In the days following Joe Biden’s call for regime change in Russia, a comment that was walked back by the White House before Biden managed to reassert it, there have been lots of different takes regarding whether he was “correct” to say what he said or not.
The foreign policy establishment, because they can never think more than one step ahead, absolutely loved it. It was Biden’s “tear down this wall” moment they asserted without a second thought for what it actually meant to call for Vladimir Putin’s ouster without any viable plan to bring that about. From there, accusations of being pro-Putin if one didn’t agree with Biden predictably emerged.
Bill Kristol recently provided a perfect example of that.
If you needed more evidence of the abject stupidity that permeates the establishment class in Washington, Kristol’s statement amounts to a written confession. When you consider the shallowness with which he approaches such a complicated issue, it becomes exceedingly apparent exactly how the humanitarian disasters in Libya and Syria occurred during the Obama administration.
Regime change is not just a moral issue. At the governmental level, it is also a practical one. It is one thing to call for the decapitation of a regime as a nation engaged in an open war that has every intention of attaining total victory. It is a completely different thing to mumble an off-script threat while having absolutely no viable plan to see it through. That’s what happened in Syria, where Democrats and Republicans alike came together to insist Basheer al Assad must be deposed while stoking a civil war that was never going to lead to that end (but did lead to over half a million people dying).
Returning to Putin, his entire argument for invading Ukraine has centered on the idea that NATO is imperialistic and wants to threaten Russia’s internal affairs. Far short of being “tough” on Putin, Biden’s comments were a gift to the dictator because they conceded his premise, and that is a premise other Western nations have been working so hard to disprove. That’s why France’s Emmanuel Marcon was so annoyed by what Biden said.
Further, it does appear that Ukraine and Russia are nearing some kind of agreement to end hostilities, and it even looks as if Russia may settle for the status quo (control over Crimea and the Donbas but not the rest of Ukraine). Biden’s gaffe came at a time when de-escalation is paramount. As the old adage says, “Loose lips sink ships.” There are real consequences to having an addled old man who can’t keep his thoughts straight attempting to lead the free world.
Again, this is not an issue of morality. In a just world, Putin would indeed be removed from power, but foreign policy isn’t a game of emotion. Biden’s words carry weight, and to be sure, Russia immediately started using them to bolster Putin domestically. And while calling for the Russian leader’s head may make neoconservatives cheer, it was an incredibly egregious error. We can only hope it doesn’t cause more damage.