Hello, and welcome to World Today, I'm Zhang Yang.
U .S. President Joe Biden has defended his foreign policy record as he prepares to leave the White House.
In a farewell address to the nation on Wednesday, he started by hailing a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas.
Biden also said his administration strengthened NATO and that the U .S.
has pulled ahead in its competition with China.
This echoed his earlier address on foreign policy where he claimed his leaving the next administration a country in a far stronger position than the one he inherited.
However, President -elect Donald Trump has criticized the foreign policy record of Joe Biden, calling it a new low in U .S history.
People talked about their foreign policy, they talked about the inflation, they talked about all the things that happened.
We wouldn't have had inflation, we wouldn't have had any wars, you wouldn't have had Russia, Ukraine.
campaign. We shouldn't have ever had the Israel.
Israel would not have been attacked by Iran." Has Joe Biden truly restored America's global leadership, or has he created more problems than he resolved?
How will history judge his foreign policy legacy?
Joining our discussion today, Dr. Wang Jin, Associate Professor at Northwest University in Xi 'an, China.
Harvey Zodden, former Vice President of ABC -TV Network and senior fellow of the Center for China and Globalization, Edward Lehman, Legal Affairs Commentator, and Managing Director of Lehman Lee and Hsi Law Firm.
Gentlemen, welcome to our show.
Great to be here. Harvey, let me start with you.
Biden has argued that his administration leaves the U .S.
in a stronger position globally, citing strengthened alliances and weaker adversaries.
Do you agree with his assessment of US foreign policy?
I agree to a degree, but it's really impossible to answer until we see what Trump does.
A lot of what Biden did was to undo the damage of Trump won.
We have to await the outcome of Trump too.
Or perhaps Trump succeeded quite soon by JD Vance.
So I guess you could say on the positive side, Biden has revitalized NATO, leading to an increased defense spending, and to the addition of Finland and Sweden.
Before Biden became president, only nine NATO allies were meeting the 2 % GDP defense spending target.
Now, it's 23 countries that are meeting it.
But in fairness to Trump, Trump's threats before he left office to pull out of NATO played a major part in the increase.
And Biden, he's also strengthened Indo -Pacific partnerships with the new US Japan, South Korea Triad reinforcing August and the quad.
And Biden has already re -engaged with a traditional ally something Trump may undo starting next week.
But on the other hand, if anything Biden has strengthened China in the sense that all this small -yard high -fence malarkey, as Biden would say, which he made into Big Yard, Higher Fence has challenged China.
But net, net, it's made China double down on its high quality tech, new productive forces to start to catch up with the US in some areas like chips.
And in the face of adversity has widened its lead in EVs, renewable energy and the like.
As President Nixon like to say, when the going gets tough, the tough gets going.
At the same time on the side, BRICS is much stronger than when Biden was sworn in.
I'm sure it pained Biden when President Xi and Prime Minister Modi began to patch up their fraught relationship last year at the BRICS summit in Kazan.
So it's a multisided story.
Yes, so, Edward, what do you think, how successful do you think Biden has been in restoring America's leadership role globally, because although he said he strengthened NATO, but as Harvey mentioned, we've also seen the rise of the global south, the stronger BRICS.
So what's your thought?
Yeah, I mean, there's no doubt that Mr. Biden will go down as some kind of superlative in American history.
I think time will tell what that will be.
if you listen to his farewell address, like I did, like you said, Harvey was mentioning, the NATO situation seems to be stronger.
He's undone and undid on the first day that he came to office.
Some of the stuff that was happening in Trump won, is reiterating that the Paris Climate Agreement was reinstated, and he was dealing with things like the COVID pandemic which was not easy.
Certainly it's kind of a second time in history that something like that's happened.
It's been a hundred years since that, but his address also talked about the diminished global standing of certain adversaries that happened during his time.
So, he didn't speak about BRICS.
He was supportive certainly of the Ukraine and against Mr. Putin, And, and so again, we'll see what time we'll tell.
