How will the war between Israel and Hamas affect US foreign policy? Will this affect policy towards Russia and even China?
I think this is a very important moment for the US on the world stage. First, we have a deep affinity with the State of Israel. It is a country that sees itself as similar to the United States, a country of immigrants, a country with a biblical heritage. But most importantly, it reminds us that America’s global responsibilities are unique and that we cannot escape history and must stand with our allies in difficult times. Right now the challenge is enormous because we have the Russian attack on Ukraine, the Hamas attack on Israel and we still have Taiwan that is certainly threatened by China and possibly even more than that. What becomes clear when we look at Hamas’s view of Israel and when we look at Putin’s view of Ukraine or what Xi says about Taiwan is that all three want to eliminate a country that they believe is illegitimate. Their commitment is total; there is no compromise with Hamas as we have seen the massacre of children, the rape of women and the decimated elderly. This aims to eliminate the State of Israel. Putin spoke in exactly the same terms about how he feels about Ukraine not being a nation state and its soldiers doing similar things, although not as brutal, but certainly war crimes. If we look at the way China thinks about Taiwan, we see that it does not consider it a real country either.
The United States remains the largest economic power, its defense budget remains overwhelming compared to that of other countries, but do you think it has the resources necessary to address so many different issues in so many different places?
We have the means to do it, the question is whether we have the necessary political will. Much of our political debate in Washington is now dominated by a kind of “easy answer” politics, where people who want to spend money in Ukraine hear someone point to another issue and say there is a real problem with a huge catastrophe. on the southern border and that it is better to spend money there than in Ukraine, or that we are faced with the challenge of China that is much greater than that of Russia, and that we cannot spend money in Ukraine. The truth is you can do more than one thing at a time, but the most important thing is to prepare the public to understand America’s role in the world, and our leaders have failed miserably at that – President Biden is not giving a speech on Ukraine months ago. He has to do this as president, he has to explain why he is sending weapons to Ukraine; why is this fight so important; why this is so goes beyond Ukraine’s own struggle for freedom. The president has not wanted to do it because it is politically unpopular.
But Biden has been very vocal in his support for Israel…
Yes, now he is talking about Israel. The president’s speech on Israel was an example of how a president should behave when it comes to world affairs: to be angry when our allies and partners are affected. It was an example of what the President of the United States’ speech should be. We saw this model with Ronald Reagan, we saw it with George Bush, with George W. Bush, with Bill Clinton, but we never saw it with Barack Obama. He failed to draw the red line in Syria, which gave the Russians the green light to eventually take over Crimea. What is needed is a righteous anger that stimulates public opinion, that stimulates the armed forces themselves.
There was no mention of Donald Trump in that list of presidents. Looking back on the Trump years, can you imagine how he would deal with these issues?
I think it is significant that Russia did not invade Ukraine during Donald Trump’s presidency. I think there are a lot of misunderstandings about what Trump’s Russia policy really was. Personally, he was very cordial with Putin, but he ensured that our armed forces were in top form and that top Russian officials were constantly punished. He imposed tough sanctions on Nord Stream 2, which President Biden withdrew. On Asia, Trump helped revive the Quad, building an extremely close relationship with Shinzo Abe, who rebuilt the US-Japan alliance and effectively made Japan America’s most important ally. That said, the moment was different. Trump was very frustrated with NATO, especially frustrated with the Germans – he hated Angela Merkel, thought she was lying about Nord Stream 2, and was very frustrated with the German defense budget. The truth is that Trump has fundamentally reshaped American foreign policy. He restored American deterrence; eliminated the leader of the Revolutionary Guards in Iran; Middle Eastern politics were reshaped with the Abraham Accords, which created an incredible partnership between Israel and the Sunni Arab states. A partnership that could have been extended to Saudi Arabia and I think Hamas saw at that moment that this would guarantee Israel’s survival as a state.
Do you therefore have a positive opinion of Trump’s foreign policy?
I have a positive opinion of your foreign policy. I don’t agree with him now on Ukraine, because I think it’s absolutely essential that we support Ukraine, but I think a lot of the fundamental things that he identified have been leveraged by Biden’s team, whether is about the Abraham Accords or American policy towards China. .
In a sense, Biden is the continuation of Trump when it comes to foreign policy towards China, but in other areas there are changes, right?
There have been changes, yes. Biden tried to woo Iran, he tried to close the circle. Trump thought that the essential issue was to build the partnership between Israel and Saudi Arabia, to put Israel on the same playing field, as he saw Israel as a force that multiplied the American presence in the Middle East. Biden tried to close the circle and first he didn’t want cooperation with Saudi Arabia, then he also tried to establish communication with the Iranians to reassure them about their presence in the world, and he did that by lifting sanctions against to lift oil. and freeing up money. But this phase is over, I think Biden has learned his lesson.
It seems to me that the big difference between Trump and Biden is the relationship with Europe. Does the moment we are experiencing now mean the return of the US to the traditional option of being close to Europe?
Yes, I think Biden has repeatedly spoken about the value of his partners and allies and has done an extraordinary job of building partnerships, especially in the Indo-Pacific region – with the Philippines and now also very actively with the Pacific island nations Ocean. deepening ties with India… Trump’s frustration was more about the issue of the Europeans not wanting to spend as much on defense as they should, but now, after the war in Ukraine, things have changed. Paradoxically, and despite not taking place during Trump’s presidency, but rather under Biden, when deterrence failed, the war greatly deepened US-Europe relations and laid the foundation for a much more positive partnership.
How influential will foreign policy be when Americans go to the polls in 2024?
It is the last of the influences. Unfortunately, I think the prevailing sentiment among Americans right now is that we should focus on our internal problems, but the Hamas war could change that. Foreign policy almost never determines American elections. Jimmy Carter’s presidency was the last in which foreign policy encouraged Ronald Reagan’s defeat of Carter after America’s humiliation by Iran. Now we find ourselves in a similar hostage situation with Hamas, but Biden has already shown a courage that Carter never showed. My concern is finding a leader who understands America’s role in the world and explains it with passion so that the public, who likes to rally around our leaders, understands what he is trying to do. I think if a leader has a very strong and clear vision on foreign policy, that can play a role in the elections, but people are much more likely to be focused on inflation, on jobs, on security, on abortion than on foreign policy . .
Source: DN
