Are Trump and Harris really so different on foreign policy?

As the 2024 presidential campaign enters the final stretch, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have sought to underline their foreign policy differences. Some of the distinctions are clear. Harris, for instance, promises “unwavering” support to Washington’s treaty allies in Europe and East Asia, whereas Trump frequently criticises them for free-riding on American largesse. Then, of course, there is Ukraine, where Harris’s “stay the course” preference runs counter to Trump, who would like the war to end immediately even if it entails Kyiv having to agree to painful compromises.

That is as far as their differences go, however. Indeed, both candidates remain firmly attached to the idea of American hegemony. Take Trump: the former president promises to bring back a “peace through strength” doctrine, which ensures Washington remains atop the world hierarchy. For instance, when the European Union sought to build an independent military capability outside the US-dominated Nato framework, the Trump administration issued a letter to Brussels threatening consequences. And despite all the talk during his first term, Trump did not reduce US defence commitments in Europe, and in the end called for the redeployment of only 12,000 troops — many of whom would have moved from Germany to elsewhere in Europe.

Harris, meanwhile, is a liberal interventionist and an Atlanticist who has doubled down on America’s Nato commitments. She has represented the Joe Biden administration in various European security conferences with a consistent message in her back pocket: Washington is fully invested in the transatlantic alliance and wouldn’t dare leave European allies in the lurch.

Read article in UnHerd