Despite his recent memory lapses and malapropisms, Joe Biden has a store of knowledge about foreign policy and foreign leaders no other senior Democrat can match.
Indeed, in the final days as he battled to retain his candidacy, his unparalleled experience was increasingly cited by his supporters as a reason in perilous times not to force him out. He himself has said he knows more about foreign policy than Henry Kissinger, and accolades to his qualities given by world leaders at the recent Nato summit in Washington were cited by the Biden team as a sign that Americans could not afford to lose him.
European leaders had cherished his succession to the presidency in 2021 after Donald Trump, finding relief and truth in his promise the US was back. Without his careful consultations and weighing of the options, it is unlikely the west would have been able to respond as decisively as it did initially in terms of sanctions on Russia and military support to Ukraine after Vladimir Putin’s invasion. But now there may be a long period as a lame duck president in which all his decisions are set against his cognitive ability.
But diplomats had sensed his star had anyway been waning, including his ability to articulate to Americans the need to defend Ukraine. The sense he is not prosecuting foreign policy arguments domestically with sufficient vigour has become a mainstay of European diplomatic discourse. His performance at the recent G7 summit in Italy raised eyebrows, and gradually some of his instincts have come to be seen as a product of a specific bygone era. He has become entrapped as well as freed by his knowledge and depth of experience.
Biden took office after more than 30 years on the Senate foreign relations committee. By the time he took on the presidency he had a list of overseas contacts unmatched by any predecessor since George HW Bush, also a former two-term vice-president who spearheaded White House diplomatic assignments in the role. Biden has visited Ukraine many times, met Xi Jinping in Beijing, and looked into the eyes of Putin and declared he is a man without a soul. He has known Benjamin Netanyahu for 40 years.
His experience also led him to believe in the power of personal rapport in foreign policy. His national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, once said: “He frequently says all foreign policy is personal, that personal relationships with leaders really matter.”
That experience has led to a willingness sometimes to overrule military commanders, diplomatic experts and others. “He’s got fluency on foreign policy that gives him confidence – he knows he can win the argument,” said Senator Chris Murphy, adding: “It allows him to act with boldness and confidence.” Sometimes that boldness led to mistakes, including his handling of the US departure from Afghanistan and a reluctance to supply Ukraine with equipment quickly.
So Kamala Harris, if she is elected, will be a downgrade in terms of knowledge of foreign affairs and foreign leaders, even after what would be an intensive autumn apprenticeship. That does not mean she is a novice. She has been slowly building her foreign policy portfolio, speaking in Britain at an AI conference organised by Rishi Sunak. She attended the 2023 Asean summit in Biden’s stead.
For three years in succession she led the US delegation to the Munich Security Conference, in what was clearly an attempt to broaden her knowledge and introduce her to Europe. At the last conference she had to respond to the news of the death of Alexei Navalny, and sent a message back home that “isolation is not insulation”.
It was a message of continuity with Biden that she will have to deploy in the months ahead with greater force than the president can now muster.
Several ex-Biden staffers have said they are optimistic that she can chart her own policy on Gaza, and that the president is caught in a time warp about an Israeli polity that no longer exists. In early March, Harris made a speech calling for a six-week “temporary ceasefire” long before Biden publicly said so.
Harris has also expressed sympathy for pro-Palestine student protesters, saying they were “showing exactly what the human emotion should be, as a response to Gaza”, though she added she did not “wholesale endorse their points”. She has said clearly that too many Palestinians have been killed, and shown herself more sensitive to the protests in swing states. The chance for a mild reset exists that would take her closer to the European mainstream position on the Gaza conflict.
Her chief foreign policy adviser, Philip Gordon, is a Washington veteran who has specialised in both Middle Eastern and European politics, and throughout has been sceptical of US efforts to secure regime change in the Middle East or impose democracy in countries such as Saudi Arabia. Unusually, his PhD was in French Gaullist security policy, and he initially joined the Obama administration as assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs before moving to the national security council staff specialising in the Middle East. He differed from his boss in believing limited strikes against Syria after its use of chemical weapons would be effective and justified, and was a strong supporter of the nuclear agreement with Iran.
Given the learning curve Harris is on, Gordon becomes the man on whom she will have to rely as the Biden and Harris teams try to find a way to work alongside one another.
