USA News Hub

Kamala Harris “would pursue an evolution rather than a revolution” in America’s relationships in the world if she becomes president, Josh Rogin said at The Washington Post. Vice presidents don’t make foreign policy — they help implement a president’s vision. That has been Harris’ role under President Joe Biden for the last four years. Now, though, she’s preparing to outline a foreign policy agenda that offers “both continuity with the Biden administration and modulation where his policy has fallen short.”

Harris has signaled that her candidacy offers a “chance to reset” a Middle East policy that has alienated progressive Democrats, said NBC News. “Israel has a right to defend itself,” she said after a meeting last month with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But, Harris added: “We cannot allow ourselves to become numb to the suffering” of Palestinians. That’s a sign that her foreign policy views differ “more on tone than on substance” from Biden’s approach. 

‘Stress-tested’ on the world stage

“She doesn’t really have a background in defense or foreign policy,” one former official told Politico. And she certainly doesn’t have nearly as much experience as Biden, who has been deeply involved in America’s foreign policy as senator, vice president and president over the last 50 years. But she has acted as a “surrogate” for Biden on the world stage — including at a 2022 security summit where she voiced support for Ukraine ahead of Russia’s invasion. “Frankly,” said Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), “she has been stress-tested.”

Harris has been “more involved in foreign policy than we realize,” Fred Kaplan said at Slate. As vice president, she has visited 21 countries and met with more than 150 leaders. Some of those trips “amounted to rote protocol.” There were also substantive accomplishments: Smoothing over relationships with France amidst anger over an American nuclear submarine deal with Australia, and helping bring the Philippines back into America’s orbit in the Pacific. “She’s not a foreign-policy wonk,” said Eurasia Group’s Ian Bremmer, “but there’s no question she has played an active role on a bunch of foreign-policy issues.”

Harris and Trump: ‘Strategically consistent’

The elephant in the room: China. “Does China prefer Harris or Trump?,” asked Wang Jisi, Hu Ran and Zhao Jianwei at Foreign Affairs. Donald Trump’s presidency saw “a far more confrontational approach” to Beijing, and Biden’s policies have followed along much the same lines, reflecting a bipartisan consensus that China “must now be treated as a major adversary.” Trump would probably pursue a “more aggressive trade policy,” but he might also be more inclined toward deal-making. A Harris approach to China would probably be “more organized and predictable.” From China’s perspective, though, the differences are mainly stylistic. Otherwise, on China, Trump and Harris are “strategically consistent.”

Harris’ “life experience” is one of the best guides to predicting her foreign policy, Anne-Marie Slaughter said at the Financial Times. Her background as a prosecutor give Harris a “steeliness” toward foes like Russia as well as a “focus on victims as well as perpetrators.” This makes her likely to base her foreign policy on a notion of “peace through strength” in which strength flows from American values. “Call it a new mix of might and right.”