Four Joe Biden myths. Speech straight out of the Cold War [KOMENTARZ]

Posted On: October 24, 2023

On Thursday (October 20), Biden delivered a real speech about the Cold War. He spoke about the tyranny that awaits the prosperity of democratic countries in the world. He assured that the success of Russia or Hamas alone would cause the dominoes of democracy to fall. And he argues that America’s role now is to build a “democracy arsenal” that will enable America and its allies to stand up to Russia in Ukraine and Hamas and its leaders in the Middle East.

Speaking about Russia, Hamas and the evil that America must fight, Biden resembled George W. Bush, who after the attack on the World Trade Center encouraged society to fight the “axis of evil.” But most importantly, he repeats so many myths about international politics and America’s role in the world that it is difficult to name them all. However, it is necessary to pay attention to the most important thing.

All the Biden myths

Myth 1. International politics is a clash between democracy and autocracy

In his speech, Biden spoke about “the American idea, America’s promise to a people fighting today for the same things we fought for 250 years ago: freedom, liberty, self-determination.” They are fighting tyrants, Putin and Hamas terrorists, and America’s mission is to help them. “We are an irreplaceable nation,” Biden argued, citing Madeleine Albright’s famous saying.

In the Biden administration’s narrative, international politics is a clash between democracies and autocracies. This is what Biden himself has said many times, and it is what his foreign policy theorist, G. John Ikenberry, has argued for years. Biden – as his colleagues often say – wants to be a president like Franklin Delano Roosevelt. He wants to protect the world’s democracies from tyranny and ensure that these countries can develop safely.

However, international politics is not an arena of contention between democracies and autocracies, and American foreign policy is the best example of this. Among US partners and allies, there are many non-democratic countries or countries that have little in common with democracy in the Western sense. Hungary, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Oman, Vietnam are just a few examples.

Conflicts between the US and Russia, China, Iran or North Korea do not arise from the fact that America is a democratic country and its rivals are authoritarian countries. This is mainly due to the fact that they compete with America for political and economic influence in certain regions. And then there was a conflict of interest. This happened with the war in Ukraine and the conflict over the future of Taiwan.

This does not mean that the narrative of American democratic superiority is simply a cover for and the result of the hypocrisy of the American elite. Biden sincerely believes in the values he preaches. He truly believed (quite rightly), that democracy, not tyranny, was the best system known to man and could provide him with significant freedom and space for self-realization.

However, in competition between superpowers, this ideological aspect is only a small part of a broader whole, and not the main axis of conflict, as Biden is trying to present to the rest of the world.

Continuation of the material below the video

Myth 2. Domino theory

Biden also believes in the domino theory. During the Cold War in America, its supporters held the view that if communists took power in one country, the revolution would quickly spread to neighboring countries.

Now Biden says that “if we let Putin erase Ukraine’s independence, would-be aggressors around the world will be emboldened. The risk of conflict and chaos could spread to other regions of the world: Indo-Pacific, Middle East – especially to other regions of the world. The middle East.”

This assumption implies that all countries are equally vulnerable to war, crisis, conflict or revolution. This does not take into account regional specificities or local conflict settings. This adopts the viewpoint that “bad” states know no borders and – if not stopped – are capable of dominating other states, which would threaten the prosperity and stability of democratic states. During the Cold War, this less sophisticated approach was promoted by, among others, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

But at that time, the communist revolution had not yet spread throughout the world. And not because the United States is on guard (although this also happens), but mainly because in many countries – for various reasons: political, economic or cultural – communism cannot stand alone.

Today – likewise. Wars and conflicts will expand not because Russia took part of Ukraine or because Hamas succeeded in surprising Israel.

Russia’s aggression against Ukraine does not mean Poland will be the next target. And conflicts in the Middle East will continue because currently almost no country is serious about resolving specific regional problems. So he doesn’t think about establishing a Palestinian state or an agreement between Israel and Iran. These are unrealistic steps at the moment, but only they can provide stability in the region.

Myth 3. The United States is the guarantor of stability in the Middle East

However, Biden claims that the United States is the guarantor of stability in the Middle East. “The United States and our partners in the region are working to build a better future for the Middle East, a future that makes the Middle East more stable,” he said in his speech.

Let us say here that the influence of the United States on our region after 1989 was indeed very positive. Thanks to American power and intent, Poland became a democratic country and could safely build Western-style institutions. But Washington’s involvement in the Middle East in recent decades must be assessed critically.

In 2003, America invaded Iraq, destroying the Middle Eastern order that existed at that time. Over the years, they have not been seriously involved in the establishment of a Palestinian state, despite numerous assurances in this regard. Since the Trump administration, Washington has also been institutionally involved in building an anti-Iran alliance (the so-called Abraham Accords), which has also fueled tensions in the Middle East rather than quelling them.

The Middle East is very problematic and full of conflict because it has long lacked significant power to maintain stability.

Myth 4. Trade reduces political tensions between countries

Mentioning US achievements in the Middle East, Biden also mentioned the American trade corridor project, which will start from India, through the Middle East to Europe. As he put it, this would create “more predictable markets, more jobs, less disruption, fewer complaints, fewer wars. The people of the Middle East and we will benefit from this.”

Let’s ignore the fact that this corridor is purely a political project and is intended to avoid, among other things, Iran and Turkey, which would cause further irritation and unrest in the region. However, the thesis that tightening trade relations will lead to more peaceful political relations is clearly untrue and has been known for many years.

The most famous example in this category is World War I, which broke out even though economic relations between European countries had never been stronger. There are many more similar examples in history – including contemporary history.

Interdependence does not necessarily result in greater understanding and empathy for the other party. These can have quite the opposite impact in the form of rivalry, misunderstanding or hatred, as recently well demonstrated by Mark Leonard in his recent book “The Age of Unpeace”. The story is not as one-dimensional as Biden makes it out to be.

***

In this context, it is not surprising that Robert Gates, US Secretary of Defense during the administrations of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, wrote in his memoirs that Joe Biden was a very honest and empathetic person, but “in the last four years for decades he made mistakes on almost every major issue affecting US foreign policy.”

And while this assessment is not entirely fair, Biden has done nothing to correct it at this point. Listening to his speech, one gets the impression that he is not drawing conclusions from the mistakes of his predecessors (Bush Jr.), he is focusing on Cold War solutions and pushing for a long-discredited form of American involvement in the Middle East.