What Biden’s Exit Means for American Foreign Policy

A Conversation With Timothy Naftali

On July 21, following weeks of intense hypothesis, U.S. President Joe Biden introduced that he wouldn’t run within the November 2024 presidential election and endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris to take his place. Coming at a time of geopolitical uncertainty, the choice might have giant implications for U.S. overseas coverage for the rest of Biden’s time period.

To make sense of what Biden’s choice means for the presidency and U.S. world management within the weeks to come back, Foreign Affairs’ senior editor Hugh Eakin spoke to the presidential historian Timothy Naftali, a school scholar on the Institute of Global Politics at Columbia University, the founding director of the Richard Nixon Presidential Library and Museum, the writer of George H. W. Bush (a quantity within the Times Books “American Presidents” sequence), and the editor of The Presidential Recordings: Lyndon B. Johnson.  

The dialog has been edited for readability and size.

In his momentous announcement, Biden stated that it’s in the very best curiosity of his occasion within the nation for him to focus solely on “fulfilling [his] duties as president for the remainder of [his] term.” I’m wondering how straightforward that might be. Will the world, together with not solely antagonists but in addition companions and allies, see him as a lame duck?

I truly assume that President Biden’s very tough choice as we speak has restored a number of the luster to the American dedication to Ukraine and to stabilizing different elements of the world.

Leaders see energy as at all times in flux. And within the three weeks because the debate, the Biden administration possible discovered the world extra skeptical about U.S. energy, within the sense that it appeared increasingly possible that former President Donald Trump would beat Joe Biden within the election this fall. And consequently, international locations had been already gaming what sort of worldwide political atmosphere they might be contending with beginning on the finish of January, with Biden not within the White House.

But there may be now a greater likelihood {that a} Democrat will win in November. And so I’d argue that, for the second not less than, overseas leaders must take critically the chance {that a} member of Biden’s staff or another person from the Democratic Party might be main the United States, that means that they can rely on assist for Ukraine, for instance. Some of that luster might disappear after the start of November. But the truth that the Democrats are not possible losers, I believe will affect the best way overseas leaders, notably American adversaries view the Biden administration.

So to the extent {that a} possible Trump victory was already baked into the worldwide calculus concerning the United States, Biden’s announcement forces a really completely different evaluation.

And one thing else must be underscored right here. Not because the early Nineteen Fifties, when the internationalist General Dwight Eisenhower received the competition for the soul of the Republican Party over the isolationist Senator Robert Taft, have the 2 events introduced such essentially completely different worldviews with regard to America’s place in worldwide affairs. Since 1952, each events have been internationalist of their outlook. President Trump in his first time period was an exception, however the Republican Party that he led was divided on this concern. 

As the latest Republican conference demonstrated, Trump has now refashioned the occasion fully in his personal picture. His selection of Senator J. D. Vance as his working mate, for instance, didn’t characterize an try to bridge completely different factors of view, however a doubling down of Trumpism. And so had been he to return to energy—had been he to regain the White House, and Republicans to carry the House and regain the Senate—overseas leaders, buddies and foes alike, might anticipate a way more isolationist America. So the truth that now the internationalist occasion has an improved likelihood to win, will essentially alter the calculations of overseas leaders. [Russian President] Vladimir Putin can not make sure that he can outlast the American dedication to European stability and to the sovereignty of Ukraine.

On the matter of antagonists, nevertheless, the United States is intently concerned in two main wars, in Europe and the Middle East, and coping with sophisticated points in Asia and elsewhere. Does this announcement come at a dangerous second?

Oh, sure. It’s a dangerous second when the nationwide technique of an ideal energy is so in query that an election might alter the nation’s, or not less than its management class’s, definition of the nationwide curiosity. And it’s particularly perilous for the worldwide system when the nation in query is a superpower. This scenario introduces an uncertainty into the political calculations of each chief. It could be very uncommon for an election to determine how the ability elite of a nation defines its nationwide curiosity. And it’s nearly unparalleled that this could occur for an ideal energy.

During the Cold War, the 2 events within the United States disagreed on the means by which to combat the Cold War, notably within the Vietnam and post-Vietnam period. But they didn’t disagree on the truth that the United States confronted a decided adversary and that nationwide safety entailed taking part in a task in defending, defending, and inspiring regional and worldwide stability. That consensus doesn’t exist anymore throughout the 2 events.

Comparisons are naturally being made with President Lyndon Johnson’s March 1968 announcement that he wouldn’t run once more. And many have famous that Biden’s choice is coming a lot later, in late July. But from a overseas coverage viewpoint, plainly truly, it’s early: we nonetheless have six months of the presidency left. What are the actual potentialities by way of what Biden can do throughout this time?

President Biden can make sure the continuation of the techniques which are under the floor which are serving to American allies world wide. If Trump is elected, we don’t know what is going to occur to intelligence cooperation, for instance, not solely with Ukraine but in addition with NATO allies and allies in East Asia. We don’t know what is going to occur to the coaching that our army is doing to help allies of freedom world wide. 

All these processes, although they don’t get a variety of consideration, matter for the steadiness of the world. And they don’t often want particular acts of Congress to be sustained; they simply want a steady middle within the Oval Office, and [under Biden] that’s been assured. Adversaries are very delicate to the continuation of these actions. It’s these day-to-day actions of the United States which are typically probably the most alarming to them and most reassuring to our allies. International issues are not often straightforward to resolve, however they are often managed, and it’s that gardening, if you’ll, that American overseas nationwide safety coverage makers must do daily to be efficient. 

