Four years back, when Joe Biden stepped into the presidency, he and his allies described their return as a restoration effort. They declared that the United States had reclaimed its global position following the disruptions of Donald Trump’s first term.
Biden had promised that the country would once again assume a leadership role, especially in guiding the world out of the pandemic’s grip and restoring dependability among allied nations.
RelatedPosts
With Trump now set to return to office, Biden’s presidency is increasingly being seen as a temporary pause during a period dominated by growing nationalism. The confidence that once shaped Biden’s foreign approach was gradually replaced by a reactive administration.
Instead of maintaining focus on boosting American manufacturing through strategic economic policies and technology-driven competition with China, the government was drawn into back-to-back crises, including wars in Ukraine and across the Middle East.
Biden and his top officials have used speeches and interviews to repeat a common message. They believe they succeeded in strengthening international partnerships and rebuilding global trust.
They highlighted efforts in Asia through platforms like the “Quad,” which ties the United States with Japan, India, and Australia. They also emphasized the critical role they played in coordinating efforts to support Ukraine’s defense.
While speaking at the State Department earlier this week, Biden stated that he had helped restore global trust in the United States as a reliable partner. He referred to legislation such as the Inflation Reduction Act, claiming it had enhanced the country’s core strengths.
He also said that his government managed relations with China carefully, working together with regional partners instead of acting alone. This statement appeared to be a jab at Trump’s earlier unpredictable foreign policy.
Biden expressed confidence in what his administration was leaving behind. He said the next team would inherit a strong foundation, with an America that has more allies, fewer threats, and a leadership role on the global stage.
Foreign Successes and Lingering Challenges
Many economic indicators show that the U.S. economy is performing better than that of other major Western countries. Enemies like Russia and Iran have suffered losses and now appear weaker than they did in previous years.
After Russia’s full-scale assault on Ukraine began in February 2022, Biden’s administration played a central role in organizing Western support for Kyiv. Their actions reinvigorated alignment among allied countries, even though several countries in the Global South avoided taking sides.
Biden’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, told PBS that the United States had helped Ukraine defend itself by supplying weapons and support throughout the war. He said those efforts played a role in preventing Russia from erasing Ukraine from the map.
Some critics, however, argue that the administration failed to deliver support to Ukraine quickly enough. According to them, the aid provided was often too slow and insufficient to produce decisive results.
Trump has shown less interest in open-ended commitments to Ukraine, and if he moves toward a peace deal, Ukraine might be pressured to give up territory it wants to keep.
Setbacks in Other Regions
Beyond Ukraine, Biden’s foreign record has received criticism from several directions. The U.S. exit from Afghanistan remains one of the darkest parts of his term. Many years of attempts to build a functioning state in that country collapsed almost overnight as the Taliban returned to power.
In Latin America, the United States struggled to address migration pressures or counter China’s economic influence. In Africa, Biden launched a large infrastructure effort involving a railway to link Congolese resources with ports in Angola. But that only came together as his presidency approached its end.
Middle East Legacy and Diplomatic Controversies
Biden’s most disputed foreign policy record lies in the Middle East. He entered office promising to put human rights at the center of foreign policy, especially after the Saudi regime was blamed for the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. But those ideals quickly took a back seat as the administration came to see Saudi Arabia as a strategic partner in the region.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken, during one of his last public appearances, was met by pro-Palestinian demonstrators. They accused the administration of supporting Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, which came in response to a deadly Hamas attack on southern Israel in October 2023. Biden and Blinken remained firm in their support for Israel, not just in that war but also in its operations against Iran and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Investigations into Israel’s actions in Gaza are still ongoing in international courts, but the Biden administration continued to back Netanyahu’s right-wing government.
Washington did little to restrain Israeli bombing campaigns or challenge the restrictions placed on humanitarian aid entering Gaza. Netanyahu, in turn, frequently expressed frustration with Biden, claiming that the U.S. was not doing enough to support Israel’s goals.
According to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, Biden’s administration took on the tough assignment of trying to mediate in the region. While they helped arrange a ceasefire in Lebanon and pushed for a hostage deal in Gaza, their military support for Israel played a major role. Yet Biden, he noted, received little recognition for his efforts and was treated as a political target by Netanyahu.
Credibility and the Global Order
The fighting in Gaza has sparked broader doubts about whether Biden’s administration truly stands by the international rules it once championed. Biden used the Ukraine war to urge other nations to support a fair global system based on agreed-upon rules.
But when the issue was Israel, the administration turned away from enforcing laws that condition U.S. military aid and rejected the authority of key international bodies, including the United Nations’ top court.
Sarah Yager of Human Rights Watch warned that when the United States applies international rules selectively, its moral authority weakens. As the main creator of modern global governance, U.S. behavior has consequences.
When Washington refuses to follow the rules, other leaders, especially authoritarian ones, feel they have permission to act without limits, worsening suffering inside their own countries and creating wider instability.
Political Calculations and Public Backlash
The final judgment of Biden’s foreign policy may come not from foreign governments but from American voters. Ravi Agrawal, editor in chief of Foreign Policy magazine, described a conversation with a senior Biden official who admitted that many policy decisions were shaped by fear of political backlash rather than deep convictions.
This official said Biden’s team kept tariffs on China even though they were not helping. They promoted protectionist policies not out of belief but because they thought it would be popular. Even the climate legislation called the Inflation Reduction Act was structured to send benefits mostly to Republican-leaning states.
Agrawal summed up the official’s concern by saying the administration tried to appeal to too many groups at once. As a result, it failed to satisfy anyone completely, and people saw through what appeared to be an effort shaped more by caution than clear direction.