With Mr. Carter passing away, you know, there's been a resurgence as to what happened during his presidency, which was some 50, you know, years ago or 45 years ago, where it, when it ended, and I think that it'll, it'll take some time to understand what the impact of Mr. Biden was on the United States and on the world stage.
but like everyone notices that I think it's on the 20th that Mr. Trump will come into play, and it'll be certainly a sharp contrast on that very first day, just like it was when Mr. Biden took the podium and took the position.
So it's it's hard to say.
The United States is taking a bit of a battering, it has done so in its long history and short long history I guess, no, but you know We'll see where we go from there.
So, okay. Wanyin, do you also see a sharp contrast because we know that Biden has often criticized Trump's America first approach.
He emphasized multilateralism and the importance of working with allies.
However, he has also continued many of the protectionist policies that were kind of central to Trump's foreign policy, including the efforts to decouple from China in areas like trade and technology.
So, do you think Biden's approach truly represents a departure from Trump's policies or is it simply a continuation with a different rhetorical frame?
I think it's both kind of conflicting as well as continuing efforts between Joe Biden and Donald Trump and administration because we actually in the politics, everybody will blame each other because they come from different parties, they come from the different camps and they actually to some extent they are competitors.
So that's why that Joe Biden's policy will be criticized strongly by Donald Trump.
And also, for example, if we look at very particular incidents that a Joe Biden administration in 2021, United States withdrawn from Afghanistan, and at the very first time, Donald Trump criticized that said that okay now it's a very strong mistake that if I was there I would not do this but the problem is that Joe Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan was based upon the deal that was reached between the United States and the Taliban in Doha at the Donald Trump administration.
So this is why i mean it's very interesting that Donald Trump made the decision made the deal and what is implemented by Joe Biden but then Joe Biden was criticized by Joe Biden, by Donald Trump.
So that is why I mean it's that when we talk about politics in reality that of course everybody blames each other, they say okay they are a godfire, they are do better the same things because they are facing a very similar and to some circumstances very even very same the problem.
So that's why their measures and their strategies look very alike each other.
And it's very different, it's difficult for them to do something totally different than the predecessors, all successors.
So that's why I think maybe Donald Trump will continue to criticize Joe Biden after Joe Biden left the White House, or do maybe in the future than some other politician would criticize Donald Trump, maybe after January the 20th.
But the reality is that they actually facing the same word and some of the strategies will continue, some policy will continue and they are maybe doing the right thing under this very some circumstances.
Okay. And Dr. Wang, let's focus on the China policy, because Biden mentioned that his administration has strengthened traditional alliance and forced new partnerships in the Asia Pacific as part of its strategy to counter China.
How do you think his policy has really affected China's position in the region?
And do you China has somehow adapted to its own foreign policy in response?
So I think it's a very important question, because that's the thing that China is now facing.
Actually, let's be frank.
During the past, or eight years, or past seven years after the Donald Trump administration started, China is feeling more and more pressure from the United States, and more and more pressure from the surrounding countries under the United States pressure.
So actually the geopolitical surroundings for China, in the East Asia and the South Asia, as well as in the Southeast Asia now, become different with 10 or 80 years ago.
So that's why China feel the pressure.
On the other hand, from the United States perspective, they are starting the campaigns resistance, ranging from ideological to the realistic fields, not only about politically but also something like economically, particularly over, for example, the cutting -edge chips, the high technologies and other kind of the technologies and hope to establish the kind of the war that's separating China and the world and the decoupled China from the rest of the world.
So that is why I think China is facing the pressure.
But this is saying I don't think will benefit the United States themselves and also will not benefit other Asian countries as well, the rest of the world, because everybody in this world knows that the cooperation is the key to the future.
And to isolate someone or to totally cutting the world into different pieces will finally lead the world to a more dangerous and more unstable scenario that finally harms everybody.
think China really know that and China hope still meet hopes to maintain the very positive relations with United States and the hope to maintain the more open and more positive ties with the world.
So that's why I think in the future maybe more things could be done.
I mean more dialogues should be managed to organize and more channels will be opened.
So that's why I, in my personal point of view, that there were a lot of divisions, of course there were a lot of dangerous factors of arrivals in the world, not only between the United States and China, but also between the other countries with the United States, other country with China.
But then dialogue maintains, communication channel maintains, the very positive beliefs harbored, everything will be fine, and we will wait and see.
