Curbing Dissent: Biden's Mainstream Foreign Policy puts the Squash on Progressive Voices
With the Biden administration reestablishing long standing US foreign policy progressives look to be on the outs
Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib made a splash after tweeting her concerns over Biden’s selection for Secretary of State. Speaking of Anthony Blinken she said, “So long as he doesn't suppress my First Amendment right to speak out against Netanyahu's racist and inhumane policies. The Palestinian people deserve equality and justice.” Tlaib, a child to Palestinian immigrants, is an outspoken ally to Palestinians and critical of US support of Benjamin Netanyahu. Support that has seen increase aggression in the region. Tlaib isn’t unique in her views. Progressives throughout government hold a general distaste for US foreign policy in the Middle East. This is no less true in regards to Israel and Palestine. Blinken represents a reaffirmation of that very same foreign policy. This is not an unexpected conflict. For those most critical of Netanyahu’s aggression this appointment is a renewed obstacle in the way of change.
Immediately following Tlaib’s tweet a groundswell of the Democratic mainstream emerged to condemn Tlaib rather than acknowledge any merits in an emerging debate. This moment is best summarized by CNN’s Jake Tapper when replying to Tlaib, “[What] is it about Secretary of State–nominee Blinken that he makes the Congresswoman think that he would try to suppress her views about the Prime Minister of Israel? Hmmm.” A tweet he reworded later to, "Blinken and Biden are both on the record opposing efforts to punish/sanction BDS (though they also oppose BDS) so I’m not sure what it is about Blinken that would prompt this tweet." A first of emerging internal skirmishes attempting to sway the direction of the incoming administration. Skirmishes that will signal what is or is not acceptable discourse or criticism in the immediate future.
Blinken and Tlaib hold antagonistic positions to one another. Positions that promote distinct directions for American policy. However, taking back burner to good-faith debate, commentary instead seemed interested in an identity politics battle à la Mr. Tapper’s not-so-subtle initial tweet. Surely not the only one voicing this position, cries of anti-semitism emerged throughout mainstream media. A knee-jerk reaction to mold the conversation around Blinken’s Jewish faith and rather than Tlaib’s preemptive but reasonable criticism of known policy differences. These efforts themselves fell to immediate criticism, but the urge to make a culture battle in lieu of substantive debate is based on a terrible trend in public discourse. A tactic conservatives may encounter more often (though more often deservedly so) and certainly play into. In this case it's a progressive voice facing this completely non-critical deflection.
Assuredly, Tlaib has justifiable room to criticize Blinken. The Times of Israel described that his views, “reflect the Democratic mainstream,” which amounts to: “Biden administration will not condition aid to Israel on policy choices, will keep the embassy in Jerusalem and will staunchly support Israel at the United Nations” Blinken is offering exactly what one would expect. Short of steadfast and unwavering support the Trump administration showed, but policy that nonetheless will renew confidence for Netanyahu. As for those who are critical of the Israeli prime minister, Blinken does not offer any major departure from long standing policy in the region, and this is the case generally on American foreign policy. Blinken has made a career working on behalf and representing the United States. There is very little critique one can make of his credentials. In saying so we should expect American foreign policy to resemble the decades that had preceded Trump.
Trump’s wonton cabinet and departure from general US foreign policy has become the ultimate scapegoat for the Biden administration. The “at least we’re not Trump,” defense might end up the most formidable obstacle for progressives to overcome for the next four years. This has certainly been is the case with the Tlaib-Blinken scuffle, but is true of other appointments as well. As cabinet picks narrow it is apparent Biden is establishing a team praised for their experience and public service. When put up against Trump appointees it is understandable. However, many are using this experience as a shield. This is the sort of praise that deafens important dialogue. PBS’s Yamiche Alcindor stated on MSNBC said, “It felt like we are being rescued from the craziness and now here are the superheroes to come and save us all."
Such blatant fawning is patently un-based journalism. Experience is important but well short of sacrosanct superhero-dom. The minimum ought not be treated as achievement, but rather grounds to begin reasonable discourse and dissent. Certainly, experience alone has led the United State down disastrous paths in the past. By all means a return to normalcy is welcomed, but ought to come with proportional criticism. For many a return to the Paris Climate Accord, reestablishing the Iran nuclear deal, and reaffirming America’s longest alliances are obvious and anticipated foreign policy accomplishments. However, the inverse was seen recently after President Trump announced a further withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. In this case the longstanding “experienced” position found this an unconscionable move much to the chagrin of a public who are long exhausted by ongoing wars in the Middle East. A return to normal that includes unfavorable military action is not in the best interest of the general public despite whatever neo-con conventional wisdom would suggest. The rejection of the Trump era foreign policy need not be wholesale. A similar argument can be made about a cabinet filled with members who supported NAFTA and TPP. Trade deals that the progressive left and Trump republicans alike largely reject. The views of the most experience may not always align with the best wishes of the public. In a political landscape that values experience over all else this will limit dissent for those less experienced. Unfortunately if Tlaib’s early case is any example of what is to come it will be an upward battle for progressives to sway the block of Democratic mainstream.
Very well put. A return to "normal" isn't without concern. A never-ending war started way before Trump, for example. "The minimum ought not be treated as achievement, but rather grounds to begin reasonable discourse and dissent."