/cloudfront-eu-central-1.images.arcpublishing.com/prisa/J75MTDX24REKTDSEHGUMRWTNPQ.jpg?_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en-US&_x_tr_pto=ajax,se,elem)
America Returns to a Different World
Biden's first international trip deserves high marks for both its planning and execution. He succeeded in setting a radically different profile than Trump and in reestablishing bridges with his European allies. But the unipolar world he led has been consigned to the past.
U.S. President Joe Biden's first international trip was a breath of fresh air. From the Group of Seven major industrial nations summit in Cornwall to his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Geneva, Biden displayed a poise and steadiness that contrasted sharply with the childish nature of his predecessor, Donald Trump. Biden's trip sent a strong message: America is back in good hands, and those hands are outstretched primarily to its traditional allies.
But Biden's goal is much more ambitious: to push for a certain democratic renaissance on a global scale, as opposed to China and other autocracies. Many doubts remain as to whether the new president will be able to implement this vision. What is clear, however, is that he has been quick to get down to work.
The last U.S. president to choose Europe as the destination for his inaugural trip was Jimmy Carter in 1977. Carter's tour started in the United Kingdom, where he attended a G-7 summit, and took him to Switzerland, where he met with Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, an ally of the Soviet Union. The parallels with Biden's trip are easily discernible and, given his admiration for Carter, perhaps not entirely coincidental.
However, the world has undergone extremely profound changes since 1977. Take the United Kingdom, for example. When Carter visited the country, it had just joined the European Communities, a decision that was subsequently endorsed by the British people. Today, the United Kingdom is immersed in political instability after leaving the European Union.
For Biden, this required reaffirming the "special relationship" the United States has with the United Kingdom by adopting a new Atlantic Charter. But it also required a reminder to Prime Minister Boris Johnson that the U.K. must abide by the agreements reached with the EU over Northern Ireland. The conclusion is more than obvious: If Biden is forced to choose between the U.K. and the EU, he will go for the latter.
The G-7 has also changed considerably since Carter's time. When the G-7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States) first met in the 1970s, they accounted for almost 70% of the world's gross domestic product in nominal terms, a share they would maintain until the end of the century. But in the last two decades, this share has plummeted to 45%.
Biden's bid to strengthen cooperation with the G-7 is commendable, although it has produced mixed results. On the one hand, the world's richest economies continue to fall short in their efforts to provide COVID-19 vaccines to developing countries. On the other hand, the recent G-7 agreement in favor of a 15% global corporate minimum tax can be described, as Harvard economist Dani Rodrik has noted, as "historic."
However, given the shrinking weight of the G-7 at the international level, the adoption of these principles by other countries is becoming both more necessary and more complex. The next hurdle to overcome will be the Group of 20 leading rich and developing nations, where the proposal will be met with reluctance from countries such as China, whose trade and human rights practices were strongly criticized in the G-7 communiqué.
Following the G-7 meeting, Biden attended a NATO summit in Brussels, which also resulted in a remarkable joint communiqué. Once again, the focus was on China, which was labeled a "challenge" and referred to as on a par with Russia. This represents a more than remarkable turnaround for the organization that served as the West's bastion against the Soviet Union.
The symbolism and potential repercussions of this turnaround are not lost on anyone (least of all China itself). It is true that Beijing is taking actions in conventional and non-conventional military spheres that must be countered. But NATO is often not the best vehicle for doing so, and it must avoid overreaching.
It could be argued that Biden's subsequent meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Charles Michel was the least politically charged event of his European tour. But the meetings between the Biden administration and senior EU officials had the most tangible effects, as they brought a truce to the long-running bilateral dispute over subsidies to aerospace companies Airbus and Boeing. All tariffs imposed as a result of the dispute have been suspended for five years.
The United States and the EU also pledged to resolve their differences over steel and aluminum trade before the end of the year. While renewed U.S. protectionism will not evaporate, and while the trade relationship between the two sides will remain tense, Biden is acutely aware that he has to set priorities and that the EU — the world's largest trading power — holds many cards in its hand.
The last engagement on Biden's agenda — his meeting with Putin — also reflected the dramatic changes that have taken place since the Cold War. To be sure, the United States and Russia remain adversaries on multiple fronts, and Biden made it clear to Putin that, unlike Trump, he would not react to Russian transgressions by looking the other way.
But it would lack strategic sense to treat Russia solely as an adversary, so Biden is attempting to play a complicated balancing act. While the United States characterizes Russia and China as the spearheads of an authoritarian bloc (in line with the NATO communiqué), Biden is exploring the possibility of reaching some basic understandings with Putin and perhaps even driving a wedge between Moscow and Beijing.
Overall, Biden's first international trip deserves high marks for both its planning and execution. The U.S. president succeeded in setting a radically different profile than his predecessor, rebuilding bridges with his European allies and demonstrating that his country will behave as a responsible actor within the multilateral system — precisely what the U.S. has long been demanding of China.
