How US election will impact the world - where Donald Trump and Kamala Harris stand on Ukraine, Israel, Nato

As the leader of the world’s foremost superpower, whoever wins the race for the White House will wield the power to exert an extraordinary influence over not just the US, but the wider world. At a time of significant global unrest, the repercussions of the US election will have a direct impact on several key areas. This is where each of the candidates - Donald Trump and Kamala Harris - stand on some of the most troubling global issues.

Ukraine

At a time when the Ukrainian military is losing ground in the country’s eastern swathes, the outcome of the US election is crucial to its ongoing fight against Russian forces. Volodymyr Zelensky, the Ukrainian president, has pointed out that under President Joe Biden, the US had delivered only a fraction of the military support it pledged under a multi-billion pound aid package ratified in April. The question now is whether the incoming administration at Washington will intensify its support for Ukraine, or reduce it. 

Ms Harris has made it clear she views Ukraine’s fate as being tied up with that of wider western interests, and she has pledged continued support to the country in its ongoing battle against Russia. The fundamental issue, however, is how far that support goes. Ukraine’s request for security guarantees and more long-range weapons are pressing, but as has been the case under Mr Biden, a Harris White House would harbour concerns about being drawn into a direct conflict with Russia.

Donald Trump’s dealings with Russia have sparked concerns over future US support for Ukraine should he win the race for the White House. Picture: Mikhail Klimentyev/Sputnik/AFP via Getty Images | Getty

Time and again, Mr Trump has promised he would bring the long-running war in Ukraine to an end, but he has offered scant detail as to how he would go about doing so, and there are fears that he would attempt to end the war by either cutting off military support for Kyiv, or striking a deal with Moscow on unfavourable terms to Ukraine.

The level of support being provided by the US has undoubtedly irked Mr Trump. He has accused Mr Zelensky of being the “greatest salesman on earth” given the weapons and assistance the US has provided to Kyiv. Should an incoming Trump administration stem that crucial flow of supplies, the Ukrainian resistance effort will be severely compromised and unable to withstand further Russian attacks.

Nato 

The NATO question is inextricably bound up with the Ukraine issue, but given the global unrest and myriad threats posed by the likes of Russia, Iran and North Korea, it is of vital importance to all of Europe, not least given the US has more than 100,000 military personnel deployed across the continent.

Ms Harris has said she will “stand strong” with Nato, describing US support for the alliance as “iron clad”. At the same time, it is likely she will follow Mr Biden’s strategy of encouraging other Nato members to up their contributions. But on the vexed issue of expansion, her views are not clear. She has ducked questions over whether the US would back Ukraine’s effort to become a member, for example.

The two candidates have expressed wildly different views on NATO. Picture: Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images | Getty Images

That continuity approach differs sharply from Mr Trump’s views of Nato. During his single term in office, he repeatedly bemoaned the way the US helped fund the alliance, and in a threat that would have had major repercussions for security across Europe, even threatened to withdraw from the vital bulwark against Russian aggression. 

Earlier in the campaign, European officials were left reeling after Mr Trump said he would encourage aggressors to “do whatever the hell they want” to members of the military alliance who failed to pay their fair share. Such a callous statement exemplifies Mr Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy, and underlines how the alliance could be in peril if he wins a second term.

Middle East 

Ms Harris has called for a ceasefire in Gaza and, emphasising humanitarian concerns about the ongoing and widening conflict, has questioned Israeli’s attacks. In the aftermath of a meeting with Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this summer, she told him of “serious concern about the scale of human suffering”, adding she would “not be silent”.

In her final rally in Michigan on Sunday, the vice-president vowed to “do everything in my power to end the war in Gaza”, but the details of how she would realise that promise are unclear. Under Mr Biden, the US has threatened to sever military aid to Israel if it does not allow more humanitarian aid to Gaza, and it is expected a Harris administration would follow suit.

Kamala Harris met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in July. Picture: Roberto Schmidt/AFP via Getty Images | AFP via Getty Images

Mr Trump, meanwhile, has tried to have his cake and eat it in the final days of the US election campaign. On the one hand, he has been targeting the sizable Arab American population in swing states like Michigan; on the other hand, his support for Israel is long-standing and well documented, and unlikely to fall away any time soon.

During his time in the Oval Office, Mr Trump infamously moved to ensure the US government recognised Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, sparking anger among Palestinians. And after recognising Israel’s territorial claims to the Golan, a housing complex was even named after the 78 year-old. Such acts could see Mr Trump grant Israel a freer hand if he is elected, and even advocate a redrawing of the borders of the Gaza Strip.

One area of significant concern is the recent escalation in the conflict between Israel and Iran. Should Israel decide to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities, it would likely require US support. During the campaign, Mr Trump suggested, without evidence, that Iran was involved in attempted assassination attempts against him, and threatened to blow the country to “smithereens”.