The U.S. diplomatic corps is so blinded by progressive ideology that it is sabotaging America’s foreign standing, alienating potential allies, and making the United States’ enemies seem reasonable in comparison.

On June 24, the U.S. embassy in India tweeted
a photo of Adam Harry, India’s “trailblazing transgender pilot.” To mark “Pride Month,” the embassy celebrated Harry’s travails. They told Indians that Harry, a biological woman who now identifies as male, “inspires us all to dream big, defy expectations, and fight for equality.” 

The tweet is the latest example of the attention the Biden administration gives to issues of sexual behavior, identity, equality, and equity as it articulates and implements its foreign policy. 

• In June 2022, the U.S. Embassy in Kuwait sparked diplomatic tensions after tweeting a picture of the “Progress Pride Flag” along with a message in Arabic about treating all people with respect and dignity, regardless of whom they love. The Emirate summoned the U.S. charge d’affaires and asserted that the message violated its domestic laws and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations.

• In February 2023, State Department Special Representative for Racial Equity and Justice Desirée Cormier-Smith flew to the Kingdom of Jordan to mark Black History Month by delivering a keynote address to the 95 percent ethnically Arab nation about the importance of ensuring the individual rights of people of African descent and other “marginalized racial and ethnic communities.”

• In May 2023, an official at the U.S. Embassy in Brazil lectured his host country about the importance of identity by promoting tolerance and usage of gender-neutral pronouns.

Since our nation’s founding, the principal aim of U.S. foreign policy has been to secure the homeland and enhance domestic prosperity. The Biden administration’s focus on a “woke” social agenda in its dealings with other countries deviates from a prudent approach to international relations, thereby raising important questions. Are these new considerations a productive course of action for the United States? Does a woke-oriented foreign policy further U.S. interests and enhance U.S. security?

The United States government has intervened in other countries’ domestic affairs to control international behavior for over a century. Washington has facilitated coups, funded autocrats, spread propaganda, rigged election outcomes, and fought wars to change regimes. The results have been less than desirable, particularly in the developing world. Such measures have produced or emboldened insurgencies, division, political instability, violence, economic stagnation, and anti-Americanism. 

The Biden administration has decided to extend the policy of intervention to new domains. The U.S. now attempts to insert its voice into issues of morality, social norms, language, and the societal structures of foreign civilizations, cultures, and countries. The purpose is to transform or re-engineer the foundations upon which traditional and religious states and societies function and govern. A woke-oriented foreign policy intends to re-create states and societies in the image and likeness of progressive America and Western Europe. These efforts are driven by self-righteousness and the false assumption that when countries share “democratic” values, they are more likely to share foreign policy and economic interests, as well.

At its core, a woke-infused U.S. foreign policy seeks, according to its own self-justifying rhetoric, to recognize and liberate sexual behavior and individual and group expressions of identity (i.e., racial, ethnic, gender, and indigenous) from violence, structures of power, and systems of oppression. According to woke ideologues, the recognition and liberation of the victims will be followed by the delivery of justice, the reduction of disparities, and the empowering of the marginalized and subjugated. Accountability, diversity, equality, equity, and inclusivity will define a woke state and society. 

To liberate supposedly victimized populations and achieve a woke world, the Biden administration indulges in discussions about rights and democracy through diplomacy and international institutions. Proponents of a woke U.S. foreign policy want to alter what it means for the United States to be a “city upon a hill.” For these zealots, America must be more than just a model for other countries to follow. It must proselytize woke values to enable the dissemination, routinization, and eventual assimilation of woke beliefs and practices. 

On the first day of his presidency, Joe Biden issued Executive Order 13985, titled “Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal Government.” The executive order (EO) requires government agencies, departments, and offices to reverse the effects of systemic racism, discrimination, and inequality by practicing equity. Biden’s EO has licensed U.S. diplomats and government officials to embark on an unfettered, worldwide “civilizing mission.” It enables admonishing, critiquing, lecturing, pressuring, and interfering in the domestic social affairs of other countries. Administration officials decide which beliefs, morals, practices, and structures of other cultures need progressive reform—or erasure.

To internationally realize the president’s EO and create a woke world order, the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and other federal offices have drafted plans, policies, and educational programs that highlight the elements of a woke-oriented foreign policy: diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI).

