2016 presidential candidates on foreign affairs

2016 Presidential Election
Date: November 8, 2016

Candidates
Winner: Donald Trump (R)
Hillary Clinton (D) • Jill Stein (G) • Gary Johnson (L) • Vice presidential candidates

Election coverage
Important dates • Nominating process • Ballotpedia's 2016 Battleground Poll • Polls • Debates • Presidential election by state • Ratings and scorecards

Ballotpedia's presidential election coverage
2028 • 2024 • 2020 • 2016

Join the hundreds of thousands of readers trusting Ballotpedia to keep them up to date with the latest political news. Sign up for the Daily Brew.
Click here to learn more.

For information about foreign affairs under the Trump administration, click here.

The overview of the issue below was current as of the 2016 election.
In polls conducted during the 2016 campaign, voters ranked foreign affairs as a less important campaign issue than the economy, jobs, healthcare, terrorism, and immigration.^[1] Nevertheless, a number of serious continuing and developing foreign policy challenges were discussed throughout the election: the continuing threat of ISIS, North Korea's missile testing, U.S.-China relations, Iran, and Russian aggression.^[2]

See what the 2016 candidates and their respective party platforms said about foreign affairs below.

Interested in reading more about the 2016 candidates' stances on issues related to foreign affairs?
Ballotpedia also covered what the candidates said about the Iran nuclear deal, ISIS, Syrian refugees, North Korea, and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Democratic ticket

Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton delivered a speech focused on American exceptionalism at the American Legion national convention in Ohio on August 31, 2016. She said, “When we say America is exceptional, it doesn't mean that people from other places don't feel deep national pride just like we do. It means that we recognize America's unique and unparalleled ability to be a force for peace and progress, a champion for freedom and opportunity. … And it’s not just that we have the greatest military or that our economy is larger than any on Earth. It’s also the strength of our values, the strength of the American people. Everyone who works harder, dreams bigger and never, ever stops trying to make our country and the world a better place. And part of what makes America an exceptional nation, is that we are also an indispensable nation. In fact, we are the indispensable nation.”^[3]

Clinton approved of the peace agreement between the Colombian government and rebel group FARC on August 25, 2016. "As president, I'll ensure that the United States remains their partner in that process. The people of Colombia deserve nothing less. And the safety and security of our hemisphere and world will be strengthened by Colombia's success,” she said in a statement.^[4]

In August 2016, the Associated Press published a profile of Clinton's handling of U.S.-Russia relations while secretary of state, chronicling her success in pushing for a nuclear arms control treaty and missteps with Syria. “Russia outmaneuvered her in negotiations over a complicated Syria peace plan, dealing her what was arguably her worst diplomatic defeat. While Clinton hailed it as a triumph, the war only escalated. And while her aides still insist she came out on top, the blueprint effectively gave Syria's Moscow-backed president, Bashar Assad, a veto over any transition government, hampering all mediation efforts still,” the Associated Press reported.^[5]

Commenting on the attempted coup in Turkey on the night of July 15, 2016, Clinton released the following statement: “I am following the fast-moving developments in Turkey tonight with great concern. We should all urge calm and respect for laws, institutions, and basic human rights and freedoms — and support for the democratically elected civilian government. All parties should work to avoid further violence and bloodshed, and the safety of American citizens and diplomatic missions must be ensured.”^[6]

Following a ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague finding that China had no legal basis for claiming rights to certain parts of the South China Sea, Clinton released the following statement on July 12, 2016: “It is important that all claimants abide by this ruling and continue to pursue peaceful, multilateral means to resolve disputes among them. U.S. leadership – building on the Obama administration's pivot to Asia – will be key in supporting our partners and allies in these efforts."^[7]

Addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the ninth Democratic debate on April 14, 2016, Clinton said, “I negotiated the cease-fire between Israel and Hamas in November of 2012. I did it in concert with...President Abbas of the Palestinian authority based in Ramallah, I did it with the then Muslim Brotherhood President, Morsi, based in Cairo, working closely with Prime Minister Netanyahu and the Israeli cabinet. I can tell you right now I have been there with Israeli officials going back more than 25 years that they do not seek this kind of attacks. They do not invite the rockets raining down on their towns and villages. They do not believe that there should be a constant incitement by Hamas aided and abetted by Iran against Israel. And, so when it came time after they had taken the incoming rockets, taken the assaults and ambushes on their soldiers and they called and told me, I was in Cambodia, that they were getting ready to have to invade Gaza again because they couldn’t find anybody to talk to tell them to stop it, I flew all night, I got there, I negotiated that. So, I don’t know how you run a country when you are under constant threat, terrorist tact [sic], rockets coming at you. You have a right to defend yourself. … That does not mean — that does not mean that you don’t take appropriate precautions. And, I understand that there’s always second guessing anytime there is a war. It also does not mean that we should not continue to do everything we can to try to reach a two-state solution, which would give the Palestinians the rights and… The rights and the autonomy that they deserve. And, let me say this, if Yasser Arafat had agreed with my husband at Camp David in the Late 1990s to the offer then Prime Minister Barat put on the table, we would have had a Palestinian state for 15 years.”^[8]

