By John Ubaldi, “Ubaldi Reports”

The 2020 presidential campaign is fully under way with various Democratic candidates espousing their domestic policies on how they would shape the U.S. economy, but a critical missing component that hasn’t been discussed and one that all presidents must deal with is national security.

Now whoever is elected president in 2020 will no doubt be faced with having to deal with global issues, but during the presidential race national security has been left to the backburner as other issues have taken precedent.

With the presidential election campaign moving forward, we have begun a series of articles assessing the credentials and polices of the Democratic candidates. This week we will examine the national security vision of California Senator Kamala Harris.

Senator Harris Political Experience

If elected president, Harris would bring a prosecutorial experience to the White House after having served as a district attorney in San Francisco, twice elected as California’s Attorney General before being elected to the U.S. Senate in 2016, where she currently serves on the Senate committee’s on Budget, Homeland Security, Intelligence and Judiciary.

Harris’s only experience with national security is her Senate committee assignments on Homeland Security and Intelligence.

Like all the Democratic candidates for president and Harris being no different have placed climate change as the central aspect of their national security vision and returning the United States to re-entering the Paris Agreement thus making climate cooperation a key component of any U.S. global priority.

All those running for the presidency, Harris like the other candidates seeks to display a sharp distinction from the Trump administration as Kamala believes we are at a turning point in history. By alienating our allies and ignoring the emerging threats we face, President Trump has left America less safe and weaker in the world.

Unlike the other candidates so far profiled Harris has given a little bit more depth to her national security vision but like the others hasn’t articulated in detail how her strategy would confront the challenges the U.S. faces globally.

 

Council on Foreign Relations Sends Foreign Policy Questionnaire to all Candidates

Answering a questionnaire by the Council on Foreign Relations which sent one to all Democratic candidates regarding a host of foreign policy issues Harris responded that with regard to China, her administration would cooperate with Beijing on global issues such as climate change, but would also focus on human rights by opposing any trade that did not take into account American workers and environmental standards.

Harris in the questionnaire stated that “We need – pro-labor, pro-environment trade deals – because it’s clear Donald Trump’s protectionist approach has been a disaster. His trade war is crushing American farmers, killing American jobs, and punishing American consumers.  I would work with our allies in Europe and Asia to confront China on its troubling trade practices, not perpetuate Trump’s failing tariff war that is being paid for by hard-working Americans.”

Harris’s Answers Lack Clarity

A follow up question needed to be asked of Senator Harris, is how would she work with China on climate change when at the Paris Climate Summit that produced the agreement the one the Trump administration pulled out of, Beijing did everything possible to limit China’s acceptance of the agreement‘s standards on global emissions, how would Harris make sure the Chinese were in compliance?

How would a Harris administration reengage with our allies in both Asia and Europe in confronting China when in fact they have been reluctant to do so in the past?

How would a Harris administration work with our allies on confronting a bellicose Russia, when Germany fails to maintain 2% for national defense, signs an energy deal with Moscow, and when Europe invites Moscow back to a European Human Rights Commission this after the Dutch concluded that implicated Russia officials in the shoot down of a Malaysian passenger plane in 2014.

How would Harris Deal with China?

Senator Harris has been critical of the Trump administration approach toward China with regard to trade and the use of tariffs, how would she deal with Beijing’s continued theft of intellectual properties, forced technology transfer, currency devaluation and a host of other issues that harm U.S. workers, what would her approach be?

In the questionnaire Harris spoke of how she would have the U.S. rejoin the JCPOA so long as Iran also returned to verifiable compliance. At the same time, I would seek negotiations with Iran to extend and supplement some of the nuclear deal’s existing provisions, and work with our partners to counter Iran’s destabilizing behavior in the region, including with regard to its ballistic missile program.

Lack of Clarity with Regard to the Middle East

Opponents of this position would argue that by rejoining the Iran nuclear agreement would you then lift the sanctions imposed by the Trump administration, as Tehran stated they would not negotiate with the United States until sanctions are lifted? How would a Harris administration prevent Iran from utilizing this revenue to support its proxy forces in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and other areas of the Middle East?

Missing from Harris’s national security vision is what would her counter-terrorism strategy and Middle East strategy be different from the Trump Administration?

Like all Democratic candidates for president Harris is no exception as she stated on her website that as president, she’ll end the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and protracted military engagements in places like Syria.

Critics would counter that this strategy is eerily reminiscent of the policy of the Obama administrations pullout of American forces from Iraq which allowed the Islamic State to rise and later allowing Russia back into the Middle East for the first time since 1973, how would this strategy be any different this time?

How Would Harris Deal with Russia?

The other aspect as it relates to Russia, Harris mentions that unlike the current occupant of the White House, I will consistently stand up to Putin in defense of democratic values, human rights, and the international rule of law.

Opponents would state that belaying Trump’s rhetoric his administration has been harder on Russia and Putin then had President Obama been, in what way and how would Harris be tougher? How would a Harris administration prevent Russia cyber-attacks on our elections or against other nations?

The notable missing component of Harris’s national security vision is what would be her strategy with regard to the Pentagon; as senator she voted against this year’s defense budget, what would her priorities be as other Democratic candidates have suggested a sharp reduction in military spending, is this in align with her philosophy?

How would a sharp reduction in defense spending by the United States be perceived by Russia, China and Iran?

Democratic aspirants for president also have a lack of clarity on this vital issue.