As the 2024 U.S. presidential election approaches, I find myself thinking about the enormous implications this election will have on global policies, particularly in relation to conflicts in places like Israel and Ukraine. It’s no secret that the United States holds a powerful influence over world politics, and the next president will significantly shape how the U.S. engages with these complex international issues. Whoever assumes office will be stepping into a world that is increasingly interconnected, and the role the U.S. plays in global conflicts must be reevaluated for the future of diplomacy, peace, and stability.
The U.S. Role in Global Conflicts
Historically, the U.S. has often positioned itself as the world’s policeman—intervening in international disputes, supporting allies militarily, and sanctioning adversaries. While this approach has allowed the U.S. to maintain global leadership, it has also led to entanglements in long-standing conflicts that have far-reaching consequences. Two such conflicts that come to mind are the ongoing war in Ukraine and the violence in Israel and Palestine. These are not isolated issues; they are deeply intertwined with global security, economic stability, and humanitarian concerns.
I believe that the next U.S. president will need to take a hard look at how the U.S. has been involved in these conflicts and assess whether continued involvement is the best course of action. The stakes are incredibly high, not just for the countries directly involved, but for the entire world. A president who can engage thoughtfully with these issues, while balancing the needs of diplomacy and security, will be crucial.
The Case of Ukraine
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the U.S. has been one of Ukraine’s most significant supporters, providing billions of dollars in military aid and imposing heavy sanctions on Russia. While this support has been critical in helping Ukraine defend its sovereignty, it has also drawn the U.S. deeper into a geopolitical struggle with Russia. The next president will face the tough decision of whether to continue providing this level of support or to pursue a different strategy, potentially even negotiating a peace deal.
In my opinion, while the U.S. must stand by its commitment to help its allies, there needs to be a careful reevaluation of what long-term involvement in Ukraine means for U.S. resources, both financial and military. Moreover, we must consider the wider implications this has on NATO relations and the risk of escalating tensions with Russia. How the U.S. handles this conflict will set the tone for its future role in Eastern Europe and beyond.
The Israel-Palestine Conflict
Similarly, the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine has reached new levels of tension, and the U.S. has always played a pivotal role as Israel’s staunch ally. The U.S. provides Israel with extensive military aid and diplomatic support, often influencing the direction of peace talks—or the lack thereof. With new escalations in violence, it is clear that U.S. policy towards Israel and Palestine will need to be revisited by whoever is elected in 2024.
What concerns me is the lack of a balanced approach in U.S. policy towards the region. I believe that the next president must take a more nuanced stance, one that supports Israel’s right to security but also acknowledges the legitimate grievances of Palestinians. The humanitarian crisis in Gaza cannot be ignored, and I hope the next administration prioritizes peace efforts that foster genuine dialogue rather than one-sided military solutions.
The Broader Implications
The implications of the U.S. presidential election on global policy extend far beyond just Israel and Ukraine. Whoever takes office will also need to address a variety of other international issues—rising tensions with China, climate change diplomacy, and the future of global trade agreements, to name a few. But these two conflicts—Ukraine and Israel-Palestine—are particularly critical because they are flashpoints that could either lead to further global instability or, with the right leadership, pave the way for peace.
I strongly believe that the U.S. needs to reassess its role as a global superpower that is constantly intervening in foreign conflicts. Instead, we should focus on diplomacy and building alliances that promote long-term peace and stability. The military-first approach has not always yielded the desired results, and it is time for the U.S. to lead by example, showing that diplomacy and negotiation are as valuable, if not more so, than military might.
Conclusion: A Time for Reflection
As we approach the 2024 election, it’s clear that the stakes are incredibly high, not just for the U.S. but for the entire world. The president elected will not only shape domestic policies but will also influence the direction of global conflicts, diplomacy, and security.
In my view, the next president must take a hard look at the U.S.’s involvement in conflicts like those in Ukraine and Israel and carefully consider what role the U.S. should play moving forward. Is it time to reduce our military interventions and focus more on diplomatic solutions? Can the U.S. balance its leadership responsibilities with a commitment to peace and stability? These are the questions the next administration must answer, and the answers will have lasting consequences for global politics in the years to come.