Okay, so, Harvey, Biden has actually made efforts to decouple from China in many strategic sectors, such as through the CHPS and Science Act.
What impact do you think this has had on China's economic position in the global tech market?
I think you need to keep in mind that CHPS, in the CHPS Act, refers to creating helpful incentives to produce semiconductors.
It and the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act have contributed to the ongoing Sino -US decoupling along with the increasingly draconian regulations that actually prevent China from advancing the most advanced computer chips from the US and other Western countries.
These efforts, to keep China down technologically, have had contradictory results.
They were intended, yes, to keep China down and to prevent the competition from China with the U .S.
But they made it much more difficult for China to develop in the tech area, for sure.
were, they almost succeeded in killing innovative Chinese companies like Huawei, because Biden thought that Huawei would roll over and play dead because they were restricted to slower, less efficient, less competitive domestic products.
But Huawei did more with less, and Huawei resurrected itself with advanced products in the domestic and global marketplace.
At the same time, the U .S.
restrictions have spurred China on to innovate new and better chips and products.
So again, when the going gets tough, the tough get going.
So Edward, do you think China's economy has kind of been forced to adapt to the new challenges?
And do you believe China's economic power remains resilient in the face of the U .S.
pressures? Yeah, no doubt.
I mean, China's always been resilient.
China always has an encouraging and positive approach towards dealing with the problems that they have on their table internationally and domestically, and they will continue to do so.
I mean, I was surprised that he did not roll back all of the issues under executive order that happened with Mr. Trump.
I was very surprised that his secretary of state's approach towards China.
It seemed to be even though Biden was, on the one hand, rhetorically distancing himself from Trump's America first approach, his administration's actions, particularly in relation to China, suggest kind of a continuity as you had suggested before at Harvey and the professor had mentioned as well, albeit framed in a more traditional a multilateral kind of foreign policy approach, but I think it did cause problems.
I think China has done its best to overcome and the businesses within China have done their best to overcome those kind of issues.
Yeah, but Edward also Biden singled out artificial intelligence as an area where the US must maintain leadership, especially given China's growing investment in AI.
And he even proposed new restrictions in its final days as the president that would limit the export of advanced computer chips used to develop AI.
I mean, how do you look at this development?
Well, I think everybody doesn't know what to do about AI.
I mean, and so as a result, there's this reactionary situation to limit it.
And then there's these discussions, and I don't think any of us really know fully how much it's going to impact our daily life, whether that's in the United States or elsewhere.
Yeah, again, I don't think that that seems like kind of an America first approach.
I mean, Mr. Biden has taken internationally with regards to China and limiting those things to the best of my knowledge that that was not in place under the Trump administration.
I mean, Harvey can correct me if I'm wrong.
So, but times have moved on, certainly, And there were other distractions during the time, you know, when Mr. Trump was in office and then when, when Mr. Biden came to office and AI has grown as a, you know, as a super power.
Um, and I think everybody is sort of warning about what the future of AI is.
So I think, um, you know, I think it's under the impact on the, on China's tech industry in the supply chain disruption is, uh, is, is extraordinary.
about what's happened, because it incentivizes domestic semiconductor manufacturers in the U .S., and it obviously hinders what can happen.
There's a technological lag with not having the U .S.
semiconductor companies like Nevada, Intel, and TSMC selling high end chips to China.
So that forces Chinese companies to turn to its domestic alternatives, which you know, may or may not match the performance and innovation of these western ships.
And so, you know, I think, you know, China is resilient, China has been able to, you know, make do and make the best out of a tough situation.
And I think part of it is being able to innovate, part of it is to be able to pivot and be self -sufficient with these things, and that's what they're being forced to do.
But I also think that China is doubling down on tech talent in R &D.
I think that the tech talent that is Chinese or that overseas Chinese has not been as welcome as it could be under both administrations frankly, and that a lot of that tech talent that the Chinese who had educated of themselves brought in the United States, I think that they're coming back to China, which is going to be a benefit net benefit for China.
And I think that that will be beneficial to try to build its own market up here.
So there's, you know, and I certainly think that there needs to be a diversification of technology markets, not only, you know, coming from the United States, but should be from other places as well, maybe from some of the BRICS nations perhaps.
