Trump and Kamala: two distinct paths

As the date for the American Presidential Election draws near, rival candidates have intensified their campaign. Last week Republican candidate former President Donald Trump and Democratic Party's Kamala Harris, the current Vice President, clashed in a presidential debate. While Ms Harris showed interest in having another round, Trump said no. This means there would be no more presidential debates between the two before the November 5 polling day. Both camps claimed victory in an over 100-minute duel in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, one of the swing states where voters' choice can turn the results upside down. Opinion polls suggested that Harris edged out her rival while Trump claimed he was the clear winner of the debate.

Presidential debates help voters, particularly in swing states, make up their minds. Trump, who has already served as President, is well known; but for Harris the debate had a chance to show her leadership skills and convince American public that she is best suited for the job. Harris would not have been the Democratic candidate had incumbent President Joe Biden not messed up his debate with Trump in June. His poor performance compelled him to withdraw from the race. The coming elections in the US are important as its outcome will have far-reaching effect on the people in America and beyond.

Pope Francis slammed both presidential candidates for what he called anti-life policies on abortion and migration, and advised American Catholics to choose who they think is the "lesser evil" in the upcoming election.

This election is important because it is not just a battle between Republicans and Democrats but between the pro- and anti-establishment forces. The US has led the world since World War-II and after the end of the Cold War in 1991. It's is generally believed that candidate from whichever party - Republican or Democratic - reaches the White House, their core policies remain aligned with those of the American establishment. But Trump's emergence on the political scene has changed that perception. He is clearly not one of those American Presidents who believe in traditional approach. This was on a display during the heated presidential debate.

Take, for example, the Russia-Ukraine war. Harris represents the core interests of the US policy i.e. to continue to lead the world. She promised to continue to support Ukraine and European allies to defeat Russia. Trump, meanwhile, has other ideas. He threatened to cut off security assistance to NATO and Ukraine if elected President. He also claimed that the Russia-Ukraine war would be over within 24 hours once he is in the White House. The two candidates also differed on the Middle East. Trump insisted that if he were the President, the conflict in Gaza would not have started in the first place. He claimed that Harris hated both Israelis and Arabs. Trump predicted that if Harris became President, Israel would cease to exist within two years.

Trump pointed to his past successes in brokering the Abraham Accords, which normalised the relations between Israel and several Arab nations. He promised to expand these agreements and criticised Harris for being "soft on Iran", particularly with regard to the nuclear deal that the Obama-Biden administration had brokered. Trump continued to emphasise his "America First" foreign policy approach - which prioritises US interests in international engagements, including reducing involvement in global conflicts, renegotiating trade deals that he believes hurt the US, and cutting down on military spending abroad.

Harris, on the other hand, emphasised a multilateral approach, aiming to repair and strengthen alliances, particularly with NATO and other global partners. She criticised Trump's isolationist policies, arguing that disengaging from the world would weaken the US influence.

This clash of ideologies gave voters a clear choice between two distinct paths for America's role on the world stage.