Myanmar and Russia show limits to Biden’s pro-democracy agenda

When Joe Biden took the stage at City University in July 2019, the presidential candidate did not just want to address his worldview. He wanted to make a statement on democracy and the defense of America worldwide.

“I will see to it that democracy is once again the watchword of American foreign policy – not to launch a moral crusade, but because it is in our enlightened self – interest,” he told the crowd in New York. “We must strive for freedom and democracy.”

But this week has shown how difficult it will be for President Biden to promote democracy and oppose autocracy in any meaningful way.

Myanmar’s military on Monday overthrew the country’s civilian leadership in a coup and ended the decade – long democratic experiment. The next day, a Russian court sentenced opposition leader Alexei Navalny to almost three years in prison and struck a devastating blow to the pro-democracy movement that threatens Vladimir Putin’s regime.

Together, these two international crises highlight a major challenge that Biden will face over the next four years, as will other presidents before him: how to support democratic movements in places where the US does not really have much influence, and where doing so could ultimately hamper the movements the US wants to support.

In Myanmar, the US has few options to overthrow the ruling generals, especially since they offer almost no financial assistance to the government. As far as Russia is concerned, any American attempt to strengthen democracy in and around it is seen as a threat to be wiped out and delegitimized. Last October, shortly after the Kremlin poisoned and nearly killed Navalny, Putin’s regime claimed that the dissident was working with the CIA.

American leaders with high hopes of ushering in a more democratic future inevitably come into the harsh reality of their restrictions and the opposing forces working against them. “Every administration for the past thirty years has struggled with this,” said Erin Snider, an expert on American democracy promotion at Texas A&M University.

Myanmar and Russia therefore show that the government of Biden is already in this dilemma.

“This is definitely an early test of their commitment,” said Patrick Porter, chairman of international security and strategy at the University of Birmingham. “It might not have been so difficult for Biden’s government if they had not built up their foreign policy around this issue.”

Promoting democracy is one thing. Promoting democracy is another matter.

Progressive people have made the promotion of pro-democracy movements worldwide a cornerstone of their foreign policy platform by 2020, and Biden has repeatedly stressed that his government will try to follow the approach as well.

But as the affairs of Myanmar and Russia make clear, it is much easier said than done.

Washington has taken a swift first step in showing its displeasure with the governments of Naypyitaw and Moscow, with Biden calling the military takeover in Myanmar a ‘direct attack on the country’s transition to democracy’, and the foreign minister affairs, Antony Blinken, demanded Russia ‘immediately and unconditionally release Mr Navalny. ”

Alexander Nemenov / AFP via Getty Images

Some skeptics consider such pro forma statements to be impeccable, but most believe it is better for Biden’s team to make clear where they stand than not. “I would rather see an administration that speaks out against these regimes, imposes costs and continues to advance the Naval News of the world,” a senior Democratic staff member in Congress told me.

But statements are the easy part. The difficult part is not only deciding how much the democratic movement of a nation is supported, but also the best way to provide that support.

Take Myanmar. After the takeover of the army on Tuesday was a ‘coup d’etat’, Biden’s government said it would cut government support while still sending money to pro-democracy and civil society groups.

But State Department officials told reporters that day that the amount the U.S. was offering to the government was very small, almost nothing, meaning that cutting aid would probably do nothing to change the generals’ minds.

Biden is also investigating the possibility of imposing economic sanctions on Myanmar in the coming weeks. But while it may give the U.S. an extra leverage over the military generals who rule the country, it could backfire.

This is because some experts have warned that it could increase authoritarian China’s already enormous economic influence in Myanmar, while ousting democracies such as South Korea and Japan, which have worked to develop economic and military ties with the country, and To break China’s ‘stranglehold’. there.

And although China has had a complicated relationship with Myanmar’s military regime, it is unlikely that closer ties between the two countries will be good for Myanmar’s pro-democracy movement – or for the Biden government’s attempt to grow China’s growing. counteract influence in the region.

“The events in Myanmar will test how much the competition with China serves as the organizing principle of US foreign policy under the Biden government,” a Democratic staff member told me.

As for Russia, Biden has already rushed away from restoring relations with the country, so it is unlikely he will pay too much attention to opposing the Kremlin. But Putin blamed the US for its support for major protests against the government in 2011 – protests that helped lead Navalny. Experts believe it was when the dictator chose to oppose Washington instead of cooperating with it, which led to the Kremlin’s interference in the last two presidential elections and the US government’s cap.

If Biden wants to prevent US-Russia relations from spiraling even further, he may want to do no more than make judgmental statements. And if he wants to help Navalny’s movement, too much enthusiasm can fall back on it. “In some cases, the USA waving its flag around you could harm your legitimacy at home,” the Porter from the University of Birmingham told me.

What’s more, it’s not clear that the US actually has many ways to successfully change Russia in order to change. The Kremlin rejects any attempts at democratization in Russia and its environs, while pro-democracy groups like Navalny are eliminated as soon as they become too threatening. The best way to punish Russia is to have European countries keep ties with Moscow, but it is always difficult for any US government to do so.

No one expects Biden, or any U.S. government, to lay off autocrats and usher in full-scale democracies over its four or even eight years. At most, the US can move the needle a little so that a country can liberalize over time so that organic democracy movements can grow. But even increasing progress requires compromises, which require the president and his team to judge how much they value the democratic tendencies of a foreign nation against all others.

Biden is therefore the youngest American leader to face this problem, one who also deceived his predecessors. “I do not think any president has been an absolute star on this front,” said Texas A & M’s Snider.

The question now is whether the dramatic events in Myanmar and Russia – all in the first two weeks of his presidency – lead to Biden promoting democracy as the ‘password’ of his foreign policy. If he does not do so, he runs the risk of falling short of his high goals.

“It’s a test you can just eavesdrop on,” Porter told me.