DEKYAS NEWS World Breaking News and Trusted Source
Related Articles
When voters in the United States go to the polls next week, they will not only hold the fate of their country in their hands – but perhaps the fate of the world.
The presidential election comes at a globally tumultuous time, with conflict in the Middle East, a war in Ukraine and the rising power of China challenging US influence in the Asia-Pacific region.
How these geopolitical issues continue to play out may be influenced by whether or is elected the next American president.
“Whether we like it or not, the world really revolves around what happens in the United States,” Emma Shortis, a senior researcher in international and security affairs at public policy think tank The Australia Institute, told SBS News.
“It is by far the most important economy, the most important military in the world, and a large part of the fate of the world, I think, is tied to what happens in the United States.”
Concerns about 'democratic instability'
The US has long seen itself as a beacon of democracy and, since the end of the Cold War in 1991, as the last remaining superpower.
But Shortis said concerns have grown over the past decade about the “enormous amount of influence” the US has over the rest of the world.
“Historically, it has been seen as an enforcer of what is often described as 'the international rules-based order', but especially asand elsewhere I think there have been some genuine concerns raised about the United States' commitment to that … and to international law,” she said.
Combined with “democratic instability” in the US, many of that country's allies are rightly concerned about what the future will bring, Shortis said.
“That's why we're watching all of this so closely and why I think there are real concerns about what's happening, especially in the aftermath of the election, depending on how close it is and how bad that instability gets. ”
Ian Parmeter, a researcher at the Australian National University's Center for Arab and Islamic Studies, agreed that the outcome of this election and the way it is handled could threaten democracy around the world.
“It was clearly not a good prospect for democracy when Trump refused to accept the outcome of the 2020 election and invaded the Capitol,” he told SBS News.
“If Trump challenges the outcome again, it will reflect poorly on democracy, and countries that are only quasi-democracies at this stage will certainly not be encouraged to continue with democracy if they see the leading democracy in world behaves in such a way. .”
US policy towards the war between Hamas and Israel
The US and Israel have been close allies since the founding of the Jewish state in 1948.
Next In last year's attack that killed more than 1,200 people and took about 250 hostages, the Biden administration has repeatedly reaffirmed its support for .
The US has spent at least US$17.9 billion ($27 billion) in military aid to Israel since October 7, according to the Brown University report. .
Israel's subsequent bombardment of Gaza killed nearly 43,000 people, according to Israel's Health Ministry. The attacks also damaged or destroyed most of the coastal enclave's buildings and displaced about 90 percent of the population.
Early in Harris' presidential campaign, there was hope among some progressives and “moderate American support for Israel,” Shortis said.
“But as her candidacy has progressed, it has become clear that she has maintained alignment with the Biden administration, has expressed strong support for Israel and has continued to characterize Iran as enemy number one for the United States,” she said.
Whether that position could change after the election would likely depend on the pressure Harris faces from progressive Democrats, as well as the composition of her Cabinet, Shortis said.
“Contrary to the progressive pressure coming from the grassroots, there are also suggestions that Harris would appoint a Republican to her Cabinet and perhaps even have a Republican as secretary of state,” she said.
Parmeter said Donald Trump would be “much more pro-Israel.”
“Trump will probably give a much looser rein to do what he needs to do to win the war,” he said.
“I think Trump would agree with Israel's need to keep troops in Gaza; Netanyahu has made it very clear that he would push for that.”
Parmeter said Trump's support would likely extend to Israeli objectives in Lebanon, where long-standing hostilities with the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah together with Iran, earlier this month.
“But by the same token, I think Trump probably wants the war to end as quickly as possible,” he said.
Shortis argued that it was difficult to say “with certainty” what Trump's position on the Middle East would be, noting that his policy positions “often depend on who he last spoke to.”
“What exactly a Trump administration might do, where power within that administration might fall between the positions of people like the vice president and others who oppose U.S. support for war anywhere, has yet to become clear,” she said. .
US policy towards Ukraine
As for Ukraine, “a lot depends on these elections,” Parmeter said.
The Biden administration has provided Ukraine with more than US$64.1 billion ($97.5 billion) in military aid since Russia launched its full-scale invasion in February 2022.
Shortis and Parmeter said that as president, Harris would try to maintain support for Ukraine, as Biden has done — but her success ultimately depends on the number of Democrats in Congress. On November 5, all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 34 seats in the Senate will be up for grabs.
“Much of the funding and support for Ukraine has been blocked in Congress by far-right Republicans who oppose U.S. support for Ukraine, which is driven by an ideological alignment with Putin's Russia,” Shortis said.
Parmeter noticed that during Russia was able to make “significant progress” in eastern Ukraine.
“If both the House of Representatives and the Senate end up in Republican hands, it could be much more difficult for the Harris administration to enforce those policies,” he said.
“They should certainly find a way to work with the Republican-controlled Congress.”
Trump, meanwhile, has made it “abundantly clear” that as president he would not continue U.S. support for Ukraine, Shortis said.
He also claims he could .
Parmeter said this could be the case – but only in a way that would be “very bad news” for Ukraine.
“I think it could unfortunately be possible for him (Trump) to wrap it up pretty well on day one by simply saying there will be no more American funding for the Ukrainian war effort,” he said.
“I think even if Trump can't end the war on day one, he will probably aim to end it sometime fairly soon after taking office.”
US policy towards China
The US's treatment of China is one of the “very few” areas of foreign policy on which bipartisan agreement has been reached, Shortis said.
In 2018, during Trump's first presidency, he imposed a 25 percent tariff on a range of Chinese imports to the US. .
Shortis said the use of “pretty aggressive economic tactics” to try to rein in China's rising influence had continued under Biden, citing tariffs his administration imposed on imports such as electric vehicles.
“I think we've also seen the Biden administration use the Pacific as a stage for great power competition, and see much of the Pacific as kind of pawns in a security game with China,” she said.
Shortis said this would likely remain the case if Harris were elected, but that there was potential for the US to “rethink and reshape” its approach in the region.
“I think there would be more opportunities for the Pacific to advocate for a change in that position, and to advocate for greater attention – as the Biden administration initially did – to climate action commitments and nuclear non- proliferation,” she says. said.
Under Trump, Parmeter said US tariffs on imported goods were likely to become even more “extreme” – and not just on China.
“He has said he would look at 10 percent tariffs across the board for all countries – and that would be a concern for Australia – but also a 60 percent tariff to start on all Chinese goods, and then move on to other countries.” to look. opportunities out there,” he said.
“All of this may go to the World Trade Organization and international legal action may well be taken, but how the relationship with China develops will be very important.”
Shortis suggested that the “belligerent promises” Trump has made about China may not even materialize.
“Trump is unpredictable because much of his rhetoric around trade is particularly aggressive and will be incredibly destabilizing, not just for the US economy, but for the global economy more broadly – so that is very important,” she said.
'But of course we know that too and he may see a political opportunity in pursuing a 'deal' with China.”
Whether a deal would extend to US support is also up in the air.
Parmeter noted that the relationship with China would be “extremely important over the next four years… for both sides of American politics.”
Additional reporting by Tanya Dendrinos
Do you want more politics? You can stream gripping political documentaries in the and stay up to date with daily news bulletins in the SBS On Demand US Election Hub.
Stay up to date on the US elections and more with the .
