The far-right would like to impeach
Joe Biden, kick him out of the White House, perhaps even throw him in
jail. "Lock him up" has been a predictable chant at Trump
rallies going back to
before the 2020 election.
Even Republicans in Congress have joined this chorus.
Bipartisanship? As Donald Trump
would say in his New York accent: fuhgeddaboutit!
One day after Biden’s
inauguration, QAnon sympathizer Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA)
introduced
HR 57 to
impeach the new president on the Trumped-up charge of bribery. As the
U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan proceeded at its telescoped and
chaotic pace, impeachment calls came with greater regularity from the
Republican Party, with Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) demanding
the president’s ouster for the
high crime and misdemeanor of “ignoring sound advice.”
It’s a curious turn of events
when the Republicans lambaste the current president for implementing
the policy of their own party’s standard-bearer and doing so in
a dysfunctional manner that was a hallmark of Trump’s tenure.
And why exactly are Republicans complaining? They’ve already
effectively handcuffed the current president—without the bother
of actually trying to send him to jail—by forcing him to deal
with the consequences of the actions taken by Donald Trump during his
four years in office.
Sure, Biden has emphasized the few
global issues on which he has boldly departed from Trump’s
agenda. The new administration dramatically re-entered the Paris
agreement on climate change. It committed the United States to fight
COVID-19 worldwide with a somewhat more generous policy on vaccine
distribution. It rescinded the “global gag rule”
prohibiting foreign aid for family planning overseas. It signaled the
end to U.S. support of the Saudi-led war in Yemen.
But in many other foreign policy
areas, Biden has had to operate within the parameters established by
his predecessor. On Afghanistan, Iran, immigration, trade, and many
other issues, Trump implemented radioactive policies that have long
half-lives. The Biden administration has been stuck with the job of
cleaning up the toxic waste. Worse, in some cases, the president has
for political reasons decided to live with the mess.
The Greater Middle East
Afghanistan has been perhaps the
most significant foreign policy legacy of the Trump team. In February
2020, the administration negotiated a deal with the Taliban in Doha
to end the two-decade war. At the time, about 13,000 U.S. troops
provided training, muscle, and firepower to a seriously
underperforming Afghan army. According to the deal, the last U.S.
soldiers would depart Afghanistan in May 2021. By the time Biden took
office in January 2021, U.S. forces were officially down to 2,500
(though in reality there were about a
thousand more American
soldiers in country).
Biden could
have scotched the Doha deal,
just as Trump threw out so many of the agreements that the Obama
administration signed. He could have once again expanded the U.S.
military footprint inside Afghanistan, as some of his advisors
recommended. But there was virtually no popular support for another
surge, and Biden had never been a fan of more boots on the ground.
He’d promised during the presidential campaign to end the U.S.
war in Afghanistan, so the 2020 agreement served as a useful
rationale.
What the new administration was not
happy with, however, were some of the consequences of the peace deal,
including the release of 5,000 Taliban prisoners without a quid pro
quo and the ultimate undermining of the authority of the government
in Kabul. The radioactive gift from the Trump administration was to
rob the Biden team of any real leverage in its implementation of the
deal. The most Biden could do was to delay the withdrawal of troops
by a couple of months and hope for some kind of power-sharing
arrangement between the Taliban and the government in Kabul.
Instead, an emboldened Taliban
clearly capitalized on the feelings of abandonment among provincial
officials in the wake of the 2020 deal to negotiate the handover of
one city after another. Sure, Biden could have begun withdrawing
American personnel and Afghan colleagues before the Taliban reached
Kabul. But the president would have been blamed for jumping the gun
and contributing to the demoralization that hastened the Taliban’s
ultimate victory. Trump’s ill-planned deal—and his
determination
to pull out all troops by
January 15, 2021, regardless of the "sound advice" of his
national security team—set up nothing but bad choices for Biden
around what was ultimately a necessary military withdrawal from
Afghanistan.
Another poisonous gift from Trump
has been his Iran policy. Trump backed out of the Iran nuclear deal
in May 2018 and tried, with additional sanctions and pressures, to
ensure that the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) would
never be resuscitated.
The Biden administration has
promised to find a way back to the nuclear agreement. But it has yet
to come up with a formula in its negotiations with Iranian
counterparts on eliminating Trump-era sanctions and providing
compensation for their impact while at the same time walking back
Iran’s moves to expand its nuclear program. In one good sign,
Iran recently
concluded an
agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency that preserves
previously agreed-upon monitoring.
But there’s no guarantee that
the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action can be revived. Meanwhile, the
Biden administration is hedging its bets. “We’re putting
diplomacy first and see where that takes us. But if diplomacy fails,
we’re ready to turn to other options,” Biden has
said.
If diplomacy fails, Biden will certainly deserve some of the
blame—but Trump did what he could to make success as unlikely
as possible.
Trade Policy
Iran is not the only country still
suffering under the burden of Trump-era sanctions.
China was hit with a variety of
tariffs and economic sanctions during the Trump years, and it
retaliated with trade penalties of its own against the United States.
To get the tariffs reduced, China signed the “phase one”
trade agreement in which it promised to purchase $200 billion more
U.S. products in 2020-21. In 2020, China fell short of its targeted
purchases by
40 percent.
