So far, Biden seems to be trying to strike a balance between these two approaches – one that upholds America’s cherished principles while acknowledging cold realities, and that uses both diplomacy and military action. In a region where America’s commitment to its values is often put to the toughest test, it seeks to forge a disturbingly nuanced middle ground. And while he has managed this balance so far, it will be extremely difficult to maintain as new challenges emerge in the region.
The tactical differences between Biden and his predecessors are shown in the handling of the new government with Iran, Saudi Arabia and Israel.
An important Biden goal is to return to the nuclear deal in Iran, the joint comprehensive plan of action, which the Obama administration reached in 2015. To push the agreement forward, Obama refrained from responding to Iran’s provocations, to the frustration of critics who have been accused. him of ‘installment’. Obama has made other controversial openings to Iran on the way to an agreement. Although he claims that the negotiations do not deter him from taking aggressive action in Syria, an Iranian ally, there is reason for skepticism.
Although Trump rejected the Iran deal and imposed “maximum pressure” on the Iranian regime, he also ignored several Iranian attacks. He did not respond in 2019, when Iranian allies in Yemen nearly paralyzed Saudi Arabia’s oil facilities, or the following year, when Iranian-backed forces fired a barrage of missiles at U.S. troops in Iraq. He did carry out one important operation and assassinate Iranian General Qassem Soleimani, but there was no coherent deterrent strategy. Many Iranian attacks were ignored.
That is probably why Iran was surprised last week when Biden responded to a series of attacks by Iranian proxy militias against US targets in Iraq. The US response – which hits Iranian targets in Syria – has not been recklessly unleashed; it has been carefully calibrated to prevent problems for the Iraqi government. (Pro-Iranian forces in Iraq often use US action to stir up the United States and the Baghdad government.) The Biden government has also called for the strikes to be discussed with its allies before the operation. At the same time, the fact that Biden was willing to take military action eliminated the fear that Biden, in his eagerness to return to the Obama-era nuclear power deal, would turn Iran blind while his allied fighters wreaked havoc.
“The Iranians did not realize that Biden is not Obama,” an Israeli official told Axios approving.
Saudi Arabia is probably also relieved that Biden is not Obama – even if Riyadh is not yet sure who Biden is. The Saudis could not wait for Obama to leave. They felt that he had turned to Iran at the expense of them; he publicly called them a ‘so-called’ ally and said they should share ‘the neighborhood’ with Iran. Then came Trump, who is embracing the kingdom, throwing away any human rights concerns and refusing to release a US intelligence report (as required by law) which concludes that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) is responsible for the assassination of the dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi. .
This is where Biden’s sewing is very visible. While the Trump administration chose to communicate with MBS, the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia, Biden last week named King Salman bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, the president’s formal counterpart. Communication with MBS, who is also Minister of Defense, has been downgraded; he is now talking to the US Secretary of Defense. With that, the Biden government essentially withdrew the recognition of MBS as Saudi Arabia’s leader, while maintaining contact with him.
In the call with the king, Biden reaffirmed Washington’s long-standing commitment to Saudi defense, but also stressed the need to improve human rights in Saudi Arabia and a solution to the humanitarian catastrophe in the Saudi-led war in Yemen. The next day, Biden released the intelligence report on Khashoggi, who officially blamed MBS for the murder. On the one hand, the report created a painful mark on the prince who could see the world. At the same time, Biden refused to punish MBS, as did other Saudi officials involved in the assassination. He was rightly criticized for not punishing MBS harder, but Biden knows that MBS is likely to become king and chose not to sacrifice the relationship.
In Israel, Biden is again not Obama or Trump. Obama left the Israelites traumatized. On one of his first foreign trips as president, he went to the Middle East but did not stop in Israel. Instead, he gave a speech in Cairo, in which he publicly criticized Israeli settlements. Relationships went down from there. Trump, meanwhile, gave free rein to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and fully supported him, relocating the US embassy to Jerusalem, backing Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan Heights and looking away as Israel expanded West Bank’s settlements.
Biden will leave the US Embassy in Jerusalem. But Israelis are worried about its plans to reinstate the nuclear deal in Iran, and other differences abound: in a call with Netanyahu last month, Biden highlighted the need to promote peace with Palestinians. He is also against the expansion of the settlement. Nevertheless, in his call with Netanyahu, he reaffirmed his personal commitment to Israel’s security. And during the campaign, Biden made it clear that he would discuss the differences of opinion with the Israeli prime minister privately.
Biden firmly believes in personal relationships as a foundation of foreign policy. All indications are that he will rely on these relationships and try to bring about a mediation. With decades of experience in foreign policy – far more than almost any of his predecessors – he comes to work with a unique depth of understanding.
It is not easy to thread that needle after all. Biden has indicated that he wants to make the Middle East a lower priority than it has been in the past. Yet the region is a tangle of interconnected, often explosive conflicts with the habit of suddenly needing urgent attention. Events in the region are also attracting a lot of interest from local constituencies in the United States. This means that Biden’s actions at home will be thoroughly scrutinized and criticized.
Sooner or later, Biden will make a decision that will elicit a sharp response. A moment will come when that careful blending of realism and values will not apply. Then we will see the real test of what the Biden doctrine is and whether it can withstand the reality of the Middle East.