Stephen M Walt, like other commentators, certainly sees Biden foreign policy flaw. However, he attributes the gap between aspiration and performance to 4 challenges.

"When Joe Biden became president, many assumed his administration would manage America’s relations with other countries in a disciplined, predictable, and sophisticated way.
....
It hasn’t quite worked out that way.

....certain aspects of Biden’s performance are worrying, leading more than a few observers to make unflattering comparisons to his undistinguished predecessor.

....the gap between the administration’s aspirations and its performance reveals a lot about the inherent difficulty of conducting a successful foreign policy, especially given the vaunting ambitions that U.S. administrations find nearly impossible to resist.

For starters, the unipolar moment is over, and we now live in a lopsided multipolar world. As international relations theorists have long understood, relations among the major powers in multipolarity are inherently more complicated, contingent, and hard to manage than relations in bipolarity or unipolarity. With more than two major powers, the interests of significant actors are less likely to line up in a consistent and predictable fashion, and the twin dangers of abandonment and entrapment loom larger. Instead of the clear “us versus them” alignments typical of bipolarity (e.g., NATO versus the Warsaw Pact), one expects looser arrangements where partners agree on some issues but not others.
....
A second challenge arises from global problems that transcend traditional great-power rivalry and that cannot be addressed without extensive cooperation across current geopolitical fault lines. Climate change is the paramount example of this problem, but one could easily add pandemic responses, global macroeconomic management, or international terrorism.
....
And then there’s the perennial problem of hubris. Biden may be pursuing a somewhat more realistic foreign-policy agenda than Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, or even Barack Obama did, but he’s hardly playing small ball. He has ended America’s fruitless crusade in Afghanistan and doesn’t seem interested in trying to fix the Middle East, but he wants to do a lot more in the Indo-Pacific, revitalize NATO, solve the climate problem, unite the world’s democracies against authoritarianism, and launch an ambitious social agenda at home that will inevitably affect America’s economic ties with the rest of the world. And didn’t Secretary of State Antony Blinken also say the administration was going to put human rights at the center of its foreign policy? Add it all up and you get a pretty breathtaking agenda, one that would be hard to pull off even if the foreign-policy establishment were united behind every item on the list and the Democrats had comfortable veto-proof margins in the House and Senate.

Which brings us to a fourth, closely related problem. Given America’s many commitments and still considerable ambitions, it is simply impossible to devise a foreign-policy strategy that is free from internal contradictions. As Robert Wright reminds us, steps taken to advance one cherished objective can make other goals harder to achieve; what one hand knits the other unravels."

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/09/30/is-bidens-foreign-policy-failing/

Well done. Prof Walt