Of course, the global outbreak of COVID didn't help, as global trade
in general plummeted. The numbers for 2021, on the other hand, have
been better, with Chinese purchases of agricultural products, in
particular, rising
sharply.
Significantly, that “phase
one” agreement didn’t lift any of the tariffs on Chinese
goods, just reduced some of the rates. Tariffs on 66 percent of
Chinese products remain
in place,
amounting to about $350 billion. That’s cost the United States
around 300,000
jobs,
not to mention the $28 billion in subsidies Trump sent to farmers to
offset the initial drop in Chinese purchases of soybeans and other
foodstuffs.
The Biden administration shows no
sign of reducing or eliminating those tariffs. Indeed, it has piled
on more
economic sanctions against China over its policies in Xinjiang and
Hong Kong. It expanded a Trump-era prohibition on U.S. investments
into Chinese companies connected to defense or surveillance
technology. Meetings between Chinese and American officials have
failed to establish common ground on trade or any other issue for
that matter.
The bottom line is that Trump helped
move the needle in Washington against China, so that anti-Chinese
policies now have strong bipartisan support. Biden would have
difficulty lifting tariffs and sanctions even if that’s what he
wanted to do.
But even where such animus doesn’t
exist, like Europe, Biden hasn’t pushed hard to lift penalties.
Although this summer the administration finally ended a 17-year trade
war with Europe over subsidizing the aerospace sector, Biden has not
lifted the tariffs Trump imposed on European steel and aluminum.
When asked after the G7 summit in
June about these measures, a clearly exasperated president said,
“A hundred and twenty days. Give me a break. Need time.”
His response is disingenuous. He
could have lifted those sanctions on day one. In fact, protectionism
strikes a chord in certain sectors of the Democratic Party, and Biden
doesn’t want to lose blue-collar voters.
Trump made protectionism great
again. Biden is loath to push against this tide.
Immigration
Trump’s protectionism also
extended to border policy. He spent much of his four years in office
doing whatever he could to cut the numbers of people entering the
country and, where possible, deporting people who were already here.
Biden pledged to
reverse the
ugliest of Trump’s policies. He stopped the construction of the
infamous wall on the southern border. He ended travel bans for people
coming from majority Muslim countries. He recommitted to protecting
the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which
covers undocumented young people who came to the United States at a
young age.
But Trumpism lives on throughout the
U.S. court system. In July, a federal judge in Texas ruled
that the Biden administration must
stop accepting new DACA applications. In August, the Supreme Court
ordered the administration to
reinstate Trump’s
“Remain in Mexico” program, which forces asylum-seekers
to wait in Mexico while awaiting a decision on their status. In
putting asylum-seekers at risk, the program clearly
violates international
law.
It gets worse. The Biden
administration is not happy with the above rulings and is seeking to
challenge them. Yet in other immigration matters, the Justice
Department continues to prosecute Trump-era cases.
“Over the past six months, the
U.S. government has backed the expiration of certain visas, pushed
for tougher requirements for investors seeking green cards, and
supported the denial of permanent residency for thousands of
immigrants living legally in the U.S.,” Anita Kumar reports
in Politico.
“Former administration
officials and immigration lawyers say Biden’s hands may be tied
in certain cases—that the government may not necessarily agree
with the specific policy but that the Justice Department may have to
defend Trump-era policy because of requirements in law and the time
needed to review all the cases.”
Trump didn’t just tie his
successor’s hands. He handcuffed them to the throttle of a
runaway train.
Not a Rule-Breaker
Trump made some changes that Biden
has accepted without reservation. The previous president created a
new focus in Asian policy that he called “Indo-Pacific,”
which brought together the United States with Japan, India, and
Australia to form “the Quad” (not to be confused with the
Squad). Indo-Pacific coordinator Kurt Campbell has continued
to prioritize India
in the new administration’s containment of China, which had
been a major Trump focus (to the extent that he could focus on
anything).
The Biden administration has also
embraced Trump’s
“Abraham Accords” that secured new diplomatic relations
between Arab countries and Israel (but at the expense of Palestine).
Meanwhile, Biden shows no sign of attempting to reverse such Trump
innovations as establishing the U.S. embassy in Jerusalem.
Of course, Biden is in a policy
space whose parameters were established long before Trump came along
with his sledgehammer. Biden is not exactly a rule-breaker when it
comes to international affairs. The new administration has increased
Pentagon spending and reaffirmed military commitments to NATO and
allies in the Pacific. Biden has resurrected the old approach of
“strategic patience” with North Korea. Aside from some
proposed increases in foreign aid, he has largely ignored the Global
South. It turns out that the new president is comfortable working
within the constraints of the status quo ante.
Trump was a true rule-breaker who
did manage to do quite a lot in the international arena, where he had
far greater leeway to make changes beyond congressional control. Much
of that activity was destructive because Trump proved quite adept at
smashing things. Indeed, Trump smashed things—the Iran nuclear
deal, détente with Cuba—not just because of a peevish
desire to destroy his predecessor's legacy but as part of a
scorched-earth
policy to
FUBAR the federal government for generations to come.
As a result, Biden will spend much
of his term picking up the pieces—and that’s a whole lot
harder when you’re in handcuffs.
|