Joe Biden is ending his term in the White House with a complex and mixed legacy. His presidency coincided with a period of serious global challenges, when Americans and the entire world expected decisive and large-scale action. However, the presidential response has often been cautious and too slow. Biden was accused of failing in Afghanistan, delaying aid to Ukraine and losing the pulse of his own nation.
At the same time, Biden’s presidency became a transition stage during which America’s new role on the world stage was formed. Biden laid the foundation for further changes that will determine the country’s future in the new geopolitical order. Now that this chapter is coming to an end and Trump will be inaugurated tonight, it’s worth taking stock of what Biden has accomplished in his five years as president.
Rebuilding international alliances in post-Trump America
As you know, Joe Biden has given priority to strengthening transatlantic relations, which have been severely tested during the presidency of Donald Trump. Biden has returned the US to a leading role in NATO, stressing the importance of the alliance’s collective security and unity amid threats from Russia. His administration not only increased defense funding in Europe, but also initiated new cooperation programs in cyber security, energy security and countering hybrid threats.
An important step was the strengthening of support for the countries of Eastern Europe, in particular Ukraine, Poland and the Baltic States, which were on the front lines of the Kremlin’s aggression. Biden also actively worked to strengthen unity in the European Union, supporting the idea of the transatlantic partnership as a foundation for global stability.
The U.S. diplomatic return to the Paris Climate Agreement and active participation in global forums such as the G7 and G20 underscored America’s commitment to working with partners to address shared challenges, including climate change, the pandemic, and geopolitical tensions. This restoration of confidence in the United States among allies has become one of the key aspects of Biden’s foreign policy strategy.
China’s technological confrontation
One of the key priorities of the Joe Biden administration’s foreign policy has been curbing the economic and geopolitical influence of China, which the United States views as its main strategic rival. Biden has identified China not only as a competitor, but also as a potential threat to the rules-based global order. His administration developed a multi-layered strategy that included both economic and military-diplomatic instruments.
In particular, Biden tightened restrictions on the export of advanced technologies to China, including semiconductors, as well as equipment for their production. This was done to hinder the development of China’s high-tech industry, especially in the fields of artificial intelligence, supercomputers and defense technology. The US has also persuaded allies, including Japan, South Korea and the Netherlands, to join the restrictions, creating a united front against China’s technological rise.
Along with the sanctions, the Biden administration has been actively promoting “Supply Chain Realignment,” in particular by moving the production of key goods to the US or other friendly countries. This was aimed at reducing dependence on Chinese goods and services in critical industries such as pharmaceuticals, electronics and renewable energy.
Indo-Pacific strategy
Biden has deployed significant diplomatic activity in the region, emphasizing the importance of alliances in containing China’s growing influence. He strengthened cooperation within such formats as QUAD (USA, Japan, Australia, India). This platform has become key to coordinating actions in the region, including security of sea lanes, countering Chinese expansion in the South China Sea and investment in infrastructure. It is also about AUKUS (USA, Great Britain, Australia) – the Agreement on the transfer of technology to Australia for the creation of nuclear submarines, which was perceived as a powerful signal to China about the readiness of the USA to support its allies.
Biden has continued a policy of military and diplomatic support for Taiwan, including the sale of advanced weapons, to bolster its defenses amid threats from Beijing. Biden established closer coordination with European allies, in particular within the framework of the G7, where investments in projects in developing countries were announced as an alternative to China’s Belt and Road initiative. His administration has also stepped up pressure on China on human rights issues, particularly in Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong, imposing sanctions on Chinese officials and companies involved in the crackdown.
At the same time, Biden faced challenges such as the limited willingness of allies to take radical economic measures against China, as well as domestic resistance in the United States to the potential rise in prices due to the new policy. The competition with China remains multifaceted and unpredictable, but Biden has taken significant steps to secure the US position in the global struggle for leadership in the 21st century.
Better than Trump, worse than Obama
AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll results show mixed perceptions of U.S. presidents as their terms end. Joe Biden received a significant level of negative evaluations, with 31% considering his presidency “terrible” and only 6% calling it “great.” Donald Trump also has fairly polar results, with the highest percentage of extreme negative ratings at 39%. At the same time, Barack Obama shows a more balanced perception: 23% consider his presidency “great” and only 14% call it “terrible”.
