As the 2024 US presidential elections approached, several think tanks had provided assessments on the potential shifts in US policy depending on the election’s outcome. These analyses emphasize the stark contrast between the foreign policy directions that could be taken depending on whether Donald Trump or Kamala Harris secures the presidency.
Global
Trump’s approach is expected to amplify unilateralism and isolationism, focusing on “America First” policies, which could lead to disengagement from international agreements and alliances. This could diminish US global influence. In contrast, Harris is likely to maintain multilateral engagement, emphasizing alliances, promoting democracy, and ensuring a stable yet assertive US role in global affairs. Under her leadership, the US might continue or even increase its global influence with a robust military presence to address global threats. (The Foreign Policy Centre, Chatham House, Stratfor)
Russia
A Trump administration will likely continue the adversarial posture, with a focus on containing Russia’s influence. Harris could make similar adversarial posture, but with potential for more assertive actions in multilateral contexts (Chatham House) Trump’s administration could lead to reduced US support for Ukraine, potentially emboldening Russia and increasing the risk of prolonged or renewed conflict. Harris’s perspective is one of continued support for Ukraine, a firm stance against Russian aggression, and a commitment to NATO and diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict. (Stratfor)
China
Regardless of who wins, US-China relations will remain competitive, with the US striving to maintain regional influence through alliances. However, a Trump administration might result in a more fragmented global order, with increased challenges from countries like Russia, Iran, and North Korea. (CSIS, Stratfor)
Middle East
Harris would likely pursue a balanced approach with a predictable continuation of current policies in the Middle East, possibly with minor adjustments. On the other hand, a Trump victory could lead to significant shifts, particularly in military commitments and alliances, potentially reducing multilateral cooperation in the region. (Thinking Middle East)
Military Engagement in South Asia
Under Trump, the US might shift its focus away from CT as a primary military objective in South Asia, instead emphasizing strategic competition with China. This could lead to a reduced military footprint in Pakistan, with more targeted operations and intelligence sharing (UPI). Under Harris, CT efforts would still play a significant role, with a focus on maintaining regional stability. (Asia Society)
Pakistan
A Trump administration might emphasize conditional aid to Pakistan, tying economic assistance to specific security or political outcomes, potentially reducing support for developmental projects unless they align with US strategic interests. Harris, however, might increase support for developmental projects in Pakistan, particularly the ones related to the CPEC, to counter Chinese influence. (Chatham House)
Given Pakistan’s close ties with China, US-Pakistan relations could experience increased tensions if the US administration, particularly under Trump, adopts a more adversarial stance towards China’s allies. This could manifest in reduced military aid or more aggressive diplomatic stances. (Stratfor) However, warmer relations between Trump and IK, previously driven by immediate security concerns regarding Afghanistan, in contrast to Biden’s strategic approach, may influence Pakistan’s future political landscape. (CSIS)
India
US policy is expected to continue strengthening ties with India as a counterbalance to China’s growing regional influence, regardless of who wins the presidency. Trump might deprioritize projects like the IMEEC if they are perceived as offering minimal direct economic benefits to the US, and his focus could shift away from engaging with India unless it directly aligns with his strategic interests. Harris is expected to continue engagement with India, supporting initiatives like IMEEC and integrating them into broader global supply chains. (CSIS, Chatham House, South Asian Voices, South Asia Journal)
Afghanistan
Trump’s administration could continue to distance the US from Afghanistan, avoiding further military involvement but maintaining a focus on CT efforts, possibly leading to minimal engagement. Harris might continue Biden’s emphasis on CT in Afghanistan, avoiding deep military involvement while focusing on regional stability through diplomatic channels rather than military force. (Thinking Middle East)
Iran
Trump is expected to persist with his previous administration’s strategies, including a “maximum pressure” stance on Iran, strong support for Israel, and alliances with regional strongmen. On the other hand, Harris, with limited foreign policy experience, will likely continue Biden’s approach but may adjust to regional volatility. (Middle East Institute)