This piece by @danbalz treats US leadership and prestige as if they are goals in and of themselves--and must in a Biden presidency be restored. That thinking no longer works. [Thread] 1/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2020/politics/reckoning-america-world-standing-low-point/

The theory that the US must lead just for the sake of leading is not a strategic vision for US foreign policy. It's a recipe for hubris, over-extension, and mistake. 2/

To the extent people want US leadership, it should be defended on the merits--in terms of the outcomes that it actually would produce. In some contexts, US leadership might do real good. 3/

But unsurprisingly, many people doubt that US leadership has consistently produced outcomes that were better than the available alternatives or have found it objectionable precisely because it has been so omnipresent. 4/

And even if it historically has done more good than harm, there is good reason to think that it no longer would. In the current geopolitical climate--marked by emboldened nationalist movements at home and elsewhere, a sprawling US military footprint, and a decline . . . 5/

. . . in the US' relative power--US leadership might in some contexts exacerbate, rather than ameliorate, global problems. That is the reality that we need to confront, if we want to think seriously about a post-Trump foreign policy. 6/6