When US President Joe Biden made an unexpected visit to Kyiv in February 2023, against a somber backdrop of air sirens signaling heightened tensions, he sought to reaffirm America’s commitment to Ukraine amidst its ongoing conflict with Russia. Reflecting on this pivotal moment, he expressed, “I felt something… more strongly than ever before,” asserting that “America is a beacon to the world.”
However, as the world looks towards the upcoming US presidential election, the question looms: who will take the helm of this self-proclaimed beacon? Will Vice President Kamala Harris continue Biden’s legacy, promoting a steadfast belief that “in these unsettled times, it is clear America cannot retreat”? Or will Donald Trump assert his vision for the nation under the banner of “Americanism, not globalism,” aiming to steer the country towards a more isolationist approach?
The current global landscape presents a stark reminder that the value of US influence is being critically scrutinized. Regional powers are asserting their autonomy, and authoritarian governments are crafting their own alliances, while wars in conflict zones like Gaza and Ukraine reveal unsettling doubts about America’s effectiveness. Nonetheless, the United States still commands significant weight due to its unparalleled economic and military strength, making it a central figure in numerous international coalitions. In light of this influence, I sought insights from various experts on the potential global ramifications of this crucial election.
“Donald Trump is Europe’s nightmare,” warns Rose Gottemoeller, former deputy secretary general of NATO, echoing concerns from various quarters regarding his past threats to withdraw from NATO. Washington’s defense spending dwarfs that of the alliance’s 31 other members, accounting for approximately two-thirds of their total military budgets.
If Harris wins, Ms. Gottemoeller expresses confidence that “NATO will no doubt be in good Washington hands.” Nonetheless, she cautions that while she aims to collaborate closely with NATO and the European Union for a successful outcome in Ukraine, she will maintain pressure on Europe regarding defense spending.
However, the new administration will likely contend with a Republican-controlled Senate or House, which may be less inclined to support foreign interventions compared to their Democratic counterparts. This reality brings forth a growing apprehension that regardless of who ascends to the presidency, pressure will intensify on Kyiv to seek resolution in the ongoing conflict, especially as US lawmakers display increasing reluctance toward endorsing substantial aid packages.
“The US remains the most consequential international actor in matters of peace and security,” asserts Comfort Ero, president and CEO of the International Crisis Group. Yet, she points out that the country’s capacity to mediate and resolve conflicts has diminished significantly.
“Deadly conflict is becoming more intractable, with big-power competition accelerating and middle powers on the rise,” Ms. Ero describes the increasingly tangled web of modern conflicts that often involve multiple global players.
A win by Harris, she speculates, “represents continuity with the current administration.” Conversely, should Trump prevail, he may extend even greater support to Israel concerning its operations in Gaza while potentially brokering a peace deal with Moscow without involving Kyiv.
Trump has also proclaimed it’s high time to “get back to peace and stop killing people,” though his backing of Netanyahu and his tendency to give broad leeway to Israel complicates the portrayal of him as a peacemaker.
In stark contrast, Harris has pledged to maintain unwavering support for Ukraine, declaring, “I have been proud to stand with Ukraine. I will continue to stand with Ukraine. And I will work to ensure Ukraine prevails in this war.”
“The biggest shock to the global economy for decades.” That’s how leading China scholar Rana Mitter characterizes Trump’s proposed 60 percent tariffs on all imported Chinese goods, an aggressive move that reflects his unyielding “America First” strategy.
However, Mitter emphasizes nuances in how each candidate might approach relations with Beijing. If Harris is elected, he anticipates a steadier trajectory in diplomatic relations. In contrast, a Trump victory would present a more unpredictable scenario, particularly concerning his stance on Taiwan, where ambiguity surrounding military support could pose significant international implications.
The election outcome also holds profound implications for global efforts to combat climate change, a pressing issue that former Irish President and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson emphasizes has ramifications beyond American borders. “Every fraction of a degree matters to avert the worst impacts of climate change and prevent a future where devastating hurricanes like Milton are the norm,” she warns.
Robinson expresses concern that Trump’s previous environmental policies and his regular dismissals of climate initiatives pose significant threats to sustainable progress. In stark contrast, she encourages Harris to refine her stance and assert leadership concerning climate action, building on recent momentum toward a more sustainable future.
The outcome of the US election holds immense significance, given the unparalleled influence the United States wields, not just through its military and economic might, but through its potential to lead with moral authority on the global stage,” says Martin Griffiths, a veteran conflict mediator. He envisions greater stability with a Harris administration, emphasizing that a return to Trump’s presidency marked by isolationism offers little hope for global stability.
While Biden’s administration has made strides in aid and support, Griffiths expresses disappointment over its “hesitancy” regarding the worsening humanitarian crisis in the Middle East. He underscores the vital necessity for sustained American engagement to restore global faith in principled leadership, saying, “In a time of global conflict and uncertainty, the world longs for the US to rise to the challenge of responsible, principled leadership… We demand more. We deserve more. And we dare to hope for more.”
