The USA’s Global Influence: A Non-Traditional War in Asia

The United States, representing less than 5% of the world’s population, wields an outsized influence on global affairs, from trade to regional politics. This influence has been largely driven by national interests, particularly since the end of the Second World War. The U.S. secured its position as the world’s hegemon, a status that was further solidified after the fall of the Soviet Union and the conclusion of the Cold War. During this period, the U.S. played a central role in world politics, a dominance that remained largely unchallenged until around 2010.

The Rise of China: A New Challenger

Since 2010, China has emerged as a formidable economic power, increasingly challenging the U.S. This rivalry is not characterized by traditional military confrontations but rather by a non-traditional war focused on trade and economic influence. In the realm of International Relations, this is often referred to as a “non-traditional war.” As a result, U.S. presidential elections, particularly those held after 2010, have garnered significant global attention, especially in Asia, where the conflict between the U.S. and China is most pronounced. Asian countries closely monitor the potential policies of U.S. presidential candidates, knowing that regardless of who wins, the focus will likely be on containing China and curbing its rise.

The 2024 Presidential Election: A Defining Moment

As the 2024 U.S. presidential election approaches, the starkly different visions presented by candidates Donald Trump and Kamala Harris will play a crucial role in shaping global dynamics. Asia, as the epicenter of geopolitical tension and economic competition, has become the battleground for what many refer to as non-traditional warfare—rivalries fought through trade, technology, and influence rather than conventional military power. The strategies employed by the next U.S. president will have profound implications not only for U.S.-China relations but for the entire region.

Trump vs. Harris: Divergent Global Approaches

Donald Trump, the former president, is known for his populist rhetoric and aggressive foreign policy, particularly toward China. During his first term, Trump’s administration initiated a trade war with China, imposed sanctions on Chinese technology firms, and withdrew the U.S. from several international agreements, including the Paris Climate Accord. His “America First” agenda emphasized economic nationalism and military disengagement from costly overseas conflicts while maintaining pressure on adversaries through sanctions and tariffs. If re-elected, Trump is expected to continue his confrontational stance toward China and Iran, reinforcing military ties with Asian allies like India and Japan.

In contrast, Kamala Harris represents a more diplomatic and multilateral approach. As Vice President, she supported the Biden administration’s efforts to repair alliances strained during the Trump era and to re-engage with international organizations. While Harris may pursue softer diplomacy, there is bipartisan agreement in the U.S. on the necessity of countering China’s rising influence. Her focus is likely to be on human rights, climate change, and coalition-building while maintaining U.S. military and economic commitments in Asia.

Non-Traditional Warfare: The New Battlefield in Asia

Non-traditional warfare, encompassing cyberattacks, economic sanctions, misinformation campaigns, and proxy conflicts, is becoming the dominant form of conflict in Asia. Unlike traditional warfare, which involves direct military confrontation, non-traditional warfare targets critical infrastructure, financial systems, and public opinion through digital means.

Cyber Warfare

Asia has become a central battleground for cyber warfare, with nations like China, Russia, North Korea, and the U.S. developing offensive cyber capabilities. China has been accused of state-sponsored cyberattacks on U.S. infrastructure and institutions, while North Korea has engaged in cyberattacks to steal cryptocurrency and fund its regime. Future U.S. administrations, whether led by Trump or Harris, will likely ramp up cybersecurity efforts to counter these threats. This could include both defensive measures to protect American infrastructure and offensive strategies to target the digital capabilities of adversaries.

Economic Warfare

Economic warfare has emerged as one of the most potent tools in global power dynamics, with its influence deeply felt across Asia. Unlike traditional warfare, which employs military force, economic warfare uses financial pressure to disrupt a nation’s economy and diminish its influence. The U.S.-China rivalry sits at the center of this battlefield, and regardless of who occupies the White House, economic warfare will likely remain a critical strategy in the years to come.

During his first term, Donald Trump deployed tariffs and sanctions as economic weapons to pressure China into making concessions on trade, intellectual property theft, and market access. His administration’s aggressive stance led to a full-blown U.S.-China trade war that rattled global markets and disrupted supply chains. If re-elected, Trump is expected to intensify this decoupling, encouraging U.S. companies to relocate supply chains away from China to other Asian nations, including India and Vietnam.

While Kamala Harris may not pursue economic warfare as aggressively as Trump, she is likely to continue some key sanctions and trade restrictions on China. There is bipartisan agreement on the need to counter China’s technological and economic rise, particularly in areas like AI, telecommunications (5G), and semiconductors. Harris’s approach may emphasize coalition-building, where the U.S. collaborates with allies like the European Union, Japan, and India to pressure China through coordinated economic policies rather than unilateral sanctions.

Misinformation and Influence Operations

Misinformation and influence operations represent a crucial and insidious component of non-traditional warfare, reflecting a significant shift in how conflicts are conducted in the modern era. The weaponization of information has emerged as a powerful tool for state and non-state actors alike, aimed at destabilizing governments, manipulating public perception, and swaying electoral outcomes. These campaigns often leverage the rapid dissemination capabilities of social media platforms, allowing false narratives to spread quickly and widely, thus influencing large segments of the population.

One of the most notable examples of such operations occurred during the 2016 U.S. presidential election, where Russian interference was characterized by a sophisticated disinformation campaign that sought to sow discord among the electorate. This campaign not only targeted specific voter demographics but also aimed to undermine trust in democratic institutions, leading to significant political repercussions and a national scandal.

In response to the growing threat of misinformation, policymakers have begun to articulate their approaches. Kamala Harris has emphasized the importance of transparency, accountability, and collaboration with tech companies to combat misinformation. Her administration advocates for stricter regulations on social media platforms, pushing for greater transparency in political advertising and improved methods for identifying and flagging false information. Harris also supports initiatives aimed at enhancing media literacy among citizens, recognizing that an informed electorate is essential for a healthy democracy.

Conversely, Donald Trump’s approach to misinformation has been characterized by his emphasis on freedom of speech and skepticism toward mainstream media narratives. During his presidency, he often dismissed claims of foreign interference and frequently referred to the media as “fake news.” While Trump has acknowledged the existence of misinformation, his policy proposals have generally leaned towards limiting regulations on social media companies, arguing that such regulations could infringe on free speech. Instead, his focus has been on empowering citizens to discern fact from fiction without imposing government oversight.

Similar tactics of misinformation have been employed in various regions across Asia, where state-sponsored narratives seek to discredit political opponents or frame protests as foreign-sponsored uprisings. The ability of misinformation to blur the lines between fact and fiction poses significant challenges to traditional governance and public trust, prompting a need for enhanced media literacy and critical thinking among the populace.

Conclusion: A Choice with Global Implications

As the U.S. election approaches, the choice between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris represents more than just a domestic decision—it will influence global geopolitics and the nature of non-traditional warfare in Asia. For countries like Bangladesh, the shifting dynamics of cyber warfare, economic sanctions, and misinformation campaigns pose both challenges and opportunities. Navigating this complex landscape will require careful diplomacy, strategic investments in cybersecurity, and a balanced approach to international relations.

In this new era of non-traditional warfare, the stakes are high, and the implications of U.S. foreign policy decisions will resonate far beyond its borders, shaping the future of global power dynamics for years to come.