When asked recently by The Atlantic about President Barack Obama’s foreign policy legacy with China, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger replied: “I’d say B-plus.” As President Obama wraps up his final days in office, presidential watchers are evaluating how well he performed, wonder what his legacy will be, and how events could have transpired differently. While two revisionist powers—China and Russia— expanded their global influence, the Arab Spring, the Syrian Civil War, and the emergence of ISIS, posed foreign policy challenges that few could anticipate and forced the administration to reconsider its priorities. Despite his efforts to redefine and stabilize U.S. relations with China and Russia, Obama will leave office with these relationships in flux.
China
In formulating the Pivot to Asia policy, Obama wanted to reinforce the idea, to allies and adversaries alike, that the United States is and always will be “a Pacific nation.” Plagued from its inception as being an attempt to contain China—in the same way the U.S. attempted to contain the Soviet Union during the Cold War—the policies strengthening strategic and economic ties with Pacific allies and maintaining freedom of navigation is still viewed with suspicion in Beijing.
A common criticism of Obama’s China policy, and one held by Kissinger, who was instrumental in President Richard Nixon normalizing U.S. relations with China in the early 1970s, is that it is too near-sighted and does not adequately prepare the U.S. for a future where China is a stronger global power. For allies and prospective partners in Asia, the perception that the U.S. cannot remove itself from quagmires in the Middle East is worrisome. It is difficult to tell whether the unexpected Middle East crises were detrimental to Obama’s pivot and to relations with China. China by virtue of its geography will always be interested in Asia, whereas the U.S.’s commitment could waver from one administration to the next, or from one crisis to the next. The movement of the Philippines under President Rodrigo Duterte towards China’s orbit illustrates how the U.S. cannot take its regional relationships for granted. Although many regional issues involving China remain unresolved, such as the South China Sea and North Korea’s nuclear program, there could be stronger grounds for cooperation outside of China’s neighborhood.
Christina Lin, a fellow at the Center for Transatlantic Relations offered a potential upside for the future. Both the U.S. and China have economic interests in the Middle East and this could be fertile ground for greater future cooperation. Lin believes “…a Trump presidency, and Sino-U.S. cooperation via OSCE (Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe) on the OBOR (One Belt One Road), may actually provide an opportunity for a joint pivot to Eurasia and a silver lining for renewed transatlantic coordination.”
Russia
Obama began his administration with the intention of pursuing a “reset” with Russia. At the time, this seemed possible under then-President Dmitry Medvedev. Initial cooperation over the Iranian nuclear program and halting of a U.S. missile defense shield seemed to bode well for the future. However, when Vladimir Putin returned to office, issues such as his crackdown on human rights, trade disagreements, and sheltering NSA-leaker Edward Snowden put the reset in doubt. Relations became irreconcilable when Russia annexed Crimea in February 2014 and fomented an insurgency in eastern Ukraine.
But U.S. and Russia both have strategic interests in the Middle East. Events in Syria have forced the two to attempt working together despite pursuing very different objectives. While the U.S. wants to eliminate ISIS, Russia’s main priority is to maintain Assad’s power and boost its own global standing as a military power. The relationship has been complicated by Putin’s response to what he perceives as a weakness in U.S. decision making. Former head of global security for Goldman Sachs Robert Dannenberg told The Cipher Brief: “…Obama made what Putin interpreted as a classic and unforgivable failure of leadership: the famous "red line" statement about the U.S. intent to take action against Assad's regime if that regime was to use chemical weapons against civilians.” Obama’s failure to act emboldened Putin to become more involved in Syria, and ultimately providing military support to the Assad regime. The Syria Civil War is an issue that the Obama administration will not bring to a close and will continue to complicate U.S.-Russia relations for the Trump presidency.
Washington and Moscow did come together to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions, and while the Iran nuclear deal can be seen as an example of cooperation, critics argue the terms for Iran are too lenient and could lead a Trump presidency to walk away from the deal. Nuclear deal aside, the failures of Obama’s policies with Russia are the flip side of Putin’s successes. With Russia and NATO incrementally deploying more forces in Europe, and Russian-backed Syrian forces grinding the opposition down, the reset is a distant memory.
Conclusion
All presidential administrations are faced with crises they could not foresee. Relations with China and Russia have always been a challenge for previous presidents and will likely be so in the future. The challenges involving Russia and China that Obama tackled are the same ones that Trump will have to take on. It is still too early to judge Obama’s legacy on these issues and so the final test will be graded on a curve.
American Presidents have struggled with handling the relationships with Russia and China for decades. Ultimately, Obama’s legacy on these two countries with growing global influence will be for the historians to sort out. Whether Obama gets a passing grade is yet to be seen, but it is clear the challenges he is facing now will be up to the next administration to take on.
Will Edwards is an international producer at The Cipher Brief. Follow him on Twitter @_wedwards.
