In a recent government meeting, discussions centered on the foreign policy positions of presidential candidates regarding the ongoing conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine. Both candidates expressed strong support for Israel following the October 7th terrorist attacks, with promises of military assistance. However, their approaches to the conflict in Gaza diverge significantly.

Vice President Kamala Harris emphasized the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, advocating for a ceasefire that would include the release of hostages. She highlighted her long-standing commitment to Israel's security, citing recent U.S. military support, including missile defense systems. In contrast, former President Donald Trump has called for a swift victory for Israel, urging Prime Minister Netanyahu to conclude the conflict quickly, although he has not explicitly defined what victory entails.

Trump has criticized the Biden administration's calls for a ceasefire, framing it as a lack of support for Israel. He maintains that while military action is necessary, it should be conducted with caution to minimize civilian casualties. Harris, on the other hand, has framed her support for Israel as part of a broader humanitarian concern, insisting that the U.S. must not turn a blind eye to the suffering in Gaza.

The conversation then shifted to the war in Ukraine, where Harris reiterated the Biden administration's commitment to supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression. Trump, however, has proposed a different approach, suggesting that the U.S. should negotiate an end to the conflict, even if it means Ukraine conceding territory. He has not detailed how he would achieve this, but his advisors have suggested delaying Ukraine's NATO membership and offering sanctions relief to Russia.

Harris criticized these proposals, equating them to surrender rather than a path to peace. She reaffirmed the importance of Ukraine's sovereignty and the need for continued U.S. support, while also acknowledging that the administration has not clearly articulated a strategy for achieving a decisive victory for Ukraine.

The candidates' differing views on NATO were also highlighted, with Trump previously questioning the U.S. commitment to Article 5, which obligates NATO members to defend one another. This stance contrasts sharply with Harris's unwavering support for NATO and its collective defense principles.

As the election approaches, these foreign policy positions will likely play a crucial role in shaping voter perceptions and the candidates' strategies.