The poll shows that Obama’s legacy is less divisive in public opinion compared to Biden and Trump, whose ratings are more polarized.
Infographic: IA “FACT”
And on this infographic, we can see Biden’s gradual loss of his electoral positions.
Infographic: IA “FACT”
Afghanistan is Biden’s biggest failure
One of Joe Biden’s most controversial decisions was ending the 20-year war in Afghanistan, the longest armed conflict in US history. Biden has followed through on a campaign promise to withdraw the U.S. military, even in the face of significant criticism both domestically and internationally.
He argued for his decision that the US could not indefinitely maintain a conflict that has no military solution, and that it was time to focus on more pressing global challenges, such as competition with China and Russia. He also noted that the American presence in Afghanistan no longer served key national security interests.
The troop withdrawal, which began in April 2021, reached its peak in August of that year, when the Taliban quickly seized control of most areas, including the capital, Kabul. This came as a surprise to many analysts who believed that the Afghan government would be able to hold on longer. The fall of Kabul and the chaotic evacuation from the international airport of citizens of various categories (Americans, Afghans who cooperated with the United States, foreigners who were in Afghanistan) became one of the biggest crises of the Biden administration.
American forces in the last weeks of the operation organized a large-scale air evacuation of more than 120,000 people. However, scenes of panic at the Kabul airport, the death of 13 American soldiers during a terrorist attack and the abandonment of modern military equipment in the hands of the Taliban caused a wave of indignation.
Biden’s decision ended the US military presence in Afghanistan, but left many questions about the future of the region. The Taliban quickly established an authoritarian regime, depriving women and girls of basic rights and freedoms (including the right to education and work), and creating a humanitarian crisis.
For the United States, the withdrawal of troops was a reminder of the limitations of American military power in resolving complex political conflicts. It also prompted a review of the counter-terrorism strategy, emphasizing remote operations and global partnerships.
“I felt safe in Ukraine”
About this said Biden in his farewell speech, recalling the trip to Kyiv and the feeling of security despite the absence of American military forces in Ukraine.
We all know that the Biden Administration played a leading role in the international response to the Russian invasion, providing significant military, financial and humanitarian aid. This support allowed Ukraine to maintain its independence and restrain Russian aggression. However, Biden’s policy on this issue raises a number of objections. Biden is often blamed for the slowness of the initial reaction.
Although the US eventually became Ukraine’s main ally, in the first months of the war the Biden administration was criticized for caution and delays in supplying critical weapons, including air defense systems and tanks. This allowed Russia to gain a foothold in the captured territories and deepen the humanitarian crisis.
Our country’s support often looked reactive rather than strategic. Uncertainty about the ultimate goal of American policy, in particular, whether the United States should contribute only to the containment of Russia or to the complete victory of Ukraine, gave rise to doubts among allies and in Ukraine itself.
Large-scale financial support for Ukraine has increased tensions between Republicans and Democrats. Some Republicans accused Biden of spending huge resources on foreign conflict instead of solving domestic problems, such as economic difficulties and the migrant crisis.
Biden was criticized for his lack of diplomacy. Although Biden has unequivocally condemned Russia’s aggression, his administration has been criticized for not paying enough attention to finding diplomatic solutions. The idea of peace often seemed secondary, especially against the background of the emphasis on the supply of arms.
Support for Ukraine has become a key element of Biden’s legacy, but it has raised questions about effectiveness, long-term consequences and the balance between international commitments and domestic US challenges. According to a recent survey According to the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, 44% of Americans believe that President Joe Biden has had a negative impact on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and 23% believe that his impact has been neutral.
Does the Biden Legacy Have a Future?
Summing up the presidency of the 46th leader of the United States, British edition The Guardian notes that Biden’s late exit from the presidential race and subsequent defeat by Kamala Harris could seriously affect Biden’s legacy. Trump’s already declared return to “America First” policies could lead to the undoing of many of Biden’s initiatives, including his foreign policy achievements.
In the final stages of his political career, Biden, along with his national security team, actively defended the administration’s achievements. They focused on supporting Ukraine and urgently working on a peace agreement in Gaza. Biden emphasized that the United States “wins in global competition.” At the same time, his national security adviser, Jake Sullivan, said that over the past four years, America has become safer and the standard of living of citizens has improved.
