About Power and Right

US foreign policy in 2025.

Although much is at stake in the US presidential election, there will remain a large area of ​​continuity in foreign policy, regardless of the winner. However, the differences in the candidates' attitudes towards alliances and multilateralism can be significant

5305 views 47 reactions 2 comment(s)
Photo: Shutterstock
Photo: Shutterstock
Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate.

As the US presidential election approaches, many are wondering what it will mean for US foreign policy. The answer is shrouded in uncertainty.

First of all, who will win the election? At the beginning of the summer, polls showed that Donald Trump has a significant lead over President Joe Biden. But now that she has become the nominee of the Democratic Party, Vice President Kamala Harris has the advantage. The problem is that voter sentiment changes so quickly, so it's impossible to predict what it will be like on November 5. Harris shows impressive political skills, but - politics in a democracy is full of surprises.

Second, foreign leaders and figures can "vote" - in the sense that their behavior can suddenly change the agenda and the likelihood of certain decisions being made in the US. The moderate foreign policy, which George Bush Jr. talked about during his election campaign in 2000, did not at all resemble the policy he pursued after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 9. Who knows what surprises Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping may be preparing.

But, of course, pre-election statements give a certain idea about future politics. If Harris wins, one can expect the continuation of Biden's policies, albeit with some adjustments. She is clearly less oriented towards the promotion of democracy in the world (one of the main topics for Biden) and talks a little more about the rights of the Palestinians. However, in general, it will pursue the same policy of strengthening the US alliance and strengthening the system of multilateral relations (multilateralism).

Trump is less predictable. Although all politicians distort the truth, he stands out. It is hard to say which of his statements will become real policy. His stance on unilateralism and the diminishing role of alliances and multilateral organizations gives us an idea of ​​the direction of his foreign policy, but concrete questions remain unanswered.

Observers often try to improve their forecasts by watching candidate advisors more closely. Harris's chief foreign policy expert is Philip Gordon, a pragmatic, well-respected centrist who handled European and Middle Eastern affairs in previous Democratic administrations before becoming the vice president's top foreign policy adviser.

In the Trump camp, it is difficult to name a similar figure, although the press sometimes mentions Robert O'Brien, Trump's last national security adviser. What we do know, however, is that Trump regrets appointing traditional Republicans to key positions during his first term, because they limited his freedom of action and made his policies more moderate than he would have liked.

It is also worth mentioning some similarities between the two candidates. The most important is their attitude towards China. There is now broad bipartisan consensus that China has played an unfair game in trade and intellectual property, and that its assertive behavior in the East and South China Seas threatens US allies such as Japan and the Philippines. China has said many times that it does not rule out using force to seize Taiwan, which it considers a breakaway province. Biden has largely continued Trump's China policy, and Harris is likely to do the same, albeit with some modifications.

Another similarity between the candidates is their rejection of neoliberal economic policies. During Trump's term, America abandoned traditional Republican approaches to foreign trade (Reagan era) and began to increase tariffs, and is less active in the World Trade Organization. All this was done under the leadership of US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, who is still influential in Trump's circle.

In addition, Trump rejected the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiated by Barack Obama, and Biden has done nothing to rejoin the deal or reverse Trump's tariffs on Chinese imports. Biden went even further and introduced new restrictions on the export of technology to China (called "a high fence around a small yard"). Since Harris is from California and has his own ties to the US tech sector, he is unlikely to lower this fence. And from Trump we can only expect the expansion of the "yard".

Both Trump and Harris promise to increase America's "hard power" (military and economic) through investments in the defense budget and the defense industry. Both can be expected to continue their nuclear weapons modernization program and promote the development of new types of weapons using artificial intelligence.

One of the main differences concerns the candidate's attitude towards Europe. Trump and his Vice President JD Vance have made it clear that they have little interest in supporting Ukraine and NATO. Trump claims that the war will end quickly through negotiations. It is hard to imagine how this can be done without radically weakening Ukraine.

In the Middle East, both candidates promise to support Israel's security and right to self-defense, although Harris talks about the Palestinians' right to self-determination. Both are likely to encourage Saudi Arabia to normalize relations with Israel, and both will take a tough line on Iran. However, Trump gives little importance to Africa and Latin America, and Harris can be expected to pay more attention to these regions.

The most radical differences relate to America's "soft power," that is, the ability to achieve desired results through persuasion rather than coercion or money. As president, Trump pursued a unilateral policy under the slogan "America First", so other countries came to the conclusion that their interests were not taken into account. Trump openly rejected multilateralism, which was most clearly demonstrated by the withdrawal of the US from the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Health Organization. Biden reversed those decisions, but Trump is likely to reverse them again, while Harris will maintain American involvement. In addition, they are more likely than Trump to make statements in support of human rights and democracy.

In other words, much of American foreign policy will remain unchanged, regardless of who wins the election. Still, the disparity between the candidates' attitudes toward alliances and multilateralism is significant—and that could make a difference.

The author is a professor emeritus at Harvard University

Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2024. (translation: NR)

Bonus video:

(Opinions and views published in the "Columns" section are not necessarily the views of the "Vijesti" editorial office.)