Joseph Biden's foreign policy

Joseph Biden for president! Yesterday his main rival for the Democratic Party’s nomination, Bernie Sanders, endorsed him. If the world could vote, the overwhelming majority would vote for Biden, despite some misgivings. My reservations would be on his foreign policy.

Like President Barack Obama he would be good on domestic policy but mistaken on much of his foreign policy.

Obama made Biden responsible for dealing with the Ukraine crisis where he fashioned an anti-Russian policy based on little evidence that this was fair to the facts. He writes now of the need to “counter Russian aggression” and that “we must impose real costs on Russia for its violations of international norms”.

If he can’t get Russian policy right, what hope is there he will get other issues right? We don’t need an unnecessary second Cold War.

If the US can’t have a policy for rapid nuclear disarmament with Russia, going well beyond the extension of a new START treaty, an end to the trade embargo and a sensible compromise over Ukraine and Crimea, the world will remain weighed down by this stand-off to the benefit of no one.

Russia has to become a partner of the West again, as it was when the Cold War ended. It takes two to tango, we know, but the US alienated Russia by breaking its word and expanding Nato up to Russia’s frontier.

In the current issue of Foreign Affairs Biden lays out his policies succinctly. Again we have the old shibboleth – “Once more we (must have) America lead the world”. How often has the world, especially its other heavyweights, told the US there must be a partnership, otherwise there will always be push-back?

There can be little effective resolution of disputes discussed by the UN’s Security Council unless every country is treated as an equal.

Similarly, Biden talks of how US companies must stop “facilitating repression in China” and “The US does need to get tough with China”.

Standing up for human rights is a good thing but how can the US do that without being hypocritical when it has undermined human rights in Iraq and Afghanistan, built a fence across the Mexican border and then incarcerated and ripped away small children from their migrant parents, opposed the making of peace in Syria and continued its longest war in its history in Afghanistan where the innocent continue to be killed by US military action?

As for accusations that “China is robbing the US and American companies of their technology and intellectual property”, isn’t this to misunderstand the dynamic of trade relationships?

The more China robs the more it becomes dependent on Western expertise to keep growing. Markets will open more quickly than patents are stolen. Besides, for every new big business departure, Western supply chains are important to Chinese companies – look at Huawei’s G5 phone and internet system.

Is it not reasonable that China secures its interest with its border islands in the South and East China Seas? Doesn’t Washington itself still apply the Monroe Doctrine?

China is not acting as the US abroad, putting its finger into almost every pie. The US has 800 bases around the world. China has one. China rarely starts the grumbling, only when the US shoots first.

Once Biden has changed US policies then will be the time to talk about human rights abroad.

On the Israel/Palestine dispute, he seems to be incapable of differentiating from those who criticize Israel and those who are anti-semitic. All he cares about is sustaining “our iron-clad commitment to Israel’s security”. Not a word about what the Palestinians need and deserve.

There are some good thoughts in Biden’s Foreign Affairs article. He writes: “We have made missteps and mistakes. Too often, we have relied solely on the might of our military instead of drawing on our full array of strengths”.

Good, but there is no mention of reducing the Pentagon’s expenditure which is as large as the next seven big powers added together.

He also sensibly says: “We should bring the vast majority of our troops home from the wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East and narrowly define our mission as defeating Al Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS). We should also end our support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen”.

He is also good on Iran, wanting to resuscitate the deal on nuclear weapon research made by Obama and also the Paris Agreement on controlling climate change.

Rightly, he wants to reinvest in the diplomatic corps- it has a useful bias towards peace-making. He blames Trump for cutting back on diplomacy and “By pulling out of treaty after treaty, reneging on policy after policy, walking away from US responsibilities, and lying about matters big and small, Trump has bankrupted the US’s word in the world”.

Elsewhere Biden has spoken about borrowing from the thoughts of his erstwhile rivals Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. But I see no sign of their many good ideas (although both of them are unnecessarily tough on China and Russia) being listed by Biden.

He needs to listen to them more because that is what probably a majority of younger Americans want.

We have no choice but to wish victory for Biden.

But he needs to make some bigger changes in his foreign policy commitments than he has so far articulated before many of us can respect the US again, and before the world will become truly peaceful.

If you think this article was useful, reward TFF with a dollar or two

[paypal-donation]

Foreign affairs columnist, film-maker and author

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Jan Oberg, TFF director April 28, 2026 In this third TFF Peace Pulse, I make the important distinction between the violence and the conflict that violence is a symptom of. If you want peace, focus on the underlying conflict because that is the key to resolution, peacemaking, and a better future for the parties. The West is obsessed with violence, just look around you – and 90+ per cent of the public debate is about military issues and other violence – totally wasted for peace. These Peace Pulses will only be published here a few times. You will also not find them on YouTube and Vimeo because both platforms have blocked TFF and me; you know, peace is dangerous these days. Most TFF’s videos since 2007 are now on Rumble.
In contrast to most, we’ll bring alternatives, solutions, hope and strategies for a better future. Times are dangerous, yes, but that only intensifies the need for constructive thinking and action! Jan Oberg, TFF director April 13, 2026 The new TFF Peace Pulse uses video messages in a new way: Max 3-5-minute-long comments, ideas or perhaps mini-lectures, all about peace – positive peace. We launch them today on April 13, 2026 with a carefully crafted visual aesthetic fitting the content. We hope to publish them regularly from now on. We launch Peace Pulse (PP) – for a number of reasons. The world is in chaos, and there are countless reasons to feel concerned, frustrated, even angry. The atmosphere is saturated with doom and gloom, with negative energy and rear‑mirror thinking, while vision, imagination, alternatives, strategies and genuine future‑mindedness remain in short supply. And without them, we simply can’t save the world. Looking at problems from a hundred angles will...

