Why the Trump-Harris Debate was so Terrible for the Indo-Pacific 

Late yesterday, presidential candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris took the stage in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania to commence their first presidential debate of the season, and the only one that is scheduled thus far.

There was no live audience, and the opposing candidates' microphones were muted when the other one was speaking. Most likely to prevent candidates from treating the debate like a roast or comedy event, rather than a formal discussion of ideas.

During the debate, the organizers brought up questions relating to the economy, the southern border, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, and a plethora of other issues. However, one key topic was strangely absent from yesterday’s debate. Asia, and more specifically, China.

While the majority of the debate was spent avoiding questions and attempting to make the other party look like a monster, some important foreign policy topics were discussed. 

However, citizens, both American and otherwise, didn’t even hear a mention of the candidate's foreign policy on China, the Indo-Pacific, or Asia in general for that matter. This refocusing of foreign policy priorities is scary. Especially since China has been sharply growing its presence in and around East Timor.

Because of the moderators’ unwillingness to discuss issues relating to China, Taiwan, Indonesia, etc. Viewers were left confused about the two candidates' ideas on how to deal with these quickly escalating issues. What makes it even more confusing, is that the two candidates' foreign policy views were almost the same. This, however, is not a good thing, as both Trump and Harris avoided the majority of the questions related to Ukraine and Gaza. This avoidance of key issues is a startling reminder of the strategic ambiguity employed by both campaigns. And why many viewers can’t get a clear answer on who will be better for the country.

While multiple political correspondents, news organizations, and policy advisors are congratulating Harris on her ‘win’ against Trump. They all seem to be missing the bigger picture here. This was the only debate scheduled for the entirety of their presidential campaigns. Previously, under the Romney-Obama and Bush-Gore campaigns, there were three debates. With one exclusively focusing on foreign policy. By only having one debate for the vast array of issues affecting America, and the world, we risk not hearing political candidates' views on other issues some may consider less important, like we've seen here.