However, disagreements between democratic countries will not disappear overnight, nor will the West regain the weight it once had on the global stage. The United States is back, and there are plenty of reasons to celebrate. But like it or not, the unipolar world it used to lead has been consigned to the past.
U.S. President Joe Biden's first international trip was a breath of fresh air. From the Group of Seven major industrial nations summit in Cornwall to his meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Geneva, Biden displayed a poise and steadiness that contrasted sharply with the childish nature of his predecessor, Donald Trump. Biden's trip sent a strong message: America is back in good hands, and those hands are outstretched primarily to its traditional allies.
But Biden's goal is much more ambitious: to push for a certain democratic renaissance on a global scale, as opposed to China and other autocracies. Many doubts remain as to whether the new president will be able to implement this vision. What is clear, however, is that he has been quick to get down to work.
The last U.S. president to choose Europe as the destination for his inaugural trip was Jimmy Carter in 1977. Carter's tour started in the United Kingdom, where he attended a G-7 summit, and took him to Switzerland, where he met with Syrian President Hafez al-Assad, an ally of the Soviet Union. The parallels with Biden's trip are easily discernible and, given his admiration for Carter, perhaps not entirely coincidental.
However, the world has undergone extremely profound changes since 1977. Take the United Kingdom, for example. When Carter visited the country, it had just joined the European Communities, a decision that was subsequently endorsed by the British people. Today, the United Kingdom is immersed in political instability after leaving the European Union.
For Biden, this required reaffirming the "special relationship" the United States has with the United Kingdom by adopting a new Atlantic Charter. But it also required a reminder to Prime Minister Boris Johnson that the U.K. must abide by the agreements reached with the EU over Northern Ireland. The conclusion is more than obvious: If Biden is forced to choose between the U.K. and the EU, he will go for the latter.
The G-7 has also changed considerably since Carter's time. When the G-7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States) first met in the 1970s, they accounted for almost 70% of the world's gross domestic product in nominal terms, a share they would maintain until the end of the century. But in the last two decades, this share has plummeted to 45%.
Biden's bid to strengthen cooperation with the G-7 is commendable, although it has produced mixed results. On the one hand, the world's richest economies continue to fall short in their efforts to provide COVID-19 vaccines to developing countries. On the other hand, the recent G-7 agreement in favor of a 15% global corporate minimum tax can be described, as Harvard economist Dani Rodrik has noted, as "historic."
However, given the shrinking weight of the G-7 at the international level, the adoption of these principles by other countries is becoming both more necessary and more complex. The next hurdle to overcome will be the Group of 20 leading rich and developing nations, where the proposal will be met with reluctance from countries such as China, whose trade and human rights practices were strongly criticized in the G-7 communiqué.
Following the G-7 meeting, Biden attended a NATO summit in Brussels, which also resulted in a remarkable joint communiqué. Once again, the focus was on China, which was labeled a "challenge" and referred to as on a par with Russia. This represents a more than remarkable turnaround for the organization that served as the West's bastion against the Soviet Union.
The symbolism and potential repercussions of this turnaround are not lost on anyone (least of all China itself). It is true that Beijing is taking actions in conventional and non-conventional military spheres that must be countered. But NATO is often not the best vehicle for doing so, and it must avoid overreaching.
It could be argued that Biden's subsequent meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President Charles Michel was the least politically charged event of his European tour. But the meetings between the Biden administration and senior EU officials had the most tangible effects, as they brought a truce to the long-running bilateral dispute over subsidies to aerospace companies Airbus and Boeing. All tariffs imposed as a result of the dispute have been suspended for five years.
The United States and the EU also pledged to resolve their differences over steel and aluminum trade before the end of the year. While renewed U.S. protectionism will not evaporate, and while the trade relationship between the two sides will remain tense, Biden is acutely aware that he has to set priorities and that the EU — the world's largest trading power — holds many cards in its hand.
The last engagement on Biden's agenda — his meeting with Putin — also reflected the dramatic changes that have taken place since the Cold War. To be sure, the United States and Russia remain adversaries on multiple fronts, and Biden made it clear to Putin that, unlike Trump, he would not react to Russian transgressions by looking the other way.
But it would lack strategic sense to treat Russia solely as an adversary, so Biden is attempting to play a complicated balancing act. While the United States characterizes Russia and China as the spearheads of an authoritarian bloc (in line with the NATO communiqué), Biden is exploring the possibility of reaching some basic understandings with Putin and perhaps even driving a wedge between Moscow and Beijing.
Overall, Biden's first international trip deserves high marks for both its planning and execution. The U.S. president succeeded in setting a radically different profile than his predecessor, rebuilding bridges with his European allies and demonstrating that his country will behave as a responsible actor within the multilateral system — precisely what the U.S. has long been demanding of China.
However, disagreements between democratic countries will not disappear overnight, nor will the West regain the weight it once had on the global stage. The United States is back, and there are plenty of reasons to celebrate. But like it or not, the unipolar world it used to lead has been consigned to the past.
Previous article![]( "American Forces in Iraq: When Will It End?")
Next article![]( "Forget ‘Destined for War’; Embrace ‘Inevitable Peace’")
