Biden's "withdrawal": Why did the US president give a pass to the aggressor as his term nears its end?

Recently, Joe Biden announced the readiness to engage in nuclear negotiations with Russia, China, and North Korea in light of the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to the Japanese organization "Nihon Hidankyo," which comprises survivors of the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. While congratulating the laureates, the current occupant of the White House expressed support for "continuing the movement towards a world free from the threat of nuclear weapons," adding: "The United States is prepared to negotiate with Russia, China, and North Korea without preconditions to reduce the nuclear threat. It is neither in our countries' interests nor in the world's interest to hinder progress in reducing nuclear arsenals. Reducing the nuclear threat is important not in spite of today's dangers, but precisely because of them."

In response to the signals from the 81-year-old outgoing President of the United States, the Kremlin reacted promptly, indicating that they regard the reduction of the nuclear threat as an important topic. However, Putin's administration set a precondition for discussing this issue. "In a situation where there is a war being waged against Russia, with indirect and even direct involvement of nuclear powers such as the USA, the UK, and France, discussing this (nuclear arms control and reduction) without linking the topic to all other aspects of security is absolutely impossible," emphasized Dmitry Peskov, the spokesperson for the Kremlin dictator. According to him, "contacts on nuclear arms reduction cannot be shelved indefinitely, but the issues must be considered in a comprehensive manner." Thus, the "voice" of the Kremlin dictator makes a direct reference to the Russian-Ukrainian war.

Notably, the well-known Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, also weighed in, perceiving Biden's nuclear initiative as "another rudeness" from the Americans. "Consider this: the USA is waging a practically full-fledged (not hybrid) war against us and desires our country’s strategic defeat. Therefore, negotiations on START (Strategic Offensive Arms) with America are no more useful than negotiating a ceasefire with Hitler in 1945," Medvedev wrote on his Telegram channel. Interestingly, this individual, while serving as the President of Russia, signed the last of the currently active bilateral agreements in the field of arms control with the USA in 2010: the New START Treaty. Against the backdrop of the full-scale Russian-Ukrainian war, the USA and Russia suspended their participation in the treaty in 2023 but promised to adhere to its quantitative ceilings: 700 units for deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and heavy bombers (TB); 1550 units for warheads on them; 800 units for deployed and non-deployed ICBM and SLBM launchers, as well as TB. It is worth noting that the New START Treaty will expire in February 2026.

Meanwhile, the Chinese Foreign Ministry, through its official spokesperson Mao Ning, remarked: "China has always believed that the complete prohibition and final elimination of nuclear weapons, as well as the creation of a world free from nuclear weapons, aligns with the common interests of all humanity." China is currently coordinating the work of the nuclear "five" - a group of official nuclear powers (the USA, China, France, the UK, and Russia) established to support the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Last week in New York, on the sidelines of the First Committee of the UN General Assembly, the inaugural meeting of delegations from the five countries took place under China's presidency. It was a closed meeting and was more preparatory in nature. Prior to China, this mechanism was chaired by Putin's Russia for a year.

The Vice-Speaker of the Federation Council of Russia, Konstantin Kosachev, identified two aspects in Mr. Biden's statement. "The first is, of course, electoral. Almost everything said by leading American politicians now is dictated by the logic of the battle for voters' support. If Trump openly states that Biden's administration's policy is leading the world to nuclear war, the current leader is eager to demonstrate his 'peace-loving' attitude. In this regard, the statement from the 'lame duck' and his desire to capitalize on the Nobel theme should hardly be perceived as a serious invitation to negotiations." The second aspect of the current occupant of the Oval Office's statement was articulated by Kosachev as follows: "The USA would indeed be very glad to limit and control the Russian nuclear potential, which today remains the last argument against NATO's direct involvement in the conflict on the side of Ukraine. The scheme here is quite clear: impose restrictions on our nuclear arsenal while excluding the nuclear weapons of European allies – the UK and France – as well as the issue of the West's overall superiority in non-nuclear capabilities. In a situation where Washington is betting on the strategic defeat of Russia, discussing the reduction of its armaments is unserious, but the USA wants to present it as if the ball is in Russia's court."

