Opinion | TIME’s Cover Curse: Kamala Harris May Be In Trouble And That’s Not Bad News At All
Joe Biden’s foreign policy was a disaster, but Kamala Harris promises to take forward his legacy with greater ideological rigidity
If in doubt about certain very important global geopolitical and economic issues, find out what the covers of the Time magazine have to say. If the issue has been on the covers and if the illustrious publication has come up with gloomy forecasts, then rest assured there are good chances that the opposite might come true. Based on “covers of Time published between 1980 and 2010", author Ruchir Sharma, in his book The Rise and Fall of Nations, found that “if the Time cover was downbeat, economic growth picked up over the next five years in 55 per cent of the cases".
As the US is all set to elect a new president, the Time magazine has its preferences cut out. It is putting its bet on the Democrats led by Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz. On May 27, 2024, it had Donald Trump on its cover, with a “If He Wins" headline, almost intimidating the readers with troubling times ahead. That was the time when Joe Biden was still in the presidential race, refusing to bow out despite committing a series of gaffes one after another. Since August 2024, Time has come up with three covers on the US elections—two on Harris and one on Trump. While the coverage on Harris was aimed at bolstering her image, hit hard by her inconsequential tenure as vice-president, calling her presidential bid as “Her Moment", the Trump cover highlighted how he was “In Trouble".
related stories
So, if one goes by the Time magazine’s “cover curse", Kamala Harris may be in trouble, which may be good news for the United States. Harris, after all, promises to take forward the Biden legacy with greater ideological rigidity. She belongs to the young clique in the Democratic party that is extremely Left in its outlook, making Biden appear a Centrist, pragmatist leader. She holds a nightmarish prospect for America.
Before one gets emotionally surcharged at the prospect of Biden leaving the White House soon, it must be clarified that his presidency, especially on the foreign policy front, was a disaster. It began with America’s humiliating military withdrawal from Kabul, giving Afghanistan on a platter to the Taliban. If Biden closed one war front in Afghanistan, he opened another in Ukraine. This was a war that the US orchestrated to put both Putin and Russia in their place. Three years down the line, Russia’s economic performance has only improved, and Putin is far from being sidelined as his recent BRICS showmanship has manifested.
Posterity may still ignore Biden’s Kabul and Kiev mistakes. But it might not be that forgiving for doing away with the US foreign policy consensus since the Cold War: of keeping Russia and China apart. It was at the core of the American foreign policy since the early 1970s to keep the Russians and the Chinese in two opposite camps. And it ended up well for the Americans with the disintegration of the erstwhile Soviet Union in 1991.
During the Biden regime, especially in the past three years, American diplomacy has facilitated the coming together of Russia and China. Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping have never so deeply and warmly embraced each other. And the credit for this goes to the Biden administration.
If this were not bad enough, the Americans have also managed to alienate India, which was supposed to act as “a bulwark against Chinese hegemony". India is not just an economic power — currently, the fifth largest economy in the world that threatens to overtake Germany and Japan in a couple of years to take up the third spot — but also a geostrategic trump card for the West, given its military standing, demographic dividends, as well as its geographical location. It makes absolute sense for America to have India by its side, more so after the growing China-Russia détente post the Ukraine gaffe.
Ironically, the Biden administration has chosen to nitpick India on issues that are peripheral, if not completely made up. The Americans know very well the Khalistani threats that India faces and yet they protect someone like Gurpatwant Singh Pannun in the name of freedom of speech, even when the New York-based Sikh separatist has threatened to blow up India’s planes and Parliament. It is also giving a covering fire to Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who has decided to leash his foreign office to Khalistani terrorists.
Worse, there is a growing perception in India about the involvement of the US in ushering in a regime change in Raisina Hill. What has further unsettled the Indian establishment is the growing confirmation of the American hand in the Bangladeshi regime change. Sheikh Hasina’s government was pro-India; by pushing her out of Dhaka, the Americans have hurt Delhi’s interest in the neighbourhood. A friend, far less an ally, is not expected to work that way. Maybe Henry Kissinger was hinting at a Biden-like dispensation when he famously said: “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal."
India is America’s friend. And it is having a taste of the Kissingerian dose!
The Biden administration is yet to realise that India is no longer a pushover. During the Ukraine war, it fervently safeguarded its national interest despite immense, and undue Western pressures. It also gave a body blow to Xi Jinping’s “strongman diplomacy", when it called the Chinese bluff at the Line of Actual Control. Again, when the Americans were trying to act tough with India in the name of “targeted killings", India gave the US a rude shock last week by announcing its border deal with China, without bending an inch from its stand.
India has shown it doesn’t need the US to sort out its issues with China. Can the US deal with China without India, more so when Xi is in the company of Putin?
Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views.
- Location :
- First Published: