International relations experts have identified notable differences in foreign policy approaches between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump as they approach the 2024 U.S. presidential election. A survey of 705 IR scholars reveals that they expect significant variations in U.S. policies regarding climate change, NATO, nuclear negotiations, trade, and foreign assistance, with Harris being viewed as the more effective candidate in managing these foreign policy challenges.
International relations (IR) experts have identified sharp contrasts between the foreign policy approaches of Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump leading up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election. A recent survey conducted by the Teaching, Research, and International Policy Project at William & Mary, supported by the Carnegie Corporation of New York, revealed that a majority of 705 participating IR scholars expect significant disparities in policy outcomes depending on who wins the presidency. Key areas of divergence include climate change policy, with scholars estimating an 80% chance Trump would withdraw from the Paris Agreement compared to just 4% for Harris. With respect to NATO membership, experts believe there is a 38% chance Trump would exit, while Harris has only a 1% chance of such an occurrence. On nuclear negotiations with Iran, respondents see a 35% chance of a new agreement under Harris, contrasted with 7% for Trump. Trade tariffs are expected to rise significantly under Trump, with an 80% prediction, while only a 30% likelihood exists for a similar outcome under Harris. Foreign assistance is anticipated to increase under Harris by 56%, compared to a mere 20% under Trump. Furthermore, IR scholars predict a 75% chance that Trump would enhance military aid to Israel, as opposed to a 54% likelihood under Harris. However, they forecast a 63% chance that Harris will extend military support to Ukraine amidst the ongoing conflict with Russia, compared to just 16% for Trump. On broader foreign policy strategies and military involvements, there seems to be a consensus that both candidates would maintain a similar posture concerning military deployments, with 44% of respondents believing the election outcome would not impact military interventions significantly. Opinion regarding competence in managing foreign policy is also pronounced; 92% of experts believe that Harris would be more effective than Trump in this arena. Moreover, when asked about confidence in their capabilities as commander-in-chief, 87% expressed confidence in Harris, while only 6% felt similarly about Trump. The survey indicates that Harris would likely achieve her foreign policy goals 52% of the time, compared to Trump’s 32%. Such sentiments highlight an overarching belief that under a Harris presidency, foreign partnerships would flourish, with 84% of experts asserting countries would be more inclined to cooperate with her administration.
The survey conducted by the Teaching, Research, and International Policy Project sheds light on the attitudes of international relations scholars towards the foreign policy implications associated with the upcoming presidential election. Given the historical context where election outcomes have profoundly influenced the U.S. foreign policy landscape, experts anticipate that the November 5 election will similarly impact America’s global engagements and strategies. This study provides insight into the academic perspective on the candidates’ contrasting policies, reflecting widespread concerns about Trump’s management of foreign affairs compared to the expertise and anticipated strategies of Harris. This understanding is essential for grasping the potential changes in U.S. foreign interactions that the election could bring about, especially concerning critical issues like international agreements, military alliances, and economic policies.
In conclusion, the contrasting views of IR experts reveal a consensus that Kamala Harris would likely usher in a more cooperative and strategically sound foreign policy approach compared to Donald Trump. The stark differences in their expected policies on climate change, international alliances, military support, and overall competence in foreign affairs underscore the significant implications that the upcoming election holds for America’s role on the global stage. Scholars overwhelmingly predict that a Harris administration would lead to more favorable international interactions and effective management of foreign policy challenges.
Original Source: foreignpolicy.com
