Search

Begin New Search Topic Joe Biden

1. ICC Investigation of Biden Administration Officials for Aiding Israeli War Crimes with Sarah Leah Whitson

Author:
Sarah Whitson and Sahar Aziz
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Video
Institution:
Center for Security, Race and Rights (CSRR), Rutgers University School of Law
Abstract:
In January of 2025, the human rights organization, Democracy in the Arab World Now (DAWN) (https://dawnmena.org/) , made a formal request with the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate former U.S. officials President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin for their accessorial roles in aiding and abetting, as well as intentionally contributing to, Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. With the support of ICC-registered lawyers and other war crimes experts, the submission details a pattern of deliberate and purposeful decisions by these officials to provide military, political, and public support to facilitate Israeli crimes in Gaza; this support included at least $17.9 billion of weapons transfers, intelligence sharing, targeting assistance, diplomatic protection, and official endorsement of Israeli crimes, despite knowledge of how such support had and would substantially enable grave abuses. Join host Sahar Aziz (https://saharazizlaw.com/) in conversation with Sarah Leah Whitson (https://dawnmena.org/experts/sarah-le...) , executive director of DAWN, about the key facts and law supporting the request for the International Criminal Court to investigate Biden officials for aiding and abetting Israeli War Crimes in Gaza.
Topic:
International Law, War Crimes, International Criminal Court (ICC), and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Israel, Palestine, Gaza, and United States of America

2. A "new Washington consensus"

Author:
Johannes Späth
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
This oiip trend report delves into the shift in the U.S. and the EU towards protectionist foreign trade policies, diverging from traditional free trade principles. Despite initial expectations of a return to free trade under President Joe Biden, the administration has maintained and expanded protectionist measures, emphasizing a labor-centered approach with import tariffs. This departure is situated within a broader global context, reflecting a growing alignment on economic security policies and strategic autonomy between the transatlantic partners. The phenomenon, termed "polite protectionism," reveals bipartisan support, influencing upcoming elections. The text elaborates on the evolving dynamics of global trade, highlighting the multifaceted motivations and consequences of the contemporary protectionist trend.
Topic:
Free Trade, Trade, Protectionism, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

3. Biden-Xi Woodside Summit and the Slow Rehabilitation of US-PRC Ties

Author:
Sourabh Gupta
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Comparative Connections
Institution:
Pacific Forum
Abstract:
The “guardrails” that President Biden and President Xi envisaged in Bali in November 2022 began to be emplaced at their November 2023 summit in Woodside, California. In-person, leader-led communication was deepened, reassurances exchanged, and practical—albeit modest—“deliverables” locked down on several fronts, including restarting mil-mil communications, cracking down on fentanyl precursors, addressing the national security harms of artificial intelligence (AI), and increased people-to-people exchanges. The establishment of numerous bilateral working groups will ensure an almost full plate of across-the-board consultations in 2024 as well as the means to troubleshoot irritants on short notice. As stabilizing as the Woodside summit was, it failed to deflect the US-PRC relationship from its larger overall trajectory of “selective decoupling” across a range of advanced technologies and frontier industries (microelectronics; quantum; AI; biomanufacturing; clean energy). Strategic trade controls and other competitive actions were doubled down upon. With a pivotal US presidential election looming in 2024, questions abound on the longer-term durability of a rehabilitating US-PRC relationship.
Topic:
Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, Trade, Xi Jinping, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
China, Asia, North America, and United States of America

4. The US Presidential Election 2024 – Two Outcomes, One Set of Challenges

Author:
Andrew A. Michta
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP)
Abstract:
Germany as Europe’s leading economy and the host country to the majority of US legacy military installations on the Continent, continues to lag behind ­NATO’s eastern flank allies when it comes to rearmament. Berlin’s long-term relations with Washington, as well as its overall ability to influence the direction of Europe’s evolution and the future of NATO will ultimately depend on how it responds to the challenge of rearmament.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Domestic Politics, Donald Trump, Presidential Elections, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Europe, Germany, North America, and United States of America

