Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • Israel-Hamas
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Research
    • Briefs
    • Explainers
    • Reports
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / Are Trump and Harris really so different on foreign policy?
Grand strategy, Alliances, Burden sharing, China, Europe and Eurasia, Middle East, NATO, Ukraine

October 25, 2024

Are Trump and Harris really so different on foreign policy?

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Daniel DePetris

As the 2024 presidential campaign enters the final stretch, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump have sought to underline their foreign policy differences. Some of the distinctions are clear. Harris, for instance, promises “unwavering” support to Washington’s treaty allies in Europe and East Asia, whereas Trump frequently criticises them for free-riding on American largesse. Then, of course, there is Ukraine, where Harris’s “stay the course” preference runs counter to Trump, who would like the war to end immediately even if it entails Kyiv having to agree to painful compromises.

That is as far as their differences go, however. Indeed, both candidates remain firmly attached to the idea of American hegemony. Take Trump: the former president promises to bring back a “peace through strength” doctrine, which ensures Washington remains atop the world hierarchy. For instance, when the European Union sought to build an independent military capability outside the US-dominated Nato framework, the Trump administration issued a letter to Brussels threatening consequences. And despite all the talk during his first term, Trump did not reduce US defence commitments in Europe, and in the end called for the redeployment of only 12,000 troops—many of whom would have moved from Germany to elsewhere in Europe.

Harris, meanwhile, is a liberal interventionist and an Atlanticist who has doubled down on America’s Nato commitments. She has represented the Joe Biden administration in various European security conferences with a consistent message in her back pocket: Washington is fully invested in the transatlantic alliance and wouldn’t dare leave European allies in the lurch.

Read at UnHerd

Authors

Jennifer
Kavanagh

Senior Fellow & Director of Military Analysis

Defense Priorities

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Western Hemisphere

op-edGrand strategy, Americas

Trump’s unconstitutional forever war against the cartels

By Daniel DePetris

October 4, 2025

In the mediaAmericas, Alliances, Global posture

‘Golden Dome’ and a U.S. defence pivot create new challenges for Canada

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

October 3, 2025

In the mediaAmericas

Proposed ‘gang suppression force’ for Haiti to be larger, more lethal, U.S. says

Featuring Benjamin Friedman

September 26, 2025

op-edAmericas

Trump’s war on ‘narcoterrorists’ is doomed to fail

By Daniel DePetris

September 24, 2025

In the mediaAmericas, Military analysis

AFSOC exercise brings concept created for great-power conflict to the Caribbean

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

September 18, 2025

In the mediaAmericas, Military analysis

U.S. strikes on Venezuela drug smugglers raise legal questions about lethal force

Featuring Gil Barndollar

September 17, 2025

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGreat power competition, Balance of power, China, Grand strategy, Middle East

U.S.-China competition and the value of Middle East influence

June 10, 2025
virtualChina, Alliances, Balance of power, Diplomacy, Grand strategy, Russia

China-Russia: Cooperation or a no-limits alliance?

April 3, 2025
virtualSyria, Balance of power, Basing and force posture, Counterterrorism, Middle East, Military analysis

Syria after Assad: Prospects for U.S. withdrawal

February 21, 2025

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2025 Defense Priorities All Right Reserved