But these are the kinds of considerations that has made it very challenging for China, but it's also a challenging time on how to deal and how to regulate AI, just in general.
I don't think we know yet the impact of the outcome of that.
Jiaoying, can I jump in on this for a second?
Sure. Okay. Well, I agree with what Ed said and I have a slightly different thing to add and that is that it's been estimated that the US has maybe a 6 to 18 month lead in AI over China and the US certainly wants to keep it that way and how by ever means possible, by hook or by crook.
But I think in the process the restrictions announced this week by the US, might hurt US chip makers, like Nvidia and AMD in terms of revenue, profits, global market share.
And moreover, I believe that Biden's latest rules could negatively affect 120 countries, including US allies like Switzerland, which is currently the global leader in innovation, in Israel, another innovator.
And even here in the EU, there's There's great concern about negative consequences from the latest proposed regulations.
It's clearly the case, I think, of the baby being thrown out with the bathwater in a rush to the exits in Biden's last few hours.
So, well, Dr. Wang, let me ask you.
Do you feel that Biden's narrative about U .S.-China competition kind of oversimplifies the complexity of global economics today, where cooperation and interdependence between the two powers could lead to a more balanced global economy?
Sure. Sure. That's also what I think that, actually, Biden or the United...
Not only Biden, I think maybe the upcoming Donald Trump also too simplifies the very complexity of the global economics as well as the global corporation, or the global relations.
Because to some extent from my point of view that I spoke during the past years with some of my United States colleagues and even the Western some of the Western colleagues that they believe in now that the world is now moving to towards two directions, one is China then the West.
So it's then the global world is, the global is now to the direction to into moving to the direction of the global competition between the two camps.
And that's an idea that, I don't think it's correct, given that we are living in, actually, the world that it's totally different or totally, totally different to the world that was happening in the Cold War.
Because actually, right now, the technology, communication technology, is much more advanced and the communication between the different countries, between the different peoples become more frequent.
The knowledge and the information transferred from the one part of the world to the other part of the world now become more and more frequent as we can see what is happening in the TikTok.
Also, what is happening in the recent days in China.
We call it the Small Red Book or the Little Red Book, another app in the cell phone in the more and more foreigners, now move the flooded into the app and facilitate the communication between Chinese and the foreigners, particularly between China's youth and United States' youth.
So, actually, what I mean here is that, like the economy, like today's economic development, the economic cooperation, because economic development is based upon the communications.
It's based upon the more and more frequent of the bilateral relations or multilateral relations not only between countries but also between societies, between groups, between people.
So that's why I think we cannot too simplify the complicity of the global economics.
And in the future, maybe the more complicating scenario will emerge.
And we cannot separate with each other, and more communication should be encouraged because this is an inevitable trend of this world.
and we cannot separate each other because this is the final destination that will be realized one day as economic and social development.
So like AI, like my just colleagues mentioned there are AI technologies as well as other chips cooperation.
I don't think it is a thing that could be stopped by the political efforts, but I think it finally will need or require the global cooperation that will help people to create more wealth and better of society than the better of living surroundings.
So that's why I think this is a global trend and it cannot be further simplified its complexities.
Thank you for being talking to Dr. Wang Xin, associate professor at Northwest University in Xi 'an, China.
Harvey Zhodun, former vice president of ABC -TV Network and senior fellow of The Center for China and globalization, Edward Li -men legal affairs commentator and managing director of the Li -men Li & Xu Law Firm.
Let's take a short break here.
Coming back, we'll continue our discussion.
Welcome back. You're listening to World Today.
I'm Zhang Ying, joined by Dr. Wang Jin, associate professor at Northwest University in Xi 'an, China.
Harvey Zodin, former vice president of ABC -TV network, and senior fellow of the Center for China and Globalization, Edward Lehman, legal affairs commentator and managing director of Lehman -Lee & Xi Law Firm.
Dr. Wang, let's move on to the Middle East, because Biden announced a ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas.
On the same day he delivered this farewell address and he held it as a major diplomatic victory for his administration but we know that Trump has also sought recognition for his role like his envoy is part of the process, right?
So in your opinion, how significant is this deal and who should take more credit for it?
