Follow us on social

2021-04-29t005134z_1711589909_mt1sipa000w8aade_rtrmadp_3_sipa-usa-scaled-e1619726858186

Biden doesn't need a cold war to justify good policy

The president invoked inflated fears of China to make the case for his ambitious domestic goals.

Asia-Pacific

In last night’s address to a joint session of Congress — the first of his presidency — Joe Biden made the case for massive investments in the American economy, infrastructure, and society. To do so, he summoned fears of a rising China, declaring that the United States is “in competition with China and others to win the 21st century.”

It is commendable that President Biden did not employ the extreme ideological rhetoric of the Trump administration in characterizing China and the bilateral relationship. Such language crowds out any rational discussion of what China’s rise means for the U.S. and the West and simply provokes a similar hardline response from many ordinary Chinese, making the effort to craft an effective policy toward Beijing even more difficult. 

But it is unfortunate that Biden nonetheless felt the need to justify his domestic proposals — positive and necessary steps towards ensuring prosperity for all Americans, and for reviving our flagging democracy — by placing them in the context of a global struggle against autocracy, and specifically with China.

The U.S. (along with other democratic nations) certainly has differences with China over various political norms and human rights values, and China’s rise presents a challenge to America in a number of arenas. But China is hardly an existential threat, nor the preeminent threat facing the United States today. Rather, the greater threats — many of which the president highlighted in his speech — are internal and global.

Domestic extremism, racism, and violence, political deadlock, and transnational perils like climate change and pandemics all present dire threats to the stability of the United States and the well-being of Americans. To present our challenges as the usual struggle between great powers is a distortion of reality; we will not be able to solve our problems through an all-consuming struggle with any other nation.

Biden stressed that he welcomes competition with China, but does not want conflict. The United States, he says, will “correct abuses” by China, and maintain its military strength in Asia and the Indo-Pacific. 

On this, the devil is in the details: how the administration defines the goals of U.S. policy in Asia, and the tone and means with which it pursues them. The U.S. can no longer treat Asia as if it remains the sole provider of hard security, or the primary economic partner, for that region and others.

It should no longer police the world and try to assert its military primacy at all costs. Instead, the United States must try to effectively work with all major nations to reduce conflict and pursue cooperative solutions to global problems. This will require deterrence towards rival powers like China — but it also requires credible reassurance on key interests. We will not stabilize Asia by pursuing the kind of bipartisan, hostile, zero-sum strategy exemplified by some of the Biden administration’s rhetoric or the China-focused legislation now making its way through Congress.

President Biden said many good things last night, but his remarks regarding China continued to reflect the absence of an overall strategy reflecting the complex reality of our relationship with China, and with other nations.

WASHINGTON, DC - APRIL 28: President Joe Biden addresses a joint session of Congress, with Vice President Kamala Harris and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on the dais behind him, on Wednesday, April 28, 2021. Biden spoke to a nation seeking to emerge from twin crises of pandemic and economic slide in his first speech to a joint session of Congress. (Photo by Melina Mara/Pool/Sipa USA/POOL)No Use Germany.
Asia-Pacific
Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. | Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. speaking wit… | Flickr

Why American war and election news coverage is so rotten

Media


Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything else is public relations.”

keep readingShow less
Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

Peter Thiel attends the annual Allen and Co. Sun Valley Media Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho, U.S., July 6, 2022. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid

Peter Thiel: 'I defer to Israel'

QiOSK

The trouble with doing business with Israel — or any foreign government — is you can't really say anything when they do terrible things with technology that you may or may not have sold to them, or hope to sell to them, or hope to sell in your own country.

Such was the case with Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir Technologies, in this recently surfaced video, talking to the Cambridge Union back in May. See him stumble and stutter and buy time when asked what he thought about the use of Artificial Intelligence by the Israeli military in a targeting program called "Lavender" — which we now know has been responsible for the deaths of an untold number of innocent Palestinians since Oct 7. (See investigation here).

keep readingShow less
Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Committee chairman Jack Reed (D-RI), left, looks on as co-chair Roger Wicker (R-MS) shakes hands with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on President Biden's proposed budget request for the Department of Defense on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., April 9, 2024. REUTERS/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades

Are budget boosters actually breaking the military?

Military Industrial Complex

Now that both political parties have seemingly settled upon their respective candidates for the 2024 presidential election, we have an opportune moment to ask a rather fundamental question about our nation’s defense spending: how much is enough?

Back in May, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, penned an op-ed in the New York Times insisting the answer was not enough at all. Wicker claimed that the nation wasn’t prepared for war — or peace, for that matter — that our ships and fighter-jet fleets were “dangerously small” and our military infrastructure “outdated.” So weak our defense establishment and so dangerous the world right now, Wicker pressed, the nation ought to “spend an additional $55 billion on the military in the 2025 fiscal year.”

keep readingShow less

Israel-Gaza Crisis

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.