Analysis of Trump Harris Debate September 10, 2024 National Security Focus

National Security Topics

An analysis of the national security and foreign policy topic identifies an area of significant white space between the candidates. I will summarize a few points and include verbatim transcript below.


I found the World War 3 comment stated by President Trump. It was very early in the debate: "And what, what's going on here, you're going to end up in World War 3, just to go into another subject."

President Trump believes President Biden has set the USA onto a path to World War 3. He predicts dire consequences of a VP Harris victory:

• We will fight World War 3
• Israel will cease to exist in two years (catastrophic war) that will kill many Arabs.

Approaches

Trump
President Trump's plan is to act decisively to secure peace through direct diplomacy, backed by the US military. Other countries find common ground with him, whether receiving money, prisoner release, trade, or other quiet benefits in return for what the USA requires.

Harris
Kamala Harris prefers peace without direct negotiations through strong, multi-country alliances and indirect warfare (give material to those fighting, but keep our soldiers off the battlefield). Kamala said in the debate that President Trump will negotiate a bad deal, in bad faith, with poor skill, and knowingly negotiate against the interests of the United States. He would put America's interests first and this would hurt America's interests. She would keep Ukraine fighting with US weapons and money, indefinitely, and work to being safety and security to both a new nation of Palestine and the State of Israel.


Different Plans
Israel
Trump had an approach to protect Israel through economic sanctions on Iran, and suggested it was working and the war would not have happened. Iran was broke.

Harris will pursue a two-state solution with equal protections for Palestine and Israel. It starts with a cease fire deal and a release of hostages by Hamas.

China
Trump wants fair trade and an even playing field, with China held to the same rules he will hold the EU and other nations to. He wants a return of tariffs to support domestic manufacturing.

Harris suggests a trade "policy about China should be in making sure the United States of America wins the competition for the 21st century." This is done by alliance building, supporting America's workforce (which we agree with), and "investing in American based technology so that we win the race on A.I. and quantum computing." She suggests we shouldn't allow China to buy American semiconductors, or chips, stating:  "he ended up selling American chips to China to help them improve and modernize their military." I am pretty sure President Trump wasn't running a value added reseller business, so she means that American vendors were legally allowed to sell US licensed technology (e.g., NVIDIA chips) to China. She would not allow that.

Diplomacy vs. Proxy Wars (a new Cold Wavs. Direct War Declaration

The text is a little hazy here on Harris's position, but we will try to fill in the blanks.

President Trump
If President Trump is elected, he will cause both wars to end before inauguration day, via diplomacy. President Trump relies on diplomacy first, whether with the Taliban in Afghanistan, Iran (they had tough sanctions), China (tariffs and removal from joint military engagement), Europe and NATO (pay your fair share, engage in your own defense), kept a cold war in Ukraine and Russia, and there was actual peace and economic integration between Israel and the Palestinians, even jobs in Israel with daily crossings.

Vice President Harris
If Vice President Harris is elected,
Israel: 100% diplomacy.
Her administration will work 'around the clock' to negotiate a cease-fire deal and cause Hamas to free the hostages (in case it hasn't happened by January, 2025). She would 'chart a course' for a two-state solution. She would provide Israel defensive weaponry, calling out Iran first, and its proxies (e.g., Hezbollah and Hamas). She recognizes Iran as the primary enemy of Israel.

Ukraine: War directly or through European allies
This progresses towards a moral imperative to defend Ukraine. Harris would not give up Ukraine in its 'righteous defense.' Her role in the defense of Ukraine was "I shared with him American intelligence about how he could defend himself." Not sure if this is an admission of an act of war, or just poor OpSec.

This is after "Russia invaded, tried through force to change territorial boundaries to defy one of the most important international rules and norms, which is the importance of sovereignty and territorial integrity. " Harris also ties in US alliances with the defense of Ukraine, which is a foreign policy expansion, stating: "understanding that the alliances we have around the world are dependent on our ability to look out for our friends and not favor our enemies." She arranged a 50-nation alliance to help support Ukraine. This is her red line, drawn very clearly, calling out a bifurcation of countries into friends and enemies.

​She characterizes Russia as an expansionist enemy with eyes on the European Union, stating: "Otherwise, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv with his eyes on the rest of Europe. Starting with Poland. "



In conclusion

President Trump
President Trump would favor pragmatic diplomacy and sanctions, with tough talk, to keep the peace. He protects Israel by throttling the wealth of Iran. He protects Europe by having them defend themselves better, and by respecting Russia and China. Regarding China, Trump ended joint military exercises and meetings, but his main focus was on fair trade (which was likely better for the relationship).

Regardless of who sits in the White House, President Trump sees us heading into World War 3.
"We're going to end up in a third World War. And it will be a war like no other because of nuclear weapons, the power of weaponry.

Vice President Harris
VP Harris has a strong, values-based belief system when it comes to foreign policy. VP Harris stated she is not open to negotiating with undemocratic leaders. She draws a distinction by labeling countries as friends or enemies. She thinks of Hamas as a terrorist organization, but charts a course for a two-state solution. She suggests a righteous defense of Ukraine is important not just for Ukraine, but to support our global alliances and stop an expansionist Russia.

Harris, in our opinion, is a cold war warrior.

For the original transcript, visit ABC News here.