We have to stress this due uncertainty, but then let's be frank, the deal itself is a very big success given that it's the very first time it's a very comprehensive deal that was reached between Israel and Hamas mediated by United States, mediated by Egypt, mediated Qatar, and other regional and international countries during the past nearly 15 months of very intensified conflicts between the two sides in the Gaza Strip in southern Israel that led to the deaths of more than 500 ,000 people civilians.
So that's why I think it is very, very major milestone.
The victory, political victory and also the very important significant events with a very strong influence to the region as well to this world.
I think that maybe the United States has already tried their efforts.
For example, at the very final conference that both Donald Trump and Joe Biden, the current president and upcoming president, they send their different representatives to the meeting and try to convince and persuade the different parties and give pressure to different parties to facilitate this deal.
So that's why I think both of them, Joe Biden and Donald Trump, should be praised for their efforts for the peace deal.
but the problem is that I think the United States is an external factor.
And the more important determining factor is dependent upon the decisions made by Hamas and by Israel.
Because their internal politics determines everything, determines whether the deal will be reached or whether the deal will be approved.
So the United States is an important influencing factor, it's very positive, it is very important.
But we cannot ignore the role of Hamas.
We cannot roll up the Israel for them for the serious success of the deal So that's why I think maybe we hope that the United States will do something more like that to facilitate Encourage peace trends in this region and to to encourage more dialogues in the communication with different conflicting paths That would lead to the most stable and most peaceful scenario in the Middle East Hmm.
Well, Harvey, actually Trump argued in a recent interview that despite Biden's claims of foreign policy successes, there aren't many things that perhaps shouldn't have happened in the first place.
He said that the Israel Hamas conflict shouldn't have happened.
The war in Ukraine shouldn't have happened.
Do you agree with his assertion that these conflicts are a result of Biden's foreign policy failures?
I believe that you have to take a bigger picture approach to this matter.
And when you make the picture a little bigger, that brings Trump one into view.
So I think there's kind of a joint responsibility here in many ways.
So, I disagree with Trump about the war in Israel, in Gaza.
It was definitely Netanyahu's failure.
He owns it. He had the intelligence from the United States and other countries about what Hamas was getting ready to do.
He chose to ignore it.
And who knows why he made that murderous decision?
I suppose that one reason was that the war was personally good for him and potentially kept him out of jail.
And if you want to talk about Ukraine and other important matter, Ukraine is a more difficult matter to analyze.
President Putin warned the West about NATO on Russia's borders.
But on the other hand, Ukraine is a sovereign country.
Maybe we can answer the question better next week and see if Trump himself is able to keep his campaign promise to stop the war, hopefully with a just outcome.
You can't just blame these things on Biden.
A lot of them were started or were policies of the Trump administration.
and Biden was more or less bound to some extent by them.
So I think Trump's charge against Biden is unfair politics.
Okay, so Edward would you agree with Harvey?
Because we know that Biden responds to the World Hamas conflict has been heavily criticized for enabling Israeli military actions, for now taking a strong stance on Palestinian rights.
How would you rate the Biden administration's role in facilitating peace or perpetuating conflict in the region?
Well, certainly, you know, with regards to who's taking, who should take credit for it or not.
I mean, it's the, it's an old adage.
It's something we've seen time and time again, which is, you know, failure as an orphan and and success, you know, as a lot of fathers.
and so in this particular case, I do think that there's success with regards to where this is going, which is important for relief for both sides, and no matter how we got here, I think it's a bit again, what was it, Mark Twain, maybe said that history doesn't repeat itself, but it rhymes, and so that the hostages are scheduled to come back on, I know that it's not been cleared, But I mean on or around that same time, that Mr. Trump is getting sworn in on the inauguration day.
This is very reminiscent.
I was at the inauguration of Mr. Reagan, after Mr. Carter had finished out his career, and the hostages, I was staying in the same hotel, same place, that the hostages came back from Iran on that same date.
It's not lost on me, that sort of connection between the two.
I do think that Mr. Trump probably, and Jared Kushner, his special envoy, doesn't get enough credit for what kind of went on in Israel.