5. A Saudi Accord: Implications for Israel-Palestine Relations

Author:
Jeremy Pressman
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
The Biden administration and Israel’s Netanyahu government have both expressed support for the idea of a trilateral agreement in which Saudi Arabia would normalize diplomatic relations with Israel in exchange for the United States providing significant benefits to Saudi Arabia, such as security guarantees. A major selling point has been the claim that such an agreement could pave the way to settling the bitter Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has again erupted into a central threat to peace in the Middle East. However, given the experience of the Trump administration’s Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between four Arab states and Israel with the hope of moving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to a resolution, deep skepticism is warranted. The Abraham Accords did nothing to advance Palestinian-Israeli conflict resolution. Even before October 7, there was no hint of Israeli moderation in response to the accords. Since October 7, we have witnessed the largest Palestinian terrorist attack in Israeli history, followed by Israel’s destruction of Gaza and the killing of thousands of Palestinians in response. This conflict risks destabilizing the entire Middle East. This brief reviews the relevant history and incentives around the claimed relationship between Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution and Israeli-Arab normalization agreements. It concludes that a U.S.-brokered normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia would be counterproductive to Israeli-Palestinian peace. Indeed, recent history suggests that Saudi Arabia and the United States would be wasting potential leverage for influencing Israeli policy and that the regional approach unhelpfully diverts attention away from the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory. Rather than pursue the already failed approach of seeking peace through the normalization of relations between Israel and third-party countries, a better route would include using U.S. leverage to directly drive Israeli-Palestinian peace. To do this, the U.S. should: 1.) Use its leverage through military aid to secure a permanent ceasefire in Gaza as a matter of urgency; 2.) Refocus on the core issues of Israeli-Palestinian peace, such as occupation, and demand genuine, substantive concessions from the Israeli government; and 3.) Fully integrate the use of U.S. leverage, such as arms sales and military assistance, into the pursuit of these goals.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, National Security, Hegemony, Conflict, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, and Administration
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, United States of America, and UAE

6. Implications of a Security Pact with Saudi Arabia

Author:
Paul R. Pillar
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
The Biden administration is seeking a deal in which Saudi Arabia would extend full diplomatic recognition to Israel in exchange for the United States providing Saudi Arabia a security guarantee, assistance in developing a nuclear program, and more unrestricted arms sales. Such an arrangement would further enmesh the United States in Middle Eastern disputes and intensify regional divisions. It would work against a favorable pattern of regional states working out their differences when the United States leaves them on their own — illustrated by the Chinese-brokered détente between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Besides being an authoritarian state lacking shared values with the United States, Saudi Arabia under Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has aggressively pursued regional dominance, most notably with its highly destructive war in Yemen. A U.S. security guarantee could motivate MBS to engage in even riskier behavior and draw the United States into conflicts in which it has no stake, such as the sectarian dispute that had led Saudi Arabia to break relations with Iran. An expanded Saudi nuclear program would have a military as well as an energy dimension, with MBS having openly expressed interest in nuclear weapons. Granting the Saudi demand for help in enriching uranium would be a blow to the global nonproliferation regime as well as a reversal of longstanding U.S. policy. A race in nuclear capabilities between Iran and Saudi Arabia may result. Meeting MBS’ demands would not curb Saudi relations with China, which are rooted in strong economic and other interests. The United States could compete more effectively with China in the region not by taking on additional security commitments but instead by emulating the Chinese in engaging all regional states in the interest of reducing tensions. Normalization of diplomatic relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia would not be a peace agreement, given the already extensive security cooperation between them. Even the gift of normalization with Riyadh would be unlikely to soften Israel’s hard-line positions regarding the war in Gaza and the larger Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and instead would only reduce further Israeli motivation to resolve that conflict.
Topic:
Diplomacy, National Security, Conflict, Normalization, Joe Biden, and Military
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and United States of America

