Biden tests US relations with Russia, China

on

U.S. relations with its two biggest geo-political rivals are facing severe tests as President Joe Biden tries to assert America’s place in the world and distinguish himself from his predecessor.

Airing myriad complaints, the Biden administration took an extraordinarily tough line with China and Russia this past week. Public spats between the countries erupted as Biden characterized Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “killer” and his top national security aides excoriated China for a litany of issues.

Moscow and Beijing both fired back, setting the stage for months, if not more, of escalating tensions that are unlikely to be resolved without intense discussions at the leadership level and major concessions from all sides.

 

Biden himself kicked off the latest round of recrimination in a television interview in which he sought to draw clear differences between his Russia policies and those of former President Donald Trump. who was accused of being soft on Putin. Just 24 hours later, Biden’s top diplomat and national security adviser blasted Chinese officials in face-to-face talks. 

Although Biden’s strong comments about Putin reflected a shift from Trump’s often conciliatory approach to the Kremlin, the harsh criticism directed at China by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and national security adviser Jake Sullivan in many ways mirrored the previous administration’s hard line toward Beijing.

The contrasting styles suggested that Biden is intent on reversing years of perceived U.S. weakness toward Russia while rejecting Trump’s 2020 campaign allegations that he’s not tough enough on China.

In taking a strong line on Russia, Biden has said the days of the U.S. “rolling over” to Putin are done. And, in the interview with ABC broadcast on Wednesday, Biden replied “I do” when asked if he thought Putin was a “killer.” Russia responded by recalling its ambassador in Washington for consultations.

Putin then shot back by pointing to the U.S. history of slavery, the slaughter of Native Americans and the atomic bombing of Japan in World War II in an “it-takes-one-to-know-one” response.

TALKING TOUGH WITH CHINA

As that was unfolding, on Thursday in Alaska, China’s top two diplomats reacted in similar fashion to criticism from Blinken and Sullivan about Beijing’s human rights record in the western Xinjiang region and Tibet and its aggressive actions in Hong Kong, Taiwan and the South China Sea.

Communist Party foreign policy chief Yang Jiechi and Foreign Minister Wang Yi accused the U.S. of hypocrisy for condemning China while at the same time grappling with its own internal issues, including violence against Asian Americans and other people of color and political unrest following the 2020 presidential election.

Blinken and Sullivan took umbrage at those comments and replied that the U.S. was not perfect but sought to openly and honestly address such matters. Sullivan said Americans’ willingness to confront their shortcomings was the “secret sauce” of U.S. success.

And, they sought to reframe U.S.-China relations in the context of the Biden administration’s resolve to correct those issues, strengthen the U.S. economy and improve ties with democratic allies in Asia such as Australia, Japan and South Korea.

Blinken, having just finished a trip to Japan and South Korea with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, made clear to the Chinese that the U.S. is aligned with its allies.

“I have to tell you, what I’m hearing is very different from what you described,” he told Wang and Yang. “I’m hearing deep satisfaction that the United States is back, that we’re re-engaged with our allies and partners. I’m also hearing deep concern about some of the actions your government has taken.”

Blinken appears to have impressed his boss. “I’m very proud of the secretary of state,” Biden said after the testy talks in Anchorage.

A similar effort with allies is underway in Europe with respect to Russia.

Blinken will leave Monday for Brussels for talks with NATO and European Union officials designed to repair strains caused by Trump’s largely transactional diplomacy. Trump’s bluster, threats of trade wars and intense demands that Europe pay more for its defense angered many, particularly in the continent’s two major powers: France and Germany.


Discover more from Current Ph

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

LEAVE A REPLY

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

MUST READ

Defunding Rail Maintenance: Keeping Today’s Trains Alive for Tomorrow’s...

One Metro Manila line still runs cars that first carried passengers in December 1999, nearly 27 years ago (DOTr, 1999). At rush hour, many...

MAS PINABILIS NA ANG PAGBIYAHE SA VICTORY LINER!

MAS PINABILIS NA ANG PAGBIYAHE SA VICTORY LINER! Mas madali at mas convenient na ang pagkuha ng bus tickets! Alamin kung paano gagawing mas mabilis at...

MC Taxi Riders Appeal to LTFRB amidst Overboarding Issue

MANILA, Philippines, October 22, 2026 — Motorcycle taxi riders are calling on the Marcos administration and transport regulatory bodies to provide those operating beyond...

China’s Wolf Warriors are Back. Beijing Should Recall Its...

China's ambassador to the Philippines has accomplished in a few sentences what years of Chinese public diplomacy have struggled to prevent: He has reinforced the perception that Beijing regards its smaller neighbors not as sovereign equals, but as countries expected to accommodate its growing military and economic power.

Beyond the 2027 Invasion Timeline: Diplomatic Isolation, Ontological Security,...

This paper challenges military-centered assessments of a possible People's Republic of China (PRC) operation against Taiwan by 2027, arguing that Beijing's calculations may depend not only on military readiness and economic costs but also on diplomatic recognition, international legitimacy, and political identity. It advances a conditional framework integrating ontological security theory, the Chinese sociological concept of mianzi (face), and recognition politics. The paper proposes that Taiwan's declining diplomatic recognition could strengthen Beijing's sovereignty narrative, create a perceived loss of face for Taiwan's governing authorities, and alter the political conditions under which Beijing considers coercive or military unification. Drawing on official PRC statements, U.S. security assessments, and international relations scholarship, the analysis develops three propositions concerning recognition, status vulnerability, and coercive decision-making. It argues that complete diplomatic isolation could represent a significant political threshold without necessarily eliminating Taiwan's international relationships or legitimizing the use of force. The paper contributes to cross-strait security studies by identifying diplomatic recognition as a potentially important condition that shapes Beijing's assessment of the political feasibility and costs of unification, beyond conventional materialist explanations.

Discover more from Current Ph

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading