How Harris and Walz Might Handle Asia Policy

In the U.S. presidential election, as I noted in a very brief post on this topic for CFR.org, the race remains very close between former President Donald Trump and current Vice President Kamala Harris, who are joined by their running mates Ohio Senator J.D. Vance and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz.

Yet despite the closeness of the race––the two candidates are tied or within a few points of each other in critical swing states—the two tickets would have dramatically different approaches to Asia policy. The Trump-Vance ticket, while disdaining many of the United States’ traditional European allies and openly voicing skepticism of continuing to support Ukraine, has signaled an extremely hawkish approach to China and a desire to push countries in Asia to clearly side with Washington over Beijing. However, the campaign has said little about how human rights issues in Asia would factor into U.S. decision-making. Trump has floated the possibility of high tariffs on Chinese products, a move that could decimate economies in Asia and around the world.

Some of the top potential advisors in a Trump administration, like prominent analyst Elbridge Colby, who could be a second Trump administration’s national security advisor, have also argued that the United States should dramatically increase and upgrade its forces in Asia to better position itself, alongside partners, to potentially fight a war with China.

For its part, a Harris-Walz administration would hardly be soft on China, as some GOP commentators have said, claiming that Walz’s time teaching in China signals the running mate is weak on the CCP. Quite the contrary. In Congress, Walz had a very tough record on China and was a consistent defender of freedoms in China, Tibet, and Hong Kong. He received praise for this record from many Chinese and Hong Kong rights activists.

For more on how the two campaigns might differ in their approach to Asia, see my new articles for Japan Times.