7. Paths to Crisis and Conflict Over Taiwan

Author:
Michael D. Swaine and James Park
Publication Date:
01-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
Abstract:
Taiwan is the most likely flashpoint for a U.S.–China conflict, unmatched in its combustible mix of conflicting interests, high stakes, and eroding trust and assurances. A full–blown war over Taiwan has become a startling possibility. Suspicion, threat inflation, zero–sum framing, and worst–casing are increasingly dominant factors in U.S.–China interactions over Taiwan, driven by preconceived ideas of the other’s intentions based on history and ideology, and domestic pressures in each country to prioritize military deterrence and even aggression. Amidst this emerging threat of direct conflict, numerous scholars, experts, and military strategists have focused on how to discourage China from invading Taiwan through military force alone — warfighting perspectives that typically share glaring and mutually reinforcing faults that, if overlooked, may only help to pave the path toward conflict. Analysts’ emphasis on military deterrence tends to obscure the utmost importance of political reassurances to avert conflict, particularly the United States reaffirming and recommitting to its original understanding of the One China Policy; this fixation on the military dimension feeds into the destabilization of the Taiwan issue, brought about by heightened suspicions of the other side’s intentions. Policymakers and pundits, in turn, tend to underestimate the possibility of inadvertent escalation, driven by an environment of distrust, pressure in Washington and Beijing to appear tough on the other, and a lack of comprehensive crisis management mechanisms. By examining the common analytical blindspots regarding a conflict over Taiwan, this report sheds new light on how the political and social dynamics fueling mutual hostility between Beijing and Washington could play a much more decisive role in a future crisis over Taiwan, rather than factors that earn far more attention, such as calculations about military capability and resolve. Averting a destructive crisis will require the United States and China to build off recent diplomatic progress to restore a deeper mutual understanding concerning Taiwan through policies and actions including: Mutual recognition of the interactive nature of the growing crisis over Taiwan, to which Beijing, Washington, and Taipei contribute. A clearer, more credible U.S. commitment to its successful, long–standing stance on Taiwan: the One China Policy and strategic ambiguity. Continued U.S. rejection of both unilateral Taiwan independence and any unambiguous commitment to Taiwan’s defense. A credible Chinese affirmation of its continued commitment to peaceful unification without any specific deadline. The development of a broad–based crisis communication mechanism that includes both military and civilian dialogue.
Topic:
Bilateral Relations, Crisis Management, Joe Biden, and Regional Security
Political Geography:
China, Taiwan, Asia, and United States of America

8. Centering Access, Quality, and Equity and Justice in a Beyond 30×30 Ocean Strategy

Author:
Angelo Villagomez, Jasmin Graham, and Alia Hidayat
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
The Biden administration should deliver an ocean conservation framework that includes new metrics for success.
Topic:
Climate Change, Environment, Oceans and Seas, Joe Biden, and Equity
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

9. 3 International Climate Priorities for 2024

Author:
Anne Christianson, Trevor Sutton, and Frances Colon
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for American Progress - CAP
Abstract:
As President Joe Biden’s first term draws to a close, his administration must deliver on three international climate policies to catalyze a 21st-century clean energy economy and avoid the worst impacts of climate change.
Topic:
Climate Change, Diplomacy, Economy, Inflation, Renewable Energy, Resilience, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Global Focus and United States of America

10. Israel-Palestine: Mapping Islamophobia on Facebook by U.S. Presidential Candidates

Author:
John L. Esposito, Archit Mehta, and Mobashra Tazamal
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
May 2024 marks over seven months of Israel’s bombardment and siege of the Gaza Strip, home to over two million Palestinians. UN experts and rights organizations have described Israel’s military actions in Gaza as a genocide, and the death toll now stands at over 36,000 Palestinians dead, with over 80,000 injured. Israel’s establishment in 1948 led to the forced expulsion of over 750,000 Palestinians from their homes and villages, an episode that Palestinians refer to as the Nakba (catastrophe), as well as numerous incidents of Israeli settlers engaging in massacres of Palestinians. Since its establishment, there have been a number of wars between Israel and Palestinians and the surrounding Arab countries, and following the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, Israel began its occupation of the West Bank (including East Jerusalem), and the Gaza Strip. This control of Palestinian territories involves “policies of land confiscation, illegal settlement, and dispossession,” rampant discrimination, and settler violence, all of which deprive Palestinians of their basic rights. Israel’s 50+ years of occupation of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank have resulted in what Amnesty International describes as “systematic human rights violations against Palestinians living there.” In a 2021 report, Human Rights Watch concluded that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory amounts “to the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution.” When it comes to the Gaza Strip, in 2007, Israel imposed a blockade on the territory after the Hamas group came to power. Following the October 2023 Hamas attack, Israel “imposed a total blockade on the Gaza Strip on October 9, cutting its supplies of electricity, food, water, and fuel.” Since Hamas came to power, Israel has launched several military assaults on Gaza in an effort to eradicate Hamas.
Topic:
Genocide, Elections, Social Media, Islamophobia, Donald Trump, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Middle East, Israel, Palestine, Gaza, and United States of America