In a rare prime-time address to Americans last Thursday, President Joe Biden tackled the challenging task of navigating the complex world of international politics and diplomacy. His speech focused on the critical need to support both Israel and Ukraine in their respective conflicts. However, the underlying message extended far beyond mere financial aid. It encapsulated the intricacies of global relations and the challenging balancing act of maintaining alliances while promoting peace and diplomacy. Mr Biden’s visit to Israel last week highlighted the profound shockwaves that the country experienced when it was attacked by Hamas militants on October 7.

Drawing parallels with America’s own experience of the 9/11 attacks, the President’s message resonated with a poignant reminder that emotions can often cloud judgement. His reference to the prolonged US military presence in Afghanistan and Iraq was a not-sosubtle caution to Israel, encouraging them not to be blinded by rage. In essence, what President Biden conveyed is that even in times of justifiable anger and desperation, it is essential to weigh the long-term consequences of one’s actions.

Mistakes made in the heat of the moment can have far-reaching effects, and while justice may be sought and eventually achieved, the aftermath can be equally devastating. What adds another layer of complexity to these international dynamics is the President’s endeavour to connect the distant conflicts of Israel and Ukraine.

By highlighting that both Hamas and Russian President Vladimir Putin aim to destroy neighbouring democracies, he underscored that the outcomes in these conflicts could have global repercussions. If terrorists and dictators are not held accountable for their aggression, the cycle of chaos and destruction continues to escalate. The global stage is fraught with complexities, where even the best-intentioned actions can lead to unforeseen consequences.

President Biden’s goal to secure significant aid packages for Israel and Ukraine may seem straightforward, but the intricate dance of international relations and domestic political realities often comes into play. The imperative is to convince the US Congress to approve these emergency funding packages, where the need for balance between support for allies and financial responsibility is critical. However, as his recent poll numbers show, the President is not without his share of criticism.

A mere 31 per cent Americans approve of his foreign policy handling. This discrepancy between public opinion and executive action reveals the difficulties inherent in conveying the nuances of foreign policy to Americans who might be growing weary of foreign entanglements. The challenge is not only in conveying the importance of supporting allies in times of crisis but also in recognising the growing divide within the United States regarding these issues.

The poll that found a decrease in support for providing weapons to Ukraine highlights this divide. It is the responsibility of the President to balance these internal tensions with international obligations