Recent Articles

Jan ObergTFF director ☮️ When this morning – August 19, 2026 – I saw the above new US Trump map, I came to think of Frank Zappa, The Mothers of Invention, who said that politics is the entertainment division of the Military-Industrial Complex. That formulation beats many academic analyses – as you will have understood […]
A Civilizational Interpretation of the West’s Body Politic Pascal Lottaz Associate professor at Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto and TFF Board member August 25, 2026 “How do we explain the self-defeating and self-harming policies of Western states? Europe seems to be happily deindustrializing, the US proxy war in Ukraine is killing hundreds of thousands (if not millions) […]
LONDON – Many of the great and the good have dismissed the utility of nuclear weapons as well as finding the idea of their use morally indefensible but still they exist in enormous numbers in the arsenals of the great powers. Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara and Secretary of State Dean Rusk both came to be convinced during their tenure in the Kennedy administration that their use was “unthinkable”. President George H.W. Bush has written that in private he ruled out a nuclear response during the 1991 Gulf War although in public his Administration did not. General Colin Powell, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in his autobiography recalls chiding his boss, Dick Cheney, for even considering it. Paul Nitze, one of the principal architects of containing the Soviet Union by nuclear deterrence, went even further. He argued in a Washington Post article in 1994 that it...

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

Jan ObergTFF director ☮️ When this morning – August 19, 2026 – I saw the above new US Trump map, I came to think of Frank Zappa, The Mothers of Invention, who said that politics is the entertainment division of the Military-Industrial Complex. That formulation beats many academic analyses – as you will have understood […]
A Civilizational Interpretation of the West’s Body Politic Pascal Lottaz Associate professor at Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto and TFF Board member August 25, 2026 “How do we explain the self-defeating and self-harming policies of Western states? Europe seems to be happily deindustrializing, the US proxy war in Ukraine is killing hundreds of thousands (if not millions) […]
LONDON – Many of the great and the good have dismissed the utility of nuclear weapons as well as finding the idea of their use morally indefensible but still they exist in enormous numbers in the arsenals of the great powers. Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara and Secretary of State Dean Rusk both came to be convinced during their tenure in the Kennedy administration that their use was “unthinkable”. President George H.W. Bush has written that in private he ruled out a nuclear response during the 1991 Gulf War although in public his Administration did not. General Colin Powell, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in his autobiography recalls chiding his boss, Dick Cheney, for even considering it. Paul Nitze, one of the principal architects of containing the Soviet Union by nuclear deterrence, went even further. He argued in a Washington Post article in 1994 that it...
Read More
HQAB7NMWUAA1gSk
Jan ObergTFF director ☮️ When this morning – August 19, 2026 – I saw the above new US Trump map, I came to think of Frank Zappa, The Mothers of Invention, who said that politics is the entertainment division of the Military-Industrial Complex. That formulation beats many academic analyses – as you will have understood […]
21b7244b-c83e-46c1-ba23-556b21b9a0a8_1536x1024
A Civilizational Interpretation of the West’s Body Politic Pascal Lottaz Associate professor at Ritsumeikan University in Kyoto and TFF Board member August 25, 2026 “How do we explain the self-defeating and self-harming policies of Western states? Europe seems to be happily deindustrializing, the US proxy war in Ukraine is killing hundreds of thousands (if not millions) […]
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
LONDON – Many of the great and the good have dismissed the utility of nuclear weapons as well as finding the idea of their use morally indefensible but still they exist in enormous numbers in the arsenals of the great powers. Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara and Secretary of State Dean Rusk both came to be convinced during their tenure in the Kennedy administration that their use was “unthinkable”. President George H.W. Bush has written that in private he ruled out a nuclear response during the 1991 Gulf War although in public his Administration did not. General Colin Powell, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in his autobiography recalls chiding his boss, Dick Cheney, for even considering it. Paul Nitze, one of the principal architects of containing the Soviet Union by nuclear deterrence, went even further. He argued in a Washington Post article in 1994 that it...
Screenshot-2026-08-22-011310
August 24, 2026 Lena Petrova & Jan Oberg I am truly happy and honoured to have been invited by Lena to her unique channel, World Affairs In Context where she has over 600,000 subscribers. She covers a very wide range of global themes, based not least on her own deep and broad knowledge of economics. I want […]
Logo-Transnational
Greenland – the world’s largest island, a continent of its own with only 57.000 inhabitants. I visited it for the first time in May 2005. I flew across the inland ice to Nuuk, the tiny capital with some 14.000 inhabitants. I was overwhelmed by the pride and kindness of everyone I met as well as by the unique natural beauty. Unfortunately, due to weather conditions during my ten-day stay I could get nowhere else but Nuuk. Fortunately, however, among those I met was Gitte Arvegaard, a Danish lawyer and negotiator employed by the local government, Greenland Home Rule. She turned out to be an enthusiastic photographer with a lot of pictures taken during various trips around Greenland. So this Greeland series is the result of our cooperative effort. We both hope you enjoy it and are stimulated to visit Greenland – about which you may read more here. Finally, if you want to...
p_mccartney_poem
 Jan Oberg’s storyof how he met Sir Paul Liverpool – where else to meet Paul McCartney? Paul’s old class mate and TFF Associate, Jonathan Power introduced me to Paul McCartney in Liverpool at an informal reception. It was held at what used to be their school, now the Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts and we were there to celebrate that Jonathan had written Amnesty International’s 40th Anniversary book. This happy event for “righting wrongs and writing songs” gave me an opportunity to meet Paul and tell him about TFF and get straight to the matter: would he consider making a donation in support of our work for peace? While I was probably the only one with such a wish that day, I was certainly not the only one who wanted to shake hands and talk with him. In the last minutes before Paul was to leave, Jonathan brought us together and we got about three...