I don't disagree with Harvey that it was probably better for Mr. Netanyahu to have this conflict happen if he had the information or not is another thing.
but it took attention away from his own domestic, you know, problems, but I - you know, for that, it's quite a big statement to say that he would have let that happen, and that would be some - I mean, due to trying to save his own career.
That's quite something with that.
But, you know, I think with Trump's legacy for laying some of the diplomatic groundwork in the and the engagement with the regional actors which influence the diplomatic environment and the ceasefire, you know, that's going to be happen and like the Professor said, it's not quite worked out.
And these things never are, I guess, until the, they actually happen.
So, and even Mr. Netanyahu has said the same thing.
I do think that this was shot before this, this ceasefire, and for some reason a number of times, but it wasn't able to be done.
So it's, you know, Mr. Biden and his team and Secretary of State Blinken, I mean, have certainly participated.
And I know that they've got two sets of actors, which is again, not dissimilar to the Carter administration and the Reagan administration with the return of the hostages.
Mr. Carter I think was a little reticent to take any credit and he was just a very modest person, but he was failing quite publicly and just sort of took it.
And that was been of a shame, but I think that he was genuinely concerned about what was happening.
We'll see what happens on foreign policy, and where Mr. Trump is going to go.
I do think that with regards to the Ukraine, as Harvey said, he's announced that this will get sorted out within 24 hours, or some kind of an announcement like that, Mr. Trump says a lot of things within the time that he is coming into office.
I think that with the Ukraine situation, A lot of folks have become weary and wary about the amount of money that's been going into that, and it's not completely clear.
There have been a lot of lives lost, and it's not clear how that's going to be resolved.
And I think that that sort of aches for some kind of nuanced approach.
Do I think that they should necessarily be able to join NATO?
So me personally, I don't think so.
I think it's difficult to have another NATO member, you know, that is connected or near to...
And I understand where Mr. Putin is coming from because it's sort of a slap in the face to him.
It would be like them setting up in Tijuana or something.
And it's probably too hyperbolic of an example, but it's close to anybody else.
I mean, Turkey's in NATO, for goodness sakes.
So I think that this is something that I think was in play about expanding NATO going back to the 80s or after, a little bit after.
So this has been quite some time in the making.
And I think that there's neocons that have been pushing this for quite some time, which has made things difficult.
And those are coming from the Republican Party.
But the people from the there aren't, there's no blame to be put in the Democratic Party as well, and these are people who are supporting the industrial -military complex that are interested in helping those folks out more than helping out people that are functioning in the United States or abroad.
Yeah, I think Mr. Trump has his hands full.
I don't think that Mr. Biden was asleep at the switch necessarily.
But I think that there were a lot of other distractions, and we sort of went into a different direction with DEI.
We went in a different direction with a number of other things that have not proved to be terribly important.
But time will tell, whether that was in the corporate world or whether that was in the governmental world.
And so there's been a shift, and I think that people have grown weary of certainly what's happening in Ukraine and in Israel and some of these other places as well.
And I think that that'll be reflected from the executive office as to how to go forward.
OK, so Dr. Wong, let's look at the Afghanistan withdrawal because that remains one of the most contentious aspects of Biden's foreign policy legacy.
So how would you comment on his decision and the chaos during the evacuation?
I think that it's a historical event given that this is the very first time that the world with this United States very chaotic withdraw from the other countries at once was dominated by the United States, and so I remember very clearly that more than three years ago, three and a half years ago, when this withdraw started and when the political scenarios transformed.
In Afghanistan, many analysts compared that moment with the United States is very withdrawn from Saigon, from South Vietnam.
So that's why I think it's a very important historic moment, and I still remember that very clearly.
But everybody blamed the Joe Biden, in particular Donald Trump, say, OK, if I was a president, it will not happen.
It will not happen.
And he will do something more smartly and do something like that.
So this is a disagreement, so there were some kind of discussions, because on the one hand, they may believe that, OK, Donald Trump has to remember that he signed the deal.
He, under his administration, he reached the deal with Talibat in Doha.
Clinton. And so that's why Joe Biden was just doing to try to implement this deal, that was reached by Donald Trump.
But then there were some other ideas that might be OK that even Donald Trump signed the deal, but it should not be organized or implemented like that way.
that it should be implemented or organized much more dissent for or much more rationally rather than this very fault of chaos and the fault of humiliation.
