Matt Duss on Biden's State of the Union & the Risks of an Anti-China Consensus in Washington

this is democracy Now democraticnow.org The War and Peace report I'm Amy Goodman yes, this is democracy Now let's move on to the topic of foreign policy as we continue to discuss President Biden's State of the Union While most of the speech focused on politics internal Biden also talked about China before I took office, the story was about how the People's Republic of China was increasing its power and the United States is failing in the world. We no longer make it clear and I had my personal conversation, which has been many with President XI that we seek competition, not conflict, but I will not apologize because we are investing and to make the United States stronger, investing in American innovation and industry will define the future that China intends to dominate by investing in our alliances and working with our allies to protect advanced technologies from being used against us modernize our military to safeguard stability and determine to deter aggression today we are in the strongest position in decades to compete with China or anywhere else in the world anywhere else in the world.

I'm engaged. work with China where we can advance American interests and benefit the world, but let's make no mistake about it, as we made clear last week, if China threatens our sovereignty, we will act to protect our country and we did, let's be clear when the competition we must unite. All of us, this happens all over the world, but in the last two years democracies have become stronger and not weaker, autocracy has been weakened, not strengthened, even more so. Joining us in Washington DC is Matt Dust, visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, former foreign policymaker. advisor to Sen.

Bernie Sanders his recent co-authored article on the new Republic has spearheaded better Biden doctrine his response to President Biden's State of the Union and, most importantly, U.S. foreign policy right now Matt, thanks for invite me I mean, I think what's notable about the speech and the foreign policy section was how little the president talked about foreign policy last night. This was a speech. I think it sounded like a number of progressive left themes regarding corporate power regarding protecting Social Security Medicare creating jobs investing in infrastructure going after Big Pharma um but the foreign policy section was very, very thin I think he spoke of China talked about Russia and Ukraine talked about climate change um and some broader issues about supporting democracy around the world, um, but you know, the small amount of foreign policy talk that he did last night I think reflects the administration's broader approach to foreign policy, which is that they want to spend as little time talking as possible. and discuss foreign policy, as necessary and I think maybe it makes some political sense.

There are other things on the minds of the American people, but in fact there are really important issues around the world that we need to address and need to address. to debate um and you know, the president needs to get involved in these issues more than what we saw last night. I think he talked about competition, not confrontation with China, but in fact, there are more US military bases in the Philippines now. of encircling China, can you talk about what Chinese policy should be and what it is now with Blinken canceling his visit to Beijing? Some said that times like this have increased tension, that is exactly when a summit should be held.

Yes, of course, in my opinion, and me. said this I think the decision to cancel the Secretary of State's trip was a mistake I think it fueled the overreaction around the spy balloon that the president didn't mention last night he of course mentioned China he didn't mention the balloon despite Washington After Having spent the previous few days freaking out about it, you know, I think the administration's response to the balloon was actually quite correct, measured and firm, but not over the top, but like I said, I think the decision to cancel the trip was the wrong one. . because, as you pointed out, these are precisely the times when we should be talking to the US and China should be talking, if the president said yes, we should know that competition with China is something that should unify us and Me worrying because yes, there are elements of China policy that are a challenge to the United States and that are of great concern both internally and externally, there is no doubt about that, but I think that this idea of ​​​​trying to create political unity around competition or confrontation with China or any external threat has a very bad history, we only need to look at the last 20 years of the US global war on terrorism to see that efforts to build a political

consensus

around external threats have enormously devastating consequences not only for our politics but for our politics and on that I would also like to point out something that the president also did not talk about: the global war on terrorism that is ongoing despite the president's

state

ment at the United Nations in 2021 that after the withdrawal from Afghanistan that the United States is no longer at war.

That is false. There are still thousands of U.S. troops deployed to countries around the world under the authorization that was passed immediately after the 9/11 attacks. We have troops increasingly involved in Africa and Somalia, Kenya, Niger and other countries, and the president's failure to acknowledge that is simply, I think you know, playing a role in hiding these conflicts and this ongoing war on terrorism from the people. American and I think that is not appropriate in a democracy we need to recognize that this war is still ongoing. I want to go to part of President Biden's State of the Union where he talked about Ukraine and a test for the ages, test for America, we test for the world. for the most basic principles we defend sovereignty we defend the right of people to live free of tyranny we will defend the defense of democracy because that defense

matt

ers to us because it maintains peace and prevents open season and it would be aggressive and threatening our prosperity a year later we know the answer yes, we would and we did, we did.

President Biden will be in Poland on February 24, it is not clear if he will go to Ukraine or if Zelensky will join him in Poland, of course, right next to Ukraine. and Zielinski today is on his second international trip, he is in the United Kingdom and will address parliament, of course, asking for more weapons. Matt gives his assessment of US policy regarding Ukraine. I think he's actually the version of the president. there are clues with the facts, I think you know, I think the administration, as my colleague Stephen and I wrote in the article that you referenced, the way the president has helped manage alliances and partnerships in response to the invasion from Russia last February, I think it's been impressive um I think it shows a way of practicing American leadership that forges

consensus

and then mobilizes that consensus um I mean the war is obviously devastating it's ongoing we would like to see the war end as soon as possible, but I think being realistic about knowing when that is possible um is part of the challenge that we face right now I think Putin has given no evidence that he is interested in a viable resolution to this conflict I think he, the The Russians and the Ukrainians at this point both seem to believe that they can continue to achieve their objectives through military means, so for the moment I think the administration's theory of the case is sound, which is that they will continue to support the defense of Ukraine to create the best possible moment or the best moment. possible environment for negotiations when that is possible do you see parallels with the pre-invasion period, that is, the period before the invasion of Iran, the invasion of Ukraine by Russia?

If you had known the United States with NATO pushing NATO to be bigger and then with China, are you seeing a parallel situation where they are increasing their US military bases? Biden is doing this and putting pressure on China. No, I think we've done it again. I think those are all very fair points that we should understand. You already know China's perspective. We must also understand the perspective of China's neighbors um many of whom are close partners and allies of the United States and who are very concerned because they are democratic countries um who have their own concerns um with China's policies these are independent actors so own right um so we We shouldn't treat this as simply a US or China situation in the same way that we shouldn't treat the Ukraine war as simply a US and Russia situation.

That said, I think the president struck the right note about China, which is at least in terms of seeking cooperation where we can and not characterizing this relationship solely as conflict, although I admit that some of the steps that the United States has been taking and again Stephen and I referenced this in our article they are putting the United States on You know, it's a really worrying path that could very likely lead to future conflict. We want to thank you Matt for joining us. Matt Dust, visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, former foreign policy advisor to Senator Bernie Sanders, will link to his new article you wrote with Stephen Wertheim A Better Biden Doctrine on democracynow.org