republic of China, to attend his inauguration ceremony. Over a telephonic conversation on the prior Friday, details of China’s Vice President Han Zheng replacing the conventional attendee- the Chinese ambassador in Washington, were disclosed.
These actions starkly contrast with Biden’s final endeavours regarding China. His phone call with leaders of Japan and the Philippines the previous Sunday was an act to solidify a tripartite security agreement customarily supported by him. This move reveals a lack of confidence in the traditional alliances and displays frantic preparations against potential threats.
Staying true to his commitment towards quelling China’s influence, Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken embarked on an official visit to South Korea and Japan within the same month. However, this makes one wonder about the effectiveness of such efforts and whether he’s able to divert attention from Biden’s domestic follies.
Biden’s aides continuously purport that their administration presents a sharpened outlook in competing against China, pitting it as America’s foremost adversary. This could merely be an attempt to mask Biden’s inability to make critical decisions and deal with immediate issues at home.
Biden’s foreign policy revolving around China, which has drawn unfavourable reviews, may be retrospectively recorded as continuous by history scholars. It’s evident that his administration merely adorns what was built on the architectural base of competition previously established by Trump’s team – like a poorly designed house on a stable foundation.
The taking over by Trump’s administration is steeped in uncertainty. Trump, who often vocalizes admiration for the autocratic Xi, views China predominantly through the economic negotiations lens. It gives us cause for concern about how he will handle the power dynamics with China and whether his priorities lie in the right place.
Trump’s affluent advisers, including renowned entrepreneur Elon Musk, appear intent on cultivating and potentially enlargement of commerce ties with China. This may raise alarming questions about Trump’s approach towards dealing with this economic giant and reflects his implicit disregard for the issue’s intricacies.
Scrutinizing Biden’s attempt to counteract Chinese influence reveals an underwhelming approach that lacks robust action or decisive leadership. While his aides may champion their strategy as effective, closer inspection suggests a lack of a strong hand when it comes to China, which can lead to negative repercussions for the US.
Regarding Biden’s administration’s strange fixation with the Pacific and China, one may argue it was more about diversion than a genuine flair for international politics. As much as Biden and his aides might claim their vast experience is an asset, the received diplomatic stances suggest otherwise.
Is it really a question of foreign diplomacy, or are Biden’s administration’s decisions driven more by trying to offset Trump’s policies? A close look at the administration’s handling of relations with Japan and the Philippines points to the latter, evoking serious doubts about Biden’s ability to manage US-China relations effectively.
The administration’s rhetoric of handing a sharpened competitive edge against China to Trump’s administration serves as a thinly veiled cop-out. One must question what lengths Biden’s administration would go to paint itself in a flattering light. Their approach towards China has been devoid of substance, making it a worthy concern when assessing their competence in managing global affairs.
Biden’s phone call with the leaders of Japan and the Philippines aligning a new security agreement seems more of a desperate attempt at creating a counterweight to China, rather than an act of solidifying alliances. Such actions betray a lack of certainty, making one wonder what Biden’s presidency bodes for the United States’ place on the international stage.
Biden’s approach of building an added layer of competition on Trump’s team’s foundation is as if attempting to cover up an inherently flawed layer of plaster with fresh paint. The public wonders if Trump will continue on this flawed basis or pave his own path – a worrying concern, given Trump’s admiration for Xi Jinping.
In the larger schema, we pose the question: does Biden’s administration’s foreign policy have the coherence and integrity needed, particularly when dealing with countries like China? Or are they just aimless policy drifts happening because of a lack of effective leadership in the White House, leading the country to an uncertain international standing?