By tossing the ball into the Russian half of the field, Mr. Biden, as we can see, has attracted a flurry of "compliments" from Medvedev and other figures. Simultaneously, the outgoing President of the USA has planned a visit to Germany, which was postponed due to Hurricane Milton. As Spiegel reports, citing an unnamed official in Berlin, official meetings with President Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Chancellor Olaf Scholz are scheduled for Friday, October 18. No other events involving the American president have been announced. This implies that Joe Biden has effectively "squandered" the meeting initiated by them within the framework of "Ramstein" – the international coalition supporting Ukraine. As noted by journalist Elmar Teveßen from the German television channel ZDF, further decisions regarding "Ramstein" will likely be made only after the results of the presidential elections in the USA.

Speaking of the elections, there are less than three weeks left until the critical voting time in the USA, but the race's favorite has yet to be determined. The gap between Republican Donald Trump, who led the country from 2017 to 2021, and the current Vice President, Democrat Kamala Harris, is within the statistical margin of error. Given this, the former president has decided to leverage his advantage – the immigration issue. Speaking recently at a campaign rally in Aurora, Colorado, Trump loudly proclaimed his plans regarding immigration. He assured that if he wins the election, mass deportations of illegal immigrants from the country would begin in that very city. "I promise you: November 5, 2024 (the day of the presidential elections) will be the day of America’s liberation. I will save Aurora and every city that has been seized," Trump declared while standing in front of posters reading "America Under Occupation" and images of Venezuelan gang leaders. According to Aurora's Republican Mayor Mike Coffman, illegal immigrants have increasingly appeared in the city due to its proximity to a shelter for illegal immigrants located in Denver. The city also has a significant Venezuelan community. Its members are legally present in the USA, while gang members try to exploit them for their purposes. Trump personally accused Kamala Harris of creating loopholes for migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, who receive expedited entry permits.

Ms. Harris did not directly respond to her opponent's attacks. Meanwhile, during a recent television broadcast on NBC News, she blamed the immigration situation on Donald Trump himself, who rejected a bipartisan border deal a few months ago, deeming it useless. "When I am elected president, I will revive that border security bill, sign it, and focus on what we need to do to ensure an orderly and humane path to citizenship," she stated.

Traditionally, in the final weeks before elections, presidential candidates in the USA focus on domestic issues. Here, it seems, the former president has chosen the optimal strategy. Why? Because the immigration crisis is the second most important issue concerning ordinary Americans. In a recent NBC News poll, 19% mentioned it (the only issue with a higher percentage, 22%, was abortion rights).

Currently, the candidates are tied in popularity nationwide, each receiving 48% among registered voters (according to the NBC News poll conducted from October 4 to 8). In a similar poll in September, Ms. Harris led by 6 percentage points. "The race is neck and neck, summer has turned into autumn, and all signs of Kamala Harris's rising popularity have disappeared," noted American sociologist Jeff Horwitz in a broadcast on the channel. Among the key factors influencing the results, he believes, are Americans' fears that Kamala Harris will not bring about real change, merely serving as a nominal replacement for Joe Biden.

At the same time, the poll indicates that American voters trust Kamala Harris more in terms of "competence and effectiveness" (advantage of 5 percentage points), as well as on healthcare (+10) and abortion rights (+19). Donald Trump, according to respondents, would handle inflation (+11), the conflict in Ukraine and the Middle East (+18), and managing the immigration crisis (+25) better. Thus, Trump's emphasis on the latter topic is clearly not accidental.

Furthermore, in the seven so-called swing states in the USA, which will determine the outcome of the presidential election, voters prefer Donald Trump over Kamala Harris regarding the resolution of the war in Ukraine. This is evidenced by a poll conducted from September 28 to October 8 by The Wall Street Journal. In the survey of seven key states, 50% of voters stated that Trump would handle the full-scale Russian war in Ukraine better, while 39% preferred Harris. When the same