The Washington-based Pew Research Centre recently carried out a survey on worldwide attitudes to the US presidential elections. The survey, conducted across 15 countries, gives a snapshot of how individuals around the globe perceive the two main candidates.
The Democratic nominee and former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, is viewed favourably in several countries. Her approval ratings reach 83 per cent in Sweden, 79 per cent in Germany and 70 per cent in Australia and Japan. The Republican nominee, Donald Trump, does not seem to inspire confidence on a global level: 92 per cent of Swedes, 89 per cent of Germans, 88 per cent of the Dutch and 85 per cent of the French and the British surveyed lack confidence in Trump.
These statistics were gathered before remarks Trump made 11 years ago were made public. In these remarks, Trump uses deeply offensive language towards women. The revelations follow his previous insults towards a disabled reporter and the family of a dead Muslim soldier who fought in Iraq. Their only fault was that they dared question some of his positions.
Trump hijacked important issues relating to migration, terrorism, job creation and the global role of the US. His flamboyant personality meant that the debate became nothing but a sideshow to his persona. His campaign did nothing but reinforce his image as a vulgar and crass individual.
This campaign turned out to be one of the worst possible advertisements for democracy in action
Criticism of Trump does not necessarily imply support for Hillary Clinton. While support for Clinton is high on an international level, many in the US believe she is untrustworthy and unreliable. Her actions give much credence to this view.
The use of a private e-mail server while she served as Secretary of State, the disparaging remarks made by her campaign chairman John Podesta, her handling of the Libya crisis, her reluctance to disclose recent health issues and the activities of the Clinton Foundation have cemented her image as a deeply flawed and shady persona.
Both candidates have debated each other three times during this campaign. In their last debate, the candidates did not shake each other’s hands. Moreover, Trump refused to confirm that he would concede defeat should he lose the forthcoming election. Indeed, Trump has stated several times that the election is rigged; perhaps this is his way of pre-empting an unmitigated disaster at the polls.
This campaign turned out to be one of the worst possible advertisements for democracy in action. Rather than produce a vibrant exchange of ideas between two mature candidates, ad-hominem attacks, superficial arguments and rhetoric which pandered to prejudice dominated this campaign. Reagan’s “Shining City on a Hill” seems to be no more.
Nonetheless, this election is the most important electoral exercise for the next four years. The United States remains the most important global player on many fronts. The person who will be elected president will certainly have considerable leeway in setting the agenda for various important initiatives.
The situation in Syria will undoubtedly be affected by the outcome of this election. The stand-off between Russia and the United States, the apparent lack of leadership and direction and the deteriorating humanitarian situation have exposed lacunae in the ability of both nation states and institutions to prompt much-needed solutions.
The conflict plunged the region into chaos and prompted individuals to seek refuge beyond their borders. Clintonhas already pledged to accept as many as 65,000 refugees in the US. Trump, onthe other hand, pledged to halt refugee resettlement citing an inadequate vetting process. Part of Trump’s stanceis motivated by the fear of terrorist infiltration. The fear of a possible terrorist attack looms over a polarised nation and a shell-shocked world.
So far, President Barack Obama’s response has been lacklustre. The former Secretary of State for Defence Robert Gates rightly stated that Obama underestimated Isis and the degree of psychological fear terrorist attacks are capable of provoking. The incoming president will undoubtedly give such issues priority.
Climate change did not play a major part in this campaign. Nonetheless, the stance of the next US president will undoubtedly help to frame thisissue internationally.
Obama has consistently championed action on climate change, and the US has recently ratified the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement. Clinton is likely to follow in his footsteps. On the other hand, Trump has repeatedly referred to climate change as a “hoax”.
Both candidates seem to agree that China’s actions on the world stage are a cause for concern. Trump has frequently accused China of undervaluing the Renminbi and pledged to introduce high tariffs in a bid to force China’s hand into changing course. Clinton has also pledged to exert pressure on China with regards to trade and respect for international laws and conventions.
China’s actions cannot be divorced from its disputes with its neighbours in the South China Seas and the support it gives to the North Korean regime.
Whether the US will be willing to exert additional pressure on China remains questionable. Since both countries are global powers and major trading partners, any action beyond a verbal reproach is likely to be mutually damaging.
Both candidates seem to have a radically different view on the US’s place in the world. Trump has repeatedly pledged to make “America great again”. Beyond this slogan, his plan so far seems to be rather incoherent. Some of his statements have also cast some doubt on his commitment to NATO while his overtures to President Putin have raised eyebrows.
Clinton is likely to continue where Obama leaves off. However, Obama’s greatest foreign policy achievements took place during his second term – after Clinton left the State Department.
Indeed, Clinton’s track record in handling the crisis in Libya was poor. Moreover, her proposal to implement a no-fly zone over Syria has been met with dismay by many security observers.
The US will undoubtedly remain an important world player with a capacity to influence the economic, political and security scenario in different parts of the globe. Its global leadership role remains vital and important.
However, the actions of the 45th president of the United States can jeopardise its standing. Judging by the performance of both candidates during the campaign, this seems to be the most likely outcome.
andre.deb@gmail.com
André DeBattista is a member of the Political Studies Association (UK) and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts.