Joe Biden’s poll numbers have consistently slid since his presidency began, as the vote to return to “normal” after Donald Trump instead resulted in a President giving us a progressive Abby Normal; now we’re seemingly all on a ride aboard the grand funk railroad, as a solid majority think we’re headed down the wrong path. Mr. Biden’s bait and switch governance (running as a moderate and governing as a radical progressive) has greatly harmed the country and his party. You can trace the precipitous drop in his polling to the disastrous Afghanistan retreat, which we (and many, many others) warned would only embolden the bad actors of the world (e.g., Russia, China, Iran) to doubt the U.S. commitment to a liberal world order based on individual liberty and democracy and resistance to autocracy. I don’t think Mr. Biden’s weakness in Afghanistan caused Mr. Putin to invade Ukraine in any sense, but it no doubt encouraged him as one more favorable part of his calculus to do what he has always wanted to do. Would he have done it under a President Trump? Perhaps…he is aging and there is limited time left. With nearly $100/barrel oil, fractured politics in the U.S., a weak Mr. Biden and a weak and dependent Europe, Mr. Putin calculated there would never be a better time. He was right, of course, but that did not guarantee success–indeed, most observers think Mr. Putin has badly miscalculated–the best time to invade is still a really bad time.

Mr. Biden has been given an opportunity to display leadership in the face of this aggression, and his preliminary performance is mixed. Beyond the debacle of Afghanistan, this invasion has been months in the making, and the Biden Administration did little to stop it. When 70,000 Russian troops were on the border last year, what was the U.S. and NATO’s response? Failure to respond “tit for tat” to the Russian buildup in order “not to escalate” the tensions violates standard game theory understanding of foreign relations and only encouraged the aggressor to go further. The fact that only now are the western nations coming to Ukraine’s aid in a meaningful way is disappointing. Mr. Biden’s continued warnings to the world (which I’ll applaud in a moment) evoked the memory of a scene in Peter Jackson’s The Return of the King, when the armies of Mordor storm Minas Tirith, and a soldier says “Long has he (Lord Denethor) foreseen this doom”, to which Gandalf replies contemptuously, “seen, and done nothing.” Mr. Biden could have, and should have, done much more in advance, given his self-proclaimed ability to work with Europe and NATO. And of course his unfortunate gaffe about a “minor incursion” didn’t help.

Yet I was pleased with his steady performance of broadcasting to the world what the Russians were up to with his sharing of intelligence with others. Mr. Biden gave it the proper focus as he regularly warned the world about what Mr. Putin’s aims were. Russian denials are now brutally revealed as the lies they were, and Mr. Biden’s efforts prior to the invasion have no doubt helped crystalize the almost universal condemnation of Mr. Putin. In this, Americans can feel some encouragement in our president, even if for many it is only begrudgingly, i.e., “well, at least he didn’t totally mess this up.” I’ll give him a bit more than that, because if we handle this appropriately, and Russia is forced to back down, Mr. Biden will be able to somewhat reverse the disastrous view of his global leadership after Afghanistan, and China will no doubt think long and hard about whether this is the best time to invade Taiwan.

Yet I fear Mr. Biden will not step up as he could, and tonight’s State of the Union is likely to be a failed opportunity to build on the world’s condemnation of Russia. The best course of action would be for Mr. Biden to announce a full scale effort for production of energy in the U.S. The idea that we’ve been begging Russia and OPEC to pump more oil, while throttling domestic production is the epitome of foolishness. To the extent global warming is a problem, it is global, and oil produced in the U.S. is not more harmful (likely much cleaner actually than Russia’s processes) than oil produced in Russia. One of the major benefits of energy independence that we had over the last decade was taking petrodollars out of the hands of many of the world’s worst actors (Russia, Libya, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela). Mr. Biden’s efforts have directly led to more oil revenue to Mr. Putin–that needs to end. I realize he can’t and won’t fully repudiate his position, but these are desperate times. So desperate that even the Greens in Germany’s government are now embracing more fossil fuel production by approving LNG terminals in Germany.

Germany’s Greens, like many parties of the left around the world, purport to combine environmental enthusiasm with idealism about human rights and the rule of law. The Ukraine invasion is testing those abstract ideals as it forces the left to reckon with the balance among climate goals, national security and aspirations for world peace. The Greens in Berlin are showing they can adapt to a changed world and are prepared to grapple honestly with its challenges even at the expense of their climate concerns. It’s a lesson the British and North American left could stand to learn.

Can’t U.S. environmentalists be the slightest bit pragmatic when their current policy does zero for the environment, and funds Mr. Putin and other bad actors? The Biden Administration’s Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has recently made a much higher hurdle before additional LNG export terminals can be approved, leading Senator Manchin to say:

“Today’s reckless decision by FERC’S Democratic Commissioners puts the security of our nation at risk,” the West Virginia Democrat said. “The Commission went too far by prioritizing a political agenda over their main mission—ensuring our nation’s energy reliability and security…..The only thing they accomplished today was constructing additional road blocks that further delay building out the energy infrastructure our country desperately needs. Energy independence is our greatest geopolitical and economic tool and we cannot lose sight of that as instability rises around the globe.”

Mr. Biden could follow the German Green Party lead, and say something like this. “Under my administration, the United States will continue its conversion to a clean energy economy. We will fund a transition to blah, blah, blah…..But the reality is this transition is going to take years, and while we are making that transition, the U.S. must continue to lead the world in production of energy, and it’s even more important with Russia’s aggression in Europe. One of the best ways we can limit Mr. Putin’s expansionism is to make sure he does not have the capacity to use energy blackmail against our NATO partners. Today I have directed the accelerated approval of all LNG export facilities so that Russia cannot continue it’s energy threats to Europe. We are opening up more opportunities for drilling on Federal lands, and are encouraging U.S. oil and gas companies to expand production as rapidly as possible. We believe for the near and the far term, we must be energy independent. For the near term, we will still be reliant on fossil fuels, but continuing our transition to cleaner burning natural gas for the U.S. and Europe. In the long term, my administration will lead the way to net carbon zero. Mr. Putin, your days of threatening the U.S. and our allies with energy blackmail are over.”

Can Mr. Biden rise above his subservient posture to the left and govern as the moderate he claimed he’d be? Someone who would try to unite a divided country? I can hope–but count me skeptical, despite his abysmal public approval. And that will be a failed opportunity to build a consensus that recognizes both the dangerous world we live in, as well as the aspirational future many on the environmental left dream of.