The US Presidential Candidates Should Not Forget Their Responsibility to the World

There has perhaps never been a time that so desperately seeks leadership from the U.S. president until now. After all, the world is growing ever more anxious both geo-politically and economically, while the international situation remains chaotic.

The new president who will assume office next January will need to deeply consider how the relationship between the U.S. and the rest of the world currently stands. The president must be someone who can act responsibly, as the leader of a superpower.

However, there is much unease surrounding this point simply from watching the primary debates held so far. Not even watching the first presidential debate could erase this worry.

On the topic of counter-measures for their domestic economy, Democratic nominee Clinton and Republican nominee Trump have both called for policies that, to some degree, reflect their parties’ more traditional thinking. Clinton has emphasized increasing infrastructure investment as well as her concern about low-income earners. Trump has called for stimulation of the economy through policies such as large-scale tax reduction and more deregulation.

The problem lies with Trump who, when asked how he would tackle employment rates and the income divide, has exclusively and consistently attacked former trade policies and foreign countries such as Mexico and China. He has pointed toward the North American Free Trade Agreement and the lax attitude toward China as the culprits that have “stolen their jobs,” and also blamed the renegotiations of past free trade agreements.

This idea of building a wall in the U.S. marketplace and improving and expanding employment conflicts with the traditional values of the Republican Party, which respects free trade. Clinton has also stated that “trade is important” and clearly shown that she opposes the Trans-Pacific Partnership, despite having spearheaded it during her time as secretary of state.

Trump has also made it clear that even with the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty, he is keeping his distance from the U.S.’s traditional position of prizing its bonds with its allies. This points to an intent to further burden the countries in NATO as well as Japan and South Korea with the responsibility of defense. Clinton has objected to this, showing that she would definitely protect the alliance with Japan and South Korea and that to her, maintaining trust is important.

Trump’s policies on trade and the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty are strongly tinged with protectionism and isolationism, and if enacted, would affect the world in an incredibly negative way. On the other hand, we can assume Clinton will live up to her stressing the importance of their allies such as Japan and South Korea, but if she builds off the Obama administration’s policies toward Asia without enacting the TPP, it’s difficult to see how she would increase influence there.

It’s natural for the new president to concentrate on winning back the trust of voters who are dissatisfied with the current state of the economy and society. However, they must also remember the responsibility they hold toward the stability and prosperity of the world.