The US presidential election attracted worldwide interest. Political and media circles around the world are following it with great interest. That’s for sure, because the US remains a superpower dominating decisions and power in today’s world order.
Despite all that is said about its weakness, decline and sometimes the collapse of its empire, this does not in any way reduce its weight and strategic position in the world, at least at the present time. Moreover, this interest is linked to the circumstances of these elections.
These circumstances, regardless of who wins, will make the results exceptional, whether in terms of continuing or revising current American policies. It also explains the passion and deep interest in having followed the day-to-day progress of the US election preparations.
To put it bluntly, the election race is the most exciting and troubling in the world compared to any previous round of voting. Many capitals are holding their breath as they await word of the outcome of the November 3 elections.
In reviewing the themes and debates of the exciting election race, a number of key observations come to light. Number one: It is difficult to rely on the results of the polls. Number two: Democratic candidate Joe Biden seems at first in a better position than his rival, Republican President Donald Trump.
According to the polls, Biden has a significant advantage. But we are not forgetting the lesson of the 2016 election. Hillary Clinton was then in the same atmosphere, perhaps with the same statistics and numbers. But she lost the election as a result of the Electoral College vote. The vote decided a race in favor of President Trump.
The polling results did not include any “reassuring” or significant difference that could justify an early resolution of the electoral duel. In addition to past experience, the circumstances surrounding these elections must also be taken into account, including the coronavirus epidemic in the US and around the world.
Voters will find it hard to venture to make change in such circumstances. This factor is becoming increasingly influential as American public opinion retains negative impressions of the Obama administration, of which Biden was member.
It is well known that every new US president makes changes to the policies of his predecessor. Any new president makes well-known changes to the policies of his predecessor and more rarely implements the promises he made in his election platform, as President Trump has done on many issues.
But the degree of stability or change in foreign policy at this stage seems considerable. There are several issues to be dealt with after November, such as relations with Washington’s NATO allies, climate change, Iran, global leadership, the attitude of the US toward its international responsibilities and obligations, and its relations with China and Russia.
A second observation is that the indifference of American voters to foreign policy issues does not mean that these issues are irrelevant in electoral disputes. It should be noted, for example, that President Trump’s trenchant attitude towards the Iranian mullahs and his success in assuming a key role as a mediator in the normalization of relations between some Arab countries and Israel are positions supported by a large part of the American electorate, regardless of their political and ideological hue.
The management of relations with China is, to my mind, of great interest to American voters. This is not a matter of foreign policy. Rather, it is about China’s significant impact on US domestic markets and jobs.
One point of electoral contention is how to conduct relations with China. President Trump seeks to block China’s rise to power by denying Chinese companies US technology. His opponent Biden, instead, tends to maintain formulas of cooperation and partnership at least for the foreseeable future.
The third observation is that President Trump’s escalation towards Iran should not necessarily be construed as a desire to unleash a war as soon as he wins a second term, as some in the region seem to think.
The opposite is true, I would say. If Trump stays here, the mullahs will have to change their position and present already constructed scenarios to negotiate with Trump in his second term, making concessions and agreeing to sit at the negotiating table to sign a new nuclear agreement.
I believe that the Iranian position on this issue is ready to be announced in due course. In this matter of extreme economic pressure, the mullahs are convinced that President Trump’s strategy makes their system unsustainable. In particular, there are signs of a new Middle East on the horizon, with normalization of relations between several Arab countries and Israel.
If there are any landmarks in the world order and international relations, I believe that the November 3 election is one of the most significant that will determine the direction of a whole range of issues for the foreseeable future. That’s whether it’s the continuation of President Trump’s current foreign policy and his engagement on many issues, or the victory of Democratic candidate Joe Biden and the rethinking of Trump’s policies.
In any case, the only constant is change.
Stability means change in the sense that it is difficult to change or eliminate the results of eight years of American attitudes on certain issues. Nor does change mean that the effects and consequences of the last four years of US-world relations have been written off.
I am not saying that the world will be different after November 3. But in my opinion, things will be very different. Either stability—in this case, stability equals a change of mentality for those who are waiting for the alternative to be declared a winner—or change.
Dr. Salem Al Ketbi is a UAE political analyst and former Federal National Council candidate