And so the gardening can proceed.

With the president in workplace centered on American internationalism, that’s a superb factor for American allies. It offers them some predictive capability about what they’ll count on from the United States between now and the twentieth of January. And it’s a horrible factor for American adversaries, who know they’re going to must put up with a variety of American actions in assist of goals that they don’t share.

What concerning the bigger Biden file? Inevitably, one thinks of what occurred on the finish of the Obama administration and Trump coming to workplace getting down to undo so lots of the main Obama coverage initiatives. Are there particular ways in which Biden can Trump-proof a few of his personal accomplishments?

By stepping apart, Biden is doing an important factor that he can do at this level to Trump-proof the United States, by way of our nationwide safety. As the Supreme Court simply reminded us, the U.S. president has monumental authority to direct our overseas coverage. And so the selection of the following president is so vital. Even if Trump had been to beat the final word Democratic nominee, Biden’s accomplishments in overseas coverage won’t all fully dissolve. Were Trump to not rating a trifecta, and retain the House in addition to win the Senate, one would possibly see some pushback from Congress if a future President Trump and Vice President [J. D.] Vance had been to attempt to dramatically rescind American actions overseas and sacrifice Ukraine to the wolf within the Kremlin. 

So easy methods to Trump-proof our worldwide stature will rely on which occasion the American individuals select to guide the 2 homes of Congress. If Democrats management the House, they might complicate Trump’s efforts, for instance, to close down assist for Ukraine. Trump might nonetheless veto a invoice, however there stands out as the votes to overturn that veto. There will nonetheless be Republican senators and Republican members of the House who will need to vote for help for Ukraine. So, if the Democrats management the House, Congress would possibly have the ability to go help packages for Ukraine and Israel, regardless of Trump’s being within the White House.

As a results of this choice, does Biden in truth have an opportunity to attempt to form his legacy, given the timing and that there’s a particular endpoint forward? Are there helpful historic analogies for what presidents have completed in these closing months?

Well, this might be an uncommon late presidency due to how this new interval we’ve simply entered began. In 1968, Johnson tried to mix two very tough selections as a means of strengthening his legacy and enhancing the well-being of the United States. At the identical time that he stated in March 1968 he wouldn’t be a candidate for reelection in November, he introduced a critical dedication to negotiating a means out of the Vietnam War. In that means, he made clear that he was devoting his late presidency to a problem of overseas coverage. 

Biden would possibly view his remaining months in workplace as a possibility to do one thing comparable within the Middle East. But the present disaster within the Middle East is hardly a parallel to the US coverage failure in Vietnam. The United States shouldn’t be a direct combatant in Israel’s struggle with Hamas. It has to work by means of an ally, Israel. So there isn’t a direct parallel to Johnson, who stated to the world, and notably to Hanoi and Moscow and Beijing, “Take me seriously” in in search of a diplomatic off-ramp from the struggle in Vietnam. “I’m no longer playing politics. I’m out of politics.” I don’t see there being a direct parallel for Biden, and that’s OK. 

History supplies us with echoes, however not often does it repeat itself; the circumstances of every case are nearly at all times very completely different although the dilemmas they increase can appear comparable. The individuals, the political tradition—these will be comparable, the people will be comparable. But historical past isn’t a crystal ball. There are distinctive parts to Biden’s choice that needs to be appreciated—and needs to be a supply of some humility in attempting to determine what’s going to occur subsequent.

From a historic perspective, is there one thing you see as notably hanging concerning the choice and the way it occurred?

In attempting to comply with from afar the discussions happening in Wilmington [Delaware, where the president was at his family home, isolated with COVID and struggling to decide what to do], it appeared that Biden was partially a prisoner to an unlucky American custom. This is the concept solely by profitable a second time period is the president of the United States validated. In the 1840s, James Okay. Polk made clear that he was in search of just one, very consequential time period. Modern presidents, nevertheless, have handled their re-election as a referendum on their first phrases, when the marketing campaign can be higher suited as a check of what they’ve to supply in a second time period.

Presidents needs to be allowed to rise to greatness in our historical past just by serving one time period. The second and the person can coalesce and that second might final solely 4 years. George H. W. Bush is an effective instance. He was supremely certified and had the appropriate instruments to handle the tip of the Cold War and the primary years of what adopted. Yet he didn’t need to be only a one-term president. As a end result, when he was defeated in 1992, he left workplace feeling depressed as if he had by some means failed as president, regardless of his one time period having been so consequential and vital. Gerald Ford was one other glorious one-term president.

Biden’s one-term presidency is destined to be seen very positively. How positively will finally rely on whether or not a Democratic successor, whether or not it’s Kamala Harris or not, is elected in November. But not all of his legacy depends upon a Democratic victory in November. He introduced us out of Trumpian chaos. He restored America’s function on the planet, restored the belief of allies. He pushed adversaries away from objectives they had been hoping to attain. Without something just like the majorities of FDR or LBJ, his deft contact with Congress led to a deepening of the social security internet, introduced expertise to bear in the issue of local weather change with out sacrificing American jobs, and made a generational dedication to American infrastructure. 

In sum, the president has had a efficiently consequential time period. Unfortunately, he felt that he alone might stop Trump from returning to the White House and so sought reelection. But sadly, he didn’t have sufficient within the tank. It was his personal physique that outlined that his second had handed. I hope that with time he involves view his time period in a different way, simply as I imagine George H. W. Bush did, as one which was terribly profitable and a blessing for our nation.