Kamala Harris & U.S. Abroad: What Is She Doing?

I could never have imagined that I would come to long in earnest for the return of the insipid, aimless, and irrelevant version of Kamala Harris — the one who believes that she is being profound when she suggests that “it is time for us to do what we have been doing, and that time is every day.” Yet here we are. Yesterday, the vice president of the United States put out a statement in Farsi that read, “The truth is: There is segregation in America. Xenophobia exists in America. Antisemitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia, all exist. Wherever injustice is dealt with, there is activity ahead.” As a reward for her efforts, the Biden administration has decided to send Harris to represent the United States at a summit in Munich, during which she will take part in “a series of high-stakes, high-level diplomatic talks” designed to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine. Thankfully, we have no alarming historical examples of the regrettable consequences that flow from our sending the wrong peace negotiators to Munich.

We are told that Harris hopes to gain some foreign-policy experience ahead of a potential run for — or takeover of — the presidency. If so, the first step will be to understand that speaking for one’s country on the global stage differs profoundly from making the keynote address at this year’s Netroots Nation. Alas, it is unclear whether the Biden administration writ large understands this. At his disastrous January press conference, President Biden was asked bluntly whether he thought that Russia would go into Ukraine, and — twice — he reacted as if he were on a late-afternoon panel at a D.C. think-tank symposium. “I think,” Biden said, “what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do. . . .” Accurate or not, this was the wrong answer for an American president to proffer. The right answer was, “Russia must not invade Ukraine, and if it does there will be consequences.” If they wish, American citizens may be neutral on the virtues of their country. The executive branch doesn’t have that luxury.

About the Author

Charles C. W. Cooke

Charles C. W. Cooke is a senior editor at National Review and the host of The Charles C. W. Cooke Podcast.

Featured Tags

I could never have imagined that I would come to long in earnest for the return of the insipid, aimless, and irrelevant version of Kamala Harris — the one who believes that she is being profound when she suggests that “it is time for us to do what we have been doing, and that time is every day.” Yet here we are. Yesterday, the vice president of the United States put out a statement in Farsi that read, “The truth is: There is segregation in America. Xenophobia exists in America. Antisemitism, Islamophobia, homophobia, transphobia, all exist. Wherever injustice is dealt with, there is activity ahead.” As a reward for her efforts, the Biden administration has decided to send Harris to represent the United States at a summit in Munich, during which she will take part in “a series of high-stakes, high-level diplomatic talks” designed to prevent Russia from invading Ukraine. Thankfully, we have no alarming historical examples of the regrettable consequences that flow from our sending the wrong peace negotiators to Munich.

We are told that Harris hopes to gain some foreign-policy experience ahead of a potential run for — or takeover of — the presidency. If so, the first step will be to understand that speaking for one’s country on the global stage differs profoundly from making the keynote address at this year’s Netroots Nation. Alas, it is unclear whether the Biden administration writ large understands this. At his disastrous January press conference, President Biden was asked bluntly whether he thought that Russia would go into Ukraine, and — twice — he reacted as if he were on a late-afternoon panel at a D.C. think-tank symposium. “I think,” Biden said, “what you’re going to see is that Russia will be held accountable if it invades. And it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and then we end up having a fight about what to do and not do. . . .” Accurate or not, this was the wrong answer for an American president to proffer. The right answer was, “Russia must not invade Ukraine, and if it does there will be consequences.” If they wish, American citizens may be neutral on the virtues of their country. The executive branch doesn’t have that luxury.