Witness the rhetoric and actions of the architects and agents of foreign policy as they diffuse their interpretation and understanding of DEI around the world:

• Vice President Kamala Harris, during her March 27 visit in 2023, pontificated to the people of Ghana about “the importance of supporting “freedom” and the fight “for equality among all people.”

• The U.S. Ambassador to Japan (and former Democratic congressman and chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee), Rahm Emmanuel, believes it is necessary to repeatedly remind the Japanese about LGBTQI+ rights. He tweeted that there can be no tolerance for delay when it comes to achieving equal rights for all. 

• Secretary of State Antony Blinken hounds his counterpart from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on their treatment of LGBTQI+ individuals every time they speak.  

The aforementioned Cormier-Smith flies around the world on a mission to assist marginalized communities plagued by the effects of white supremacy and ethnic discrimination. Her position embodies the administration’s belief that merely recognizing diversity and equality is not sufficient; the entire world must be transformed by
inclusivity and equity. During her visit to the Kingdom of Jordan in February 2023, Cormier-Smith expressed that belief when she sought to learn more about the status of Afro-Jordanians, a community that accounts for just 1.8 percent of the Kingdom’s population. She said during the visit: “greater diversity and representation in the workforce and the political process is a win for everybody.”  

Tim Lenderking, the U.S. Envoy to Yemen, is working to resolve the country’s nine-year civil war through an “inclusive” political dialogue. He stated in March 2023:

Women must be included meaningfully in all stages and in all levels of peace efforts … and it’s incumbent on the international community to press the parties to meaningfully include women in the peace process.

Lenderking spoke those words to the Peace Track Initiative, a group representative of a larger initiative promoted by the State Department’s Office of Global Women’s Issues that champions gender equity.

Via the X account of the U.S. Embassy in Brazil, a U.S. official identified only as “Mark” lectured Brazilians in May 2023 about the importance of gender-neutral pronouns, claiming that making assumptions about gender based on appearances is a form of “micro-aggression.”

For the State Department, the absence of gender-neutral pronouns perpetuates oppression because it negates identities. The creation of gender-neutral pronouns like “xe/xem” or “ze/hir” modernizes centuries-old languages by making them more inclusive and equitable for individuals who do not identify as either male or female. 

USAID created the Rainbow Fund. Its purpose is to move beyond issues of human rights and equality to matters of political and civil rights by cultivating LGBTQI+ activism and leadership. The fund demonstrates that the agency seeks more than just the decriminalization of certain sexual behaviors. It wants to revolutionize traditional and religious societies by normalizing same-sex marriage, surrogacy for same-sex couples, and sex change operations for children. The fund complements another grassroots endeavor: a 30-page educational program guide that seeks to help teachers who work abroad to “integrate lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and intersex (LGBTQI+) considerations into programming.” It is an unsubtle attempt to normalize pro-LGBTQI+ perspectives among the most impressionable individuals—children—within traditional societies where there is no historical or cultural basis for America’s woke beliefs.

The Biden administration’s celebration and promotion of a woke-infused foreign policy is perplexing. An analysis of the beliefs and ideas underpinning the policy reveals dangers and problems. The woke agenda is not the liberator, comforter, and ally that it claims to be. It is perceived as a form of 21st-century cultural imperialism. Promoting an international woke agenda is not welcomed with open arms by countries and populations; rather, it is considered interference in domestic affairs and the imposition of foreign beliefs. 

Biden and his woke warriors antagonize, irritate, and offend civilizations, cultures, and countries. The application of woke beliefs and practices to U.S. foreign policy disrupts, distances, and divides: It disrupts states and societies by advancing identity politics; it distances the United States from its allies and partners by creating distrust; and it divides by making woke beliefs and practices a convenient issue to rally against. 

For example, Cormier-Smith’s mission to raise awareness about marginalized identities abroad is inherently problematic. Her emphasis on recognizing victimized communities and inequity elevates communal identities to the point that all politics is about identity. This approach is a caustic cocktail because it disrupts social cohesion. National identity dissipates as the interests of respective communities (e.g., sexual, racial, ethnic, and indigenous) become more salient. A community’s interests compete with or supersede the interests of the nation and state, requiring that every community’s interests are appeased in what becomes a zero-sum competition. Politics evolves from formulating and implementing policies to a vicious struggle for control over the levers of state power. 

