As diplomats and officials gathered in New York last week for the annual United Nations General Assembly, one question overshadowed the proceedings: who will lead the U.S. in 2025? The outcome of the upcoming presidential election is poised to have far-reaching implications beyond America’s borders, as the next president will be pivotal in addressing pressing global issues such as climate change, public health, and international cooperation.
The electoral battle is shaping up to be a stark choice between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, each offering contrasting visions for U.S. engagement on critical global challenges. Their differing approaches to economic inequality, climate action, and pandemic preparedness will not only impact the lives of Americans but also set the trajectory for millions worldwide.
Harris has consistently advocated for a multilateral approach, emphasizing the necessity of U.S. leadership in tackling global challenges. She views issues like epidemic outbreaks and antimicrobial resistance as international concerns that require collaborative solutions. Conversely, Trump’s administration is marked by isolationism and skepticism toward global institutions. His previous decision to disband the pandemic response unit created by President Obama and his intention to eliminate the Office of Pandemic Preparedness and Response Policy have raised alarms about the future of U.S. public health strategy.
During his presidency, Trump’s foreign policy decisions often undermined global cooperation, notably withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement and the World Health Organization (WHO) amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Such moves, if repeated, could weaken international health collaborations and exacerbate vulnerabilities to future health crises. In contrast, Harris is committed to strengthening institutions like the WHO, recognizing that infectious diseases transcend national borders.
The urgency of climate action has also been underscored by recent natural disasters, such as Hurricane Helene. Harris champions aggressive measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and invest in renewable energy, viewing climate action as both an environmental imperative and an economic opportunity for American workers. In contrast, Trump has downplayed climate change, rolled back environmental regulations, and favored fossil fuel development, which could alienate the U.S. from key international partners committed to combating climate change.
The differing approaches extend to global development goals as well. The Sustainable Development Goals, set by 193 U.N. member states, aim to eradicate poverty, protect the planet, and ensure prosperity for all by 2030. Harris has pledged to keep the U.S. actively engaged in these efforts, while Trump’s past actions indicate a tendency toward disengagement from international commitments.
As the U.S. approaches the election, global leaders are anxiously monitoring the developments. The decisions made in Washington over the next five years will significantly shape global health, climate initiatives, and economic stability. The world awaits to see whether the U.S. will reaffirm its commitment to international collaboration or retreat from its responsibilities, with the implications resonating far beyond American shores.