Five questions for Clinton and Trump: Foreign policy hot spots
From Russia to China to Iran, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have outlined starkly different approaches to dealing with America’s international issues.
With Wednesday’s final presidential debate set to focus on “foreign policy hot spots,” among other topics, here’s a list of considerations the next president will face as they help shape America’s role on the world stage.
Is Russia an adversary or a potential ally?
Donald Trump has stated that he holds Putin in higher regard as a leader than President Obama. Trump has pledged to promote “easing of tensions and improved relations” with Russia, and the National Review in August reported that Trump would be “open to lifting sanctions against Russia imposed after the 2014 invasion of Ukraine.”
Likewise, Trump has rattled US allies in Europe by suggesting that America’s commitment to NATO needs to be re-examined. In the wake of this summer’s email hacks of the Democratic National Committee, Trump encouraged further cyber attacks on his opponent: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.”
Based on Russia’s recent actions, why does Donald Trump believe a more cooperative relationship is possible? Does he want to reassure our European allies that he will oppose future Russian territorial aggression? And though Trump discredits reports that Russia is behind email hacks of the Clinton campaign, is he bothered by the potential for foreign governments to intervene in US elections?
Hillary Clinton, has been far more critical of the Russian Federation. As mentioned, her own campaign as well as the DNC have come under siege by email hacks which US intelligence agencies have traced to the Russian government. But Clinton’s critique of Russia’s Vladimir Putin and his attempts to “re-Sovietize” border nations pre-date the cyber attacks. However, Clinton was Secretary of State during the “reset” with Russia early in President Obama’s first term; that policy has since been derided as naïve.
Does Clinton believe another “reset” is possible, with Putin in power? Can she elicit Russian cooperation in regional and international issues, given the hostility she’s expressed about Putin’s regime?
How can the U.S. effectively respond-to China’s rise?
“On day one”, Donald Trump has pledged to declare China “a currency manipulator” – a move he says will either cause China to halt manipulations, or “face tough countervailing duties that level the playing field.” Clinton has also pledged that she will work with allies to press China to “play by the rules” on currency. However, as U.S. News and World Report notes, “China is not alone in trying to gain an advantage by undervaluing its currency. Moreover, the Chinese government has yielded to Western pressure over the past decade and let its currency, the Yuan, appreciate by a third, leading some economists (including the International Monetary Fund) to declare it’s no longer undervalued.”
Are Clinton and Trump simply scapegoating China on currency and trade because it’s a politically convenient target? How will each candidate address the fundamental issue of the US-China balance of trade and the vast discrepancies between our nations in pay, environmental protection, and workplace safety?
Malaysia, Vietnam, China, Brunei, and the Philippines all lay-claim to some or all of a 100-island archipelago in the South China Sea. Potentially rich in offshore oil and gas reserves, the area is also a busy shipping thoroughfare - CNN reported in October 2015 that some “$5 trillion in ship-borne trade is thought to pass through [these] waters annually”. Both Clinton and Trump have opposed China’s expansionist stance in this region, but neither candidate has spelled out exactly how far they’re willing to go to push back on Chinese aggression.
Where does each candidate draw the line against Chinese expansion in the region – and are they willing to back that up with US military engagement?
What would your election mean for the Iran nuclear deal?
Although in September of 2015, Trump said he would try to work with what he called a “disastrous” nuclear deal and turn it around, he has since pledged (speaking before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee) that his “number one priority is to dismantle the disastrous deal with Iran.”
How would Trump extricate the U.S. from the deal? And if he re-imposed sanctions on Iran, how would Trump convince other nations to go-along? Also, how does he answer the criticism that withdrawing from the deal would actually ease Iran’s path to a bomb, since it would remove the limits placed on their nuclear energy program?
Clinton has stated that she would uphold the historic nuclear deal struck with Iran and has campaigned-on her success in laying the groundwork for the agreement while she was Secretary of State.
How will Clinton ensure the deal is implemented and Iran follows through on its obligations? Can she explain how the U.S. will address Iran’s support for terrorist groups and its roles in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq?
How can you break the vicious cycle of North Korean tensions?
The question of aggression from Pyongyang came to the fore when, on September 9th, North Korea staged its largest nuclear test on the 68th anniversary of that nation’s founding.
Hillary Clinton denounced the tests and stressed her commitment to “reducing — not increasing — the number of nuclear weapons and nuclear states in the world,” a likely reference, as Politico notes, to Trump’s past suggestion that Japan should be encouraged to develop its own nuclear weapons. Clinton went on to support President Obama’s call to strengthen UN sanctions against Pyongyang.
North Korea has vexed the last few presidential administrations in similar ways, though – how will Clinton break the cycle of provocation and negotiation?
The Trump campaign, however, responded to the North Korean provocation by criticizing Hillary Clinton, blaming the test on her inability to end the North Korean nuclear program in “yet one more example of Hillary Clinton’s catastrophic failures as secretary of state”. Precisely how Trump would thwart the nuclear ambitions of North Korea remains to be determined. When asked by Charlie Rose on CBS This Morning what Trump would do if North Korea had the capacity to deliver a nuclear weapon to the United States, Trump’s campaign manager, Kellyanne Conway, responded by saying, “he would make sure that they would never use it.” When Rose pressed on how Trump planned to ensure that, Conway explained that he would not “reveal all of his plans now” and suggested that perhaps someone would ask him in a debate.
Will Donald Trump explain his strategy to contain the North Korean threat?
How will you manage America’s response to the Brexit?
Donald Trump has voiced support for separatist movements in Europe, includingthe ‘Brexit’ (this summer’s referendum that has initiated Britain’s exit from the European Union). Trump went so far as to campaign with Brexit leader, Nigel Farage in August after lauding the secession win at a press conference at his Scottish golf course. The Republican nominee has predicted the further disintegration of the EU as a result of immigration policy stating, “The people have spoken. I think the EU is going to break up. I think the EU might break up before anybody thinks in terms of Scotland. I really think that without the immigration issue [the EU] wouldn’t have had a chance of breaking up ... the people are fed up, whether it’s here or in other countries. You watch: other countries will follow.”
Although Trump was its cheerleader, as President, how would he ensure the Brexit doesn’t create global economic chaos and sap growth as many economists fear?
Clinton, who opposed the Brexit vote, has consistently stressed the importance of European cohesion, with her senior policy adviser, Jake Sullivan, stating her position “that transatlantic cooperation is essential”, and “that cooperation is strongest when Europe is united”.
In the wake of the Brexit vote, does Clinton have a strategy to insulate the American economy from shocks in Europe?