Cormier-Smith’s lecturing of Jordan about the importance of equity and inclusivity does more harm than good to the prosperity and cohesion of the Kingdom’s state and society. She needs to look no further than Lebanon and South Africa to witness the disruption caused by making wokeism the nostrum of U.S. policy efforts.

In Lebanon, a reliance on identity politics has inflicted irreparable damage. The Lebanese political system recognizes and accommodates the country’s 18 religious communities, but this pluralism has proven to be anything but a panacea. Recurring dysfunction, policy paralysis, and periods of armed conflict have become the rule of the day. Currently, Lebanon cannot elect a president or form a government. It cannot even provide electricity to its citizens or collect garbage reliably, to say nothing of its failure to prevent, or recover from, the explosion of its main port in 2020, or to address the historic economic collapse that began in the fall of 2019.

Equity policies are also ravaging South Africa. In 1994, the World Bank considered South Africa an upper-middle-income developing country with a per capita GDP exceeding all other African countries, except Gabon. Today, South Africa is on the brink of state failure. The woke policies of President Thabo Mbeki (1999-2008) extinguished hopes for South Africa. Under Mbeki’s rule, the government passed laws that mandated strict racial hiring quotas. As a result, government institutions and the private sector are led and staffed by people who lack the skills to perform their jobs. Today’s South Africa now endures blackouts, polluted water, an unreliable rail network, a crumbling medical infrastructure, a failing education system, and high unemployment.

[Vladimir Putin] protrays wokeism as a threat to Russian culture and traditional Russian values and effectively uses this theme to stamp out domestic opposition to his rule. 

The promulgation of woke beliefs, causes, and practices by the U.S. State Department and USAID provides a convenient theme for hostile leaders to galvanize domestic support against America. Russian President Vladimir Putin frequently invokes the dangers of America’s woke ideas in his speeches. He portrays wokeism as a threat to Russian culture and traditional Russian values and effectively uses this theme to stamp out domestic opposition to his rule. Turkish President Recep Erdoğan utilized a similar tactic to extend his hold on the presidency. While campaigning for re-election in 2023, he associated his political opponent with woke beliefs and practices to appeal to traditional voters. 

The introduction of woke values and beliefs also inhibits agreement and undermines the political will needed to end conflicts. The aforementioned Lenderking’s attempt to establish “inclusive political dialogue” in Yemen ignores the reality that the main combatants in the conflict—the Houthis—have no patience for his insistence on sexual equity and equality. The Houthis impose conservative Muslim values in the areas they control, which encompass about 80 percent of the Yemeni population. They believe that such traditional values protect female honor. A durable peace in Yemen requires the cooperation of the Houthis. Considering the Houthis hold the upper hand in the conflict, Lenderking’s gender-equity objective creates a ridiculous impediment to reaching an agreement to end the devastating nine-year conflict. 

A woke-oriented foreign policy also damages America’s relations with its closest allies and partners and creates obstacles to developing potential friendships. Both the leaders and populations of foreign countries consider the United States’ woke rhetoric as presumptive and unwelcome, if not outright intrusive, imposing, and confrontational.

The hubris, elitism, entitlement, and a lack of respect for foreign cultural boundaries have negative repercussions. The immediate and most obvious repercussions are the verbal and written retorts directed at the U.S. The Speaker of Ghana’s parliament, Alban Bagbin, called Vice President Harris’s comments about LGBTQI+ rights “undemocratic” and claimed she was dictating political morality to Ghana. The Japanese newspaper Sankei Shimbun called Rahm Emmanuel’s harping on LGBTQ+ rights “an arrogant and outrageous act on the part of an ambassador to Japan to meddle in the culture of another country, especially one with a 2,000-year history.” 

Beyond the affronts generated by our woke apostles, they produce other, more serious and costly repercussions. 

The compulsion to critique and lecture foreign civilizations, countries, and cultures makes maintaining relations with them more difficult than they should be. Attempts to re-engineer how states and societies behave, talk, and think foments distrust with leadership and populations because it erodes or marginalizes the primacy of a respective culture—and dissolves the glue helping to maintain cohesion and order.

