The world holds its breath (again) as the US votes

A hundred million or so Americans will head to the polls to choose their next president tomorrow (Tuesday), joining the record 75 million folks who’ve already voted.

Meanwhile, foreign diplomats will head in to work at Washington’s ~175 foreign embassies to offer their home governments some final thoughts on where they see this all headed. And they’ll be seeking to answer the same two questions as everyone else:

1. Who’s gonna win?

Diplomats will lean on their contacts in the major parties and pollsters for any extra insight, but you could find a data point to claim almost any outcome at this stage. Meanwhile, polls keep pointing to a historically tight race: neither candidate has managed a five-point lead at any stage, for the first time in more than half a century.

But here’s the thing: there’s every chance this simply reflects the current state of US polling – wracked with second-guessing and course-correction – more than it reflects the current state of the actual race, which could well deliver a decisive result tomorrow.

The other guide embassies will lean on is modern history, which could likewise point you in either direction:

• No incumbent party has won re-election with a president’s approval so low, but
• No incumbent party has lost re-election with an economy this good, and
• No modern candidate has been so disliked in back-to-back elections as Trump.

So whoever wins, they’ll be bucking a trend.

2. And so… what does this election mean for us?

Every foreign government will say publicly they can deal with whoever the American people elect as president. But in the privacy of their encrypted cable systems, those diplomats will be offering some frank assessments of the continuity and predictability of Harris versus the more transactional and unilateral style of Trump.

So here’s a quick tour of how Embassy Row will be thinking it all through:

• 🇨🇳 China

Beijing has mostly sought to lay low this cycle, and that probably reflects four factors: i) with mounting problems back home, Xi Jinping really wants stability with the US at this point; ii) stability is even sweeter when you’ve just spent the last three US electoral cycles as a fiery bipartisan talking point; iii) while there are differences in rhetoric – and Trump is pledging higher tariffs – both candidates broadly want to counter China’s assertive vibes; and therefore iv) both election outcomes promise a tough road ahead for Xi.

Still, with stability front of mind, he’ll likely prefer the predictability and continuity of a Harris presidency.

• 🇷🇺 Russia

One candidate has consistently tended towards a) US alliance scepticism, b) US isolationism, and therefore c) cutting US defence assistance to Ukraine: Donald Trump. And while Trump frames these positions as ending wars and refocusing on priorities back home, they’d still benefit Putin, who’ll therefore realistically prefer a Trump presidency.

But beyond that, Putin will also welcome (and encourage) any electoral chaos. Georgia’s secretary of state has just called BS on yet another Russia-seeded story about foreigners voting in the US election, and there’ll be more — including to amplify what would ordinarily be the inevitable and inconsequential irregularities of such a vast election.

Putin’s aim here is to erode Americans’ trust in their democracy: that leads to a weaker, more inwardly-focused, and less credible America, which all leaves more space for Russia to pursue its aims (like invading Ukraine).

• 🇮🇷 Iran

This one’s easy considering Iran is seeking to assassinate only one of the two candidates: Donald Trump. That’s a response to Trump’s 2020 order to assassinate a top Iranian general (Soleimani), plus his broader ‘maximum pressure’ campaign on Iran while in office.

But it also reflects the fact that it’s Harris’s party that’s typically been more open to dialogue as a way to talk Iran off its nuclear path. So on both fronts, it follows that Tehran would realistically prefer a Harris presidency.

• 🇮🇱 Israel

Sure, there are differences in dialogue, but both US candidates fundamentally back Israel. Still, Trump hasn’t meaningfully criticised the way Israel has conducted its war, so Netanyahu’s hard-line coalition will expect a freer hand under a Trump 2.0 presidency. And that’s reflected in polling, which suggests Israelis would much prefer Trump.

• 🇮🇳 India

The bipartisan US approach to China translates to a bipartisan approach to India, too: both candidates hope India can help counterbalance China. So India will come out of this election just fine either way, though Narendra Modi’s more authoritarian vibes at home and more assertive style abroad will likely find more space in a world where Trump has more clearly delineated US interests.

• 🇪🇺 Europe

Only one candidate has threatened to pull the US out of the 75-year-old NATO alliance that’s helped Europe thrive, plus ‘end’ the war on Europe’s doorstep (presumably by freezing it and ceding Ukrainian land to Moscow) — that candidate is Donald Trump.

So while Europeans have been rattled by the Biden-Harris administration’s occasional solo act (eg, funnelling vast subsidies to US firms), and while Trump’s team says he just wants partners rather than freeloaders, Europe (minus Hungary) wants a Harris win.

• 🌎 Latin America

Trump’s pledge to conduct mass deportations and slap tariffs on all US imports has rattled much of the region given its own reliance on remittances from — and exports to — the world’s largest economy. That said, the country with most at stake (Mexico) ended up securing a pretty functional US relationship under Trump 1.0, so there’s a quiet hope across the region that some similar equilibrium might emerge under Trump 2.0.

• 🌏 Other allies (the Five Eyes, Japan, Korea, Philippines)

These allies typically want a continued, stabilising US presence in their respective regions plus ongoing US trade and investment – that combination is partly what’s allowed them to flourish. And it’s really Harris promising that kind of continuity with fewer strings attached, so these allies will quietly hope for her success, though will be braced for either outcome.

And while not a formal ally, Taiwan will have been spooked by Trump’s a) fatalism around a mainland invasion, b) accusing Taiwan of harming the US semiconductor sector, and c) suggesting Taiwan should pay more for US support. So while Taiwan will have taken some comfort from Trump 1.0’s tough-on-China approach, the prospect of Trump 2.0 has left folks on the democratic island rattled.

Anyway, DC’s ~175 embassies will hit send on their cables along the above lines, then do what the rest of us do: scroll X and watch cable news to see what happens next.

INTRIGUE’S TAKE

Will the real America please stand up? Is it Harris’s America, or is it Trump’s America? Well, three election cycles after the modern world first asked this kind of question, the answer looks pretty clear to us at this point: it’s both.

And world capitals are already adjusting to that dual-track reality, regardless of who ends up in the White House next: sure, the above capitals might hold their breath or breathe sighs of relief after tomorrow’s outcome, but 2028 is just around the corner. And you can see what that means, for example, in a weekend tweet by Poland’s leader, Donald Tusk: “Whatever the outcome, the era of geopolitical outsourcing is over”.

As for what it means for the US itself? The superpower has a long history of straddling conflicting philosophies and political currents. In fact, you could argue that these very same competitive tensions over the decades have helped drive America’s capability for renewal at home and course correction abroad.

But the key has always been in finding a common vision that both ‘Americas’ can back. And that’s one of the many big challenges for whoever wins tomorrow.

Also worth noting:

• Our very own John and Kristen dug into the latest election updates in their most recent podcast episode. Plus, don’t miss the next edition of Election Intrigue, our weekly briefing on what the US election means for the world (and vice versa).