The Role of Foreign Policy in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election: Kamala Harris vs. Donald Trump

As the 2024 U.S. presidential election draws closer, foreign policy is emerging as a key battleground, particularly in how the United States engages with the Middle East. With the country’s geographical isolation offering a false sense of security, the stakes are high as voters weigh the future of America’s role on the global stage. In this election, the divide between Republican and Democratic visions for foreign policy is sharper than ever, with candidates Kamala Harris and Donald Trump presenting vastly different approaches to the region’s growing conflicts, including the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.

The U.S. and Its Global Influence

The United States has long viewed its global involvement from a position of strength, shielded from many of the world’s major conflicts by oceans and distance. This isolation has allowed the U.S. to project its military might and diplomatic influence far beyond its borders. In key regions like the Middle East, the U.S. plays a critical role in shaping political outcomes, and its foreign policy decisions in this region resonate both internationally and domestically.

For decades, the U.S. has been a staunch ally of Israel, providing substantial military and financial support. However, this support is now under scrutiny, particularly as Israel’s involvement in conflicts with Palestine, Lebanon, and Iran intensifies. Critics argue that unwavering American support for Israel has exacerbated tensions in the region, contributing to worsening conditions for Palestinians and increasing instability. This issue has come to the forefront of the 2024 election, with both candidates offering starkly different solutions.

Donald Trump’s “Peace Through Strength” Philosophy

For former President Donald Trump, his relationship with Israel is one of the defining aspects of his foreign policy platform. Trump has consistently positioned himself as a strong ally of Israel, promoting a “peace through strength” philosophy that resonates with his Republican base, particularly in rural and conservative heartland states. This approach prioritises national security and a robust military presence in the Middle East, asserting that America’s military engagement is essential for protecting U.S. interests abroad, even at the cost of international tension.

Trump’s “America First” policy has found support in those who see U.S. foreign involvement as a strategic advantage to deter threats and protect national interests. Many voters, especially those in less urbanised areas, believe that a strong, assertive America abroad ensures safety and stability at home. With Trump’s steadfast defence of Israel, his base is largely united behind his vision of maintaining American military dominance in global affairs.

Kamala Harris and the Divided Democratic Party

On the other side, Kamala Harris faces a much more complex political landscape. As the leading Democratic candidate, Harris must navigate a party deeply divided on the issue of U.S. foreign involvement, especially in the Middle East. While traditional Democrats continue to support strong diplomatic ties with Israel, many progressive voices, especially those in urban areas and on the coasts, are calling for a shift toward a more balanced and humanitarian approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

These progressives argue that the U.S. should push for peace negotiations and reduce its military aid to Israel. For them, the status quo has contributed to ongoing suffering in the region and failed to bring about lasting peace. Harris, who represents a more centrist position within the Democratic Party, must find a way to balance these progressive demands while maintaining traditional alliances that have long been central to U.S. foreign policy.

Her campaign faces the challenge of uniting her base, especially younger, more liberal voters, with the broader electorate that still values America’s diplomatic and military influence. The pressure to maintain this balance will be critical as the election draws nearer, with Harris needing to articulate a foreign policy vision that appeals to both her party’s progressive wing and more centrist voters.

Geography and Political Divide

Geography plays a significant role in shaping American voters’ views on foreign policy. In rural and suburban areas, where Trump’s base is most concentrated, voters tend to prioritise strong military support and national security. These voters are more inclined to back a hawkish foreign policy that places emphasis on military strength and unwavering alliances.

In contrast, urban voters, particularly those on the coasts, often lean towards a more diplomatic and nuanced approach. These voters are more likely to support Harris’s calls for peaceful conflict resolution, advocating for multilateral negotiations rather than military intervention. The regional divide reflects a broader ideological split within the U.S., where views on foreign policy often align with domestic political and social values.

The Election’s Foreign Policy Debate

As the 2024 election looms, it’s clear that foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, will play a central role in shaping voter preferences. The question at hand is whether the U.S. should continue its strong military presence abroad, particularly in the Middle East, or shift towards a more balanced diplomatic approach. Trump’s promise to maintain his tough stance on Israel contrasts sharply with Harris’s call for a more peaceful resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Ultimately, the outcome of this election could determine the future trajectory of U.S. foreign policy for years to come. As tensions rise in the Middle East and American voters debate their country’s role in the world, the decision will likely be influenced by how voters perceive the risks and rewards of continued military engagement versus a shift toward diplomacy.

A Polarised Nation, A Divided Foreign Policy

The divide between these two candidates on foreign policy reflects the broader political polarisation within the United States. While the American public is increasingly divided on domestic issues, foreign policy—once seen as an arena of relative consensus—has become a major fault line in the 2024 election. The differing approaches of Harris and Trump highlight the ideological chasm between the two parties, and it’s clear that the future of U.S. foreign policy will be a decisive factor for many voters come November.

As voters prepare to cast their ballots, the decision over how America engages with the world, particularly in the Middle East, will have lasting implications for the country’s global standing and its role as a superpower in the 21st century.