Israel Patrick Kingsley is currently serving as The Times’s Jerusalem bureau chief. Polls clearly show that a majority of Israelis would vote for Trump if given the chance. However, regardless of the election outcome, the long-term impact on Israeli society’s opposition to Palestinian statehood and a two-state solution is likely to remain limited. While President Harris may apply more pressure on Israel to engage in peace talks with Palestinians, it is unlikely that she would cut off military support to Israel. On the other hand, President Trump may be more lenient towards Israeli policies, such as allowing Jewish settlers back into Gaza and taking a more aggressive stance on Iran, which appeals to many Israelis. The unpredictability of Trump’s decisions may lead Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to believe he can benefit more from a Harris administration.
Anton Troianovski, The Times’s Moscow bureau chief, highlights the significance of the U.S. election for Russia and Ukraine. Ukrainians fear that a Trump presidency could lead to a quick peace deal favoring Russia, while they hope for continued support from a Harris administration. President Putin sees little difference between Trump and Harris regarding Ukraine, as he believes both would be less committed to the country than Biden. Putin desires a deal with the U.S. president that he can claim as a victory, viewing Ukraine as a puppet of the United States. He has publicly supported Harris, believing he can negotiate with her to achieve his goals.
In China, the next U.S. president is expected to take a tough stance on China, particularly regarding tariffs and Taiwan. Trump’s proposed tariffs on Chinese exports could severely impact China’s economy, heavily reliant on foreign demand. The Chinese government sees advantages in Trump’s policies, as he is less committed to building alliances and defending Taiwan. On the other hand, a Harris administration may continue efforts to strengthen alliances against China.
In Europe, a Trump victory could spell disaster for the economy due to potential tariffs and threats to the NATO alliance. Western European leaders are concerned about Trump’s policies, while nativist groups view him as a leader who supports their hardline stance on immigration. A Harris administration may expect European nations to do more for themselves and focus on China.
The global trade system is at stake in this election, with Trump proposing aggressive tariffs that could lead to trade wars and economic downturn. Harris would maintain tariffs on Chinese goods for national security reasons.
In Africa, views on Harris and Trump vary, with some seeing Trump as a strong leader and Harris as deeply connected to the continent. African countries may prefer Trump’s presidency for energy policies, while Harris may focus on decarbonization efforts.
Mexico faces challenges with either candidate’s victory, with heightened tensions at the U.S.-Mexico border and potential tariffs under a Trump administration. Both candidates are expected to maintain tough immigration policies, impacting migration flows throughout the region.