Trump vs Harris: 2024 Foreign Policy Insights

As the 2024 presidential poll approaches, foreign policy becomes a crucial battleground for potential candidates. The stark contrast between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump's approaches to international relations significantly influences the global stage. Their divergent views on critical issues like the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza are shaping the discourse surrounding America's role in world affairs.

Credit: Casual Dose montage/The White House

Approach to China and Asia-Pacific

Economic policies: Harris and Trump have divergent views on trade with China. Skeptical of free trade orthodoxy, Harris has criticized Trump's broad sanctions on Chinese goods. However, the Biden administration has primarily maintained these tariffs. Trump advocates for even more severe restrictions, proposing a 60% tariff on Chinese imports and a plan to boost U.S. manufacturing to reduce reliance on China.

Military strategy: Both candidates view China as a threat to peace in the Indo-Pacific region. Harris supports the Biden administration's efforts to restrict the export of advanced semiconductors to China, citing concerns about military and intelligence applications. Trump proposes building a missile defense shield and implementing new restrictions on Chinese-owned infrastructure in the U.S.

Diplomatic relations: Harris has met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, emphasizing the need for open communication to manage competition responsibly. She has also worked on legislation promoting human rights in Hong Kong and expressed support for Taiwan's self-defense. On the other hand, Trump has taken a more confrontational stance, arguing that Taiwan should pay the U.S. for its defense.

Middle East and Israel-Palestine Conflict

Support for Israel: Harris backs the Biden administration's approach to the Gaza conflict, advocating for de-escalation and a cease-fire that includes hostage return. She supports Israel's right to self-defense and Hamas's elimination but has shown alignment with progressive views. In a speech in Selma, Alabama, Harris called the situation in Gaza a "humanitarian catastrophe" and urged an immediate, temporary cease-fire. She has also displayed a more sympathetic tone toward Palestinians, stating, "We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering."

Iran nuclear deal: Harris criticized Trump's withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, calling it "reckless." She has supported rejoining the agreement if Iran returns to verifiable compliance. Harris has highlighted the Obama-Biden administration's success in imposing sanctions that brought Iran to negotiations and prevented a nuclear-armed Iran. The growing threat of Iran's nuclear program weaponization could be a key challenge for a potential Harris administration.

Regional alliances: Harris supports a two-state solution that ensures Israel's security and Palestinian statehood. She has emphasized the need for Palestinians to recognize Israel as a "Jewish state" for lasting peace. Experts predict Harris may adopt a more sympathetic tone towards Palestinian issues while maintaining moderate views on Israel. Her approach is expected to be to the left of Biden's current stance but not as far as those advocating for imposing consequences on Israel.

NATO and European Allies

Commitment to NATO: Harris strongly supports NATO, viewing it as vital for transatlantic security. She emphasizes the alliance's role in maintaining stability and preventing conflicts. In contrast, Trump has criticized NATO, threatening to reduce U.S. involvement if other members don't increase their contributions.

Transatlantic partnerships: Harris advocates for strengthening alliances crucial for America's global power. She has worked to maintain NATO unity and support Ukraine against Russian aggression. Trump, however, favors an "America First" approach, skeptical of international obligations that might limit U.S. sovereignty or increase costs.

Defense spending: Both candidates support NATO allies' increased defense spending. Harris backs the commitment to spending 2% of GDP on defense, while Trump has demanded higher contributions from European partners. Their approaches differ, with Harris focusing on collaborative efforts and Trump emphasizing financial burden-sharing within the alliance.

Voters Gear Up

Harris and Trump's foreign policy approaches significantly impact America's global standing and relationships. Their contrasting views on China, the Middle East, and NATO highlight the divergent paths the U.S. might take depending on the election outcome. These differences extend to economic policies, military strategies, and diplomatic relations, shaping how the U.S. might handle key international challenges in the coming years.

As voters gear up to make their choice, understanding these foreign policy positions is crucial to grasping the potential direction of U.S. international relations. The next president's stance on these issues will affect America's role on the world stage and have far-reaching consequences for global stability and cooperation. Foreign policy is vital when casting votes in the 2024 presidential election.