So maybe it's not easy to charge or to comment on what kind of thing that Joe Biden could do better.
but actually this is something very historic moment.
I think even Donald Trump came back at a particular moment to become the president and to continue his policy in Afghanistan.
I don't think that United States will leave very well organized.
So I think this is just to reflect the situation in Afghanistan, this reflect United States global strategy reformation and this reflected the very historical moment for United States foreign policy.
So no matter who was the president is not important, but actually the the moment is that it represents the historical trend was something that matters should be remembered.
So Harvey, actually Biden kind of inherited a war that had become politically untenable.
So, in hindsight, was the chaotic withdrawal avoidable or was it an inevitable consequence of the war's prolonged nature?
Well, that's an interesting question, and maybe even historians aren't going to be able to answer it.
But you have to look at Afghanistan.
It's a very special country.
Many countries, including Britain, Russia, and others, have invaded it.
And so, consequently, historically, historians have dubbed Afghanistan as the graveyard of empires because as mighty countries tried to subdue Afghanistan, they were thwarted, and they had to leave at great cost.
So, I suspect that in this particular case that, as we've all discussed, Trump started the withdrawal.
It may have been done without much finesse.
But obviously he and his secretary of state felt that it was better to get out.
vote. But he left office, and this was all left to Biden.
Could Biden have done a better job?
Maybe, probably. But given the nature of Afghanistan, and the fact that aside from Kabul, the country is a lawless land, I'm not sure how much better Biden could have done.
I do think probably they could have planned better for this because they were fully aware of the Doha agreement.
But they didn't, they felt that they had to get out of there at the time that they got out.
It was messy. And it's certainly going to go down in history as a black mark on Biden's administration.
But I don't think he had that much wiggle room in that kind of country to produce a much better outcome.
We're still paying the price for the mistakes that Trump and Biden have made in Afghanistan.
And the last chapter of Afghanistan's recent history is not yet written.
There's still a lot of question marks there that are going to need to be answered.
Okay, well, Edward, let's look at the war in Ukraine, because Biden touted his administration's ability to rally the world in support of Ukraine.
And he also claimed that Russia is weaker today than it was four years ago.
But critics would argue that Washington's support for Ukraine has actually escalated the conflict and contributed to a prolonged war.
How would you assess the US role in the Russia -Ukraine conflict under the Biden administration?
Well, I mean, certainly the Biden administration has consistently framed the US role in the conflict as one of global leadership.
Portraying American support for the Ukraine is part of a broader effort to kind of defend American values and deter Russia and Mr. Putin.
It becomes certainly a rallying cause for a lot of folks.
And you saw it, you know, in university campuses, I mean, and you saw it in different places where there was this support.
And Mr. President Zielinski, he came to the United States and addressed the Congress.
So the extensive military aid, including weapons and trading and intelligence sharing, went on certainly during the administration, so it was fully supported.
That military assistance provided not only advanced weaponry, but included artillery and drones and defense systems and tanks.
And this assistance, uh, has significantly bolstered the Ukraine's defense capabilities.
Mr. Biden is, you know, in his administration carried on same as the Trump administration, but sanctions with Russia and, um, yeah, through the coordination of the European allies, it imposed these kind of sweeping sanctions on Russia aimed at weakening its economy and limiting its access to the critical technologies and financial resources.
But what we've seen is an escalation in the conflict, and it seems to be a prolonged war that the U .S.
support of the Ukraine has extended the war.
This is what some critics are saying, that both sides have become more entrenched in their positions, and it's very difficult to get out of it.
And Mr. Trump somehow, like it or not, just coming back into this situation might allow there to be some kind of settlement.
Not because Mr. Trump is so great, but because it's a new face and it's a new page that can be turned to be able to bring in some resolution where as we become so entrenched in our positions as Mr. Putin has in his, that it's difficult to to have an excuse or an out to be able to do that.
So you know, the role the US has played under the Biden administration is a complicated one.
It's marked by both strategic successes and challenges.
But on the one hand, the US has played a key role in enabling Ukraine to mount a strong defense.
At the same time, it's still ongoing, and we haven't been able to solve it.