The fear of dissolution is palpable among the people of Africa. Before Vice President Harris visited Zambia (following her visit to Ghana), President Hakainde Hichilema expressed concerns about her pressuring the country on LGBTQI+ issues and exclaimed that despite U.S. pressure Zambia would remain a “Christian nation.”

In many non-Western states, political legitimacy flows from culture. A challenge to the culture is a challenge to the leadership. It makes foreign leaders doubt whether the U.S. has their interests in mind, since it works to undermine the very foundations that legitimize their power. 

Take Saudi Arabia as an example. The Kingdom is a critical partner in fighting terrorism, achieving peace between Israelis and Palestinians, and containing Iran. America also needs to ensure that any future nuclear program Riyadh develops is peaceful in nature, a task that will require Saudi cooperation. However, relations between the United States and Saudi Arabia have suffered in recent years. Part of the problem is America’s woke expectations regarding human rights and social justice. These ideas are foreign to Saudi Arabia and its conservative interpretation of Islam. They have no appeal to ordinary Saudis and no chance of being adopted by the Kingdom. Any attempt to implement woke policies would threaten the monarchy’s hold on power, since the House of Saud derives legitimacy from its conservative interpretation of Islam.

How long before Kuwait or other countries grow tired of being taunted by the U.S. State Department’s “Progress Pride Flag,” and decide to instead seek the assistance of China for their next national project?

A woke-oriented foreign policy also challenges American prosperity. The practice of cultural imperialism threatens opportunities for American business and investment in an increasingly competitive global market. The United States has a long history of assisting countries with national infrastructure and other projects. The projects demand the expertise and precision exhibited by American companies. However, China has become a viable and increasingly attractive alternative, particularly for Africa and the Middle East, because the Chinese are uninterested in social justice issues.

How long before Kuwait and other countries grow tired of being taunted by the U.S. State Department’s “Progress Pride Flag” and decide to seek instead the assistance of China for their next national project? The issue extends to matters like U.S. access to rare mineral deposits in Africa. Will African countries grow tired of being asked to empower women through abortion and reward China by selling mining concessions to Chinese companies? 

For how long, to what ends, and at what cost will the Biden administration continue to pursue this ideological crusade? In December 2022, the Indonesian parliament passed a new criminal code that punishes sexual relations outside the institution of marriage. Visitors to Bali, a popular vacation destination for Westerners, might be jailed for one year if found guilty of violating the law. Could a disagreement with Indonesia over sexual freedom—a central tenet of America’s woke belief system—complicate or undermine U.S.-Indonesian relations, which is a relationship critical to containing China? 

A woke-infused U.S. foreign policy reveals an ugly side of America while compounding its pre-existing
international relations problems. The Biden administration’s infatuation with DEI produces hypocritical, imperialistic, and disruptive foreign policy.

In the eyes of the world, America’s posturing as the champion and purveyor of democracy and sovereignty violates those fundamental principles in the name of wokeism. These acts corrode America’s credibility. They foment suspicion and imperil future economic opportunities.

The Biden administration exports toxic identity politics in the name of wokeism, fracturing states, societies, and the world. It drives deeper wedges within societies, creating additional divisions that prolong conflict and further complicate turmoil. The U.S. cannot afford to create more Lebanons and South Africas. Nor can the U.S. afford a more polarized international environment.

It is remarkable that President Biden and Vice President Harris and their woke apostles believe they can pressure other countries to adopt alien social beliefs and practices completely contrary to their traditions, and still expect to get their cooperation on more important matters. How many times can one offend a society, its people, or leaders and still expect to be welcomed? The Biden administration’s attitude is even more reckless given that the United States is now competing with China for influence in capitals around the world. China doesn’t demand  adherence to woke principles as a price for cooperative relations.

The Rolling Stones song “Blinded by Rainbows” aptly describes the machinations of America’s foreign policy. The Biden administration and its State Department have crafted and articulated a foreign policy without thinking through the consequences. Their indulgence in a provincial progressive belief structure and their determination to proselytize it has blinded them to the harm they are inflicting on American interests and security. The next president needs to wipe the rainbows out of the eyes of America’s diplomatic corps so that its can see the world realistically and act in a way that actually advances U.S. interests.