And it could have turned into a nuclear war, which I mean, is not.
And so the credit to Mr. Biden for that, and Mr. Blinken for not allowing that to happen.
But I don't think it's a wittable war, and I think that I think they need an excuse to try to get out of it, both sides.
So maybe Mr. Trump will offer that solution, but I guess that's all we have now.
Well, Dr. Wong, Biden has consistently highlighted the strengthening of NATO as a key achievement of his administration.
How would he assess the current state of NATO?
has unity been solidified under Biden's leadership?
I think we can both witness the very sign of both weakening of unity as well, the strengthening of the unity.
Because when we are talking about the strengthening of the unity of the NATO members, we can see, for example, on many occasions that NATO should become more and more important platform form for the multilateral voices that spoke out by spoken out by the NATO members.
For example, they have very shared ideas over this, over Russia, and they had shared ideas over, for example to some extent over China.
For example, they define Russia as a very, very threat over China and the very competitor.
So that's why I think the NATO now become very coherent, is growing.
But on the other hand, we also witnessed the division, for example, whether what kind of measures should NATO take to Ukraine.
And whether they should continue to support or they should suspend the support and how much support they should give.
For example, if you look at some European countries, for example, the Germany, for example, other European countries, they hope to give more assistance to weaponry aid or even directly involved in the war against Russia in Ukraine.
But then if we look at the United States, there were some kind of divisions and some kind of discussions over whether or how or what kind of degree that the NATO role should be played in the Ukraine and Russia role.
So that's why I think the NATO itself is under the process of transformation and the roles of members of the NATO are also under process of transformation.
So we are actually witnessing the development of history and it might in the future, maybe not only the Joe Biden administration, but also in the future, next four or five years will be very critical for the development of NATO.
Well, Harvey, Biden touted his own efforts to combat climate change, including by rejoining in Paris climate agreement.
How would you evaluate his administration's actions in this regard?
Have they led to tangible results or are they more symbolic gestures?
Well, you know, you have to look at Biden kind of as a Trump Biden sandwich because there was Trump.
And he undid many of the good environmental actions of the United States under President Obama, which actually was achieved like the Paris Climate Accords with the leadership of China and and United States together.
And then Trump came, he undid a lot of the good things that were done by the US.
Biden came back and tried to reset the situation as much as he could by rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, by making a number of pledges to reduce greenhouse gases that passed the Inflation Reduction Act, which was the largest climate investment in US history.
It actually had provided almost $400 billion for clean energy and emissions reduction.
So I'd have to say that Biden tried his best to do what he could.
Part of this was in the larger picture of trying to keep China down or interact with China, but much of it was designed to try to improve our environment.
It's just been announced very recently that the world has shot through the 1 .5 degree above industrial levels set in the Paris climate agreement.
It's going to be very difficult to go below that.
We've seen these fires in Los Angeles recently and other catastrophic events around the world that are resulting from this.
I'm not very much looking forward to Trump's administration with respect to the environment.
Okay. Well, we are running out of time.
But one last question, Dr. Wong.
As the Biden administration prepares to hand over the ranks, how do you think history will judge his foreign policy?
I think the historian will judge that he's the very important leader in the United States history because on the one hand, we are witnessing more and more direct computation, direct rivalries in the United States' political scenarios no matter, ranging from the political presidential campaign to the different social developments?
We can witness more the more different dimensions of the United States and then actually these dimensions conflicting and the directly challenging each other.
So he is the president at a very critical moment and then on the other hand we when the Donald Trump administration took takes power maybe days later that Joe Biden's legacies will still work.
For example he continued the very policy of OK, we've been talking to Dr. Wang Jin, associate professor at Northwest University in Xi 'an, China.
Harvey Zodin, former vice president of ABC -TV Network and senior fellow of the Center for China and Globalization and Edward Leman, legal affairs commentator and managing director of Leman Lee & She Law Firm.
Thank you again for being with us and that's all the time we have for this edition of World Today.
To listen to this episode, again or to catch up on previous episodes, you can download our podcast by searching World Today, and for further discussion, please follow us on X, at CGTN radio.
I'm Zhao Ying, thank you so much for listening.
See you next time.