During the ninth Democratic debate on April 14, 2016, Clinton was asked about the United States’ involvement with NATO. She said, “I support our continuing involvement in NATO. And it is important to ask for our NATO allies to pay more of the cost. There is a requirement that they should be doing so, and I believe that needs to be enforced. But there’s a larger question here. NATO has been the most successful military alliance in probably human history. It has bound together across the Atlantic countries that are democracies, that have many of the same values and interests, and now we need to modernize it and move it into the 21st century to serve as that head of our defense operations in Europe when it comes to terrorism and other threats that we face. So... yes, of course they should be paying more, but that doesn’t mean if they don’t we leave, because I don’t think that’s in America’s interests. … I will stay in NATO. I will stay in NATO, and we will continue to look for missions and other kinds of programs that they will support. Remember, NATO was with us in Afghanistan. Most of the member countries also lost soldiers and civilians in Afghanistan. They came to our rallying defense after 9/11. That meant a lot. And, yes, we have to work out the financial aspects of it, but let’s not forget what’s really happening. With Russia being more aggressive, making all kinds of intimidating moves toward the Baltic countries, we’ve seen what they’ve done in Eastern Ukraine, we know how they want to rewrite the map of Europe, it is not in our interests. Think of how much it would cost if Russia’s aggression were not deterred because NATO was there on the front lines making it clear they could not move forward.”^[8]

During an interview on April 10, 2016, Clinton told CNN's Jake Tapper that she supported “Israel’s right to self-defense” and believed that “Hamas provokes Israel.” ^[9]

Clinton delivered a wide-ranging speech on counterterrorism at Stanford University on March 23, 2016. Discussing ground strategy in the Middle East, Clinton said, “It would be a serious mistake to stumble into another costly ground war in the Middle East. If we’ve learned anything from Iraq and Afghanistan it’s that people and nations have to secure their own communities.” On the topic of carpet-bombing, she said, "It would also be a serious mistake to begin carpet-bombing populated areas into oblivion. Proposing that doesn't make you sound tough. It makes you sound like you are in over your head. Slogans aren't a strategy. Loose cannons tend to misfire.” Clinton also talked about European alliances. She said, "On 9/11, NATO treated an attack against one as an attack against all. Now it is our turn to stand with Europe. We cherish the same values and face the same adversaries so we must share the same determination." Clinton also mentioned Trump’s foreign policy. She said, “If Mr. Trump gets his way, it will be like Christmas in the Kremlin.”^[10]^[11]

At the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference on March 21, 2016, Clinton expressed her support for a two-state solution, saying, “It may be difficult to imagine progress in this current climate when many Israelis doubt that a willing and capable partner for peace even exists. But inaction cannot be an option. Israelis deserve a secure homeland for the Jewish people. Palestinians should be able to govern themselves in their own state, in peace and dignity. And only a negotiated two-state agreement can survive those outcomes.” She also commented on U.S.-Israeli relations, saying, “Indeed, at a time of unprecedented chaos and conflict in the region, America needs an Israel strong enough to deter and defend against its enemies, strong enough to work with us to tackle shared challenges and strong enough to take bold steps in the pursuit of peace. That’s why I believe we must take our alliance to the next level. I hope a new 10-year defense memorandum of understanding is concluded as soon as possible to meet Israel’s security needs far into the future. That will also send a clear message to Israel’s enemies that the United States and Israel stand together united.”^[12]

Clinton wrote an op-ed in The Jewish Journal on January 6, 2016, to promote the importance of stronger U.S.-Israel relations. She stated that “the United States and Israel need to work together to address three converging trends: the rise of ISIS and the struggle against radical jihadism, Iran’s increasingly aggressive regional ambitions, and the growing effort around the world to isolate and delegitimize Israel.” She also advocated for the end of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement.^[13]

In an op-ed Clinton wrote for Forward on November 4, 2015, she discussed how she would handle relations between the United States and Israel. Clinton wrote, “As president I will never stop working to advance the goal of two states for two peoples living in peace, security and dignity. I will do everything I can to enhance our strategic partnership and strengthen America’s security commitment to Israel, ensuring that it always has the qualitative military edge to defend itself. That includes immediately dispatching a delegation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to meet with senior Israeli commanders. I would also invite the Israeli prime minister to the White House in my first month in office.”^[14]

Clinton tweeted on September 27, 2015, that Chinese President Xi Jinping was “shameless” for “hosting a meeting on women’s rights at the UN while persecuting feminists” in his country.^[15]

On September 20, 2015, Clinton said the United States should increase sanctions against Russia if it aided Hezbollah in Syria.^[16]

In response to the global refugee crisis across Europe resulting from the spread of ISIS in Syria and Iraq, Clinton said in September 2015, “There should be an emergency global gathering where the U.N. literally tries to get commitments. I obviously want the United States to do our part.” In an interview later that month, Clinton called for the United States to take in 65,000 refugees rather than 10,000 and to develop "the mechanisms for vetting" them.^[16]^[17]

In a July 2, 2015, letter to Israeli-American businessman Haim Saban, Clinton expressed her opposition to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) Movement against Israel. She added, "I am also very concerned by attempts to compare Israel to South African apartheid. Israel is a vibrant democracy in a region dominated by autocracy, and it faces existential threats to its survival. Particularly at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise around the world—especially in Europe—we need to repudiate forceful efforts to malign and undermine Israel and the Jewish people."^[18]

In July 2014, after Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was shot down, Clinton advocated tougher sanctions on Russia and more U.S. support for Ukrainians. She said, "One, toughen their (Russia's) own sanctions. Make it very clear there has to be a price to pay. Number two, immediately accelerate efforts and announce they are doing so to find alternatives to Gazprom. And thirdly, do more in concert with us to support the Ukrainians. There has to be more help on their borders in order to prevent this porous border allowing Russians to go back and forth, insurgents to do the same."^[19]

Wall Street Journal reporter Michael O'Hanlon praised Clinton's approach to dealing with China in her actions as secretary of state and in her book Hard Choices. He wrote, "There is a firmness in Hillary Clinton’s thinking about China that provides a good guide to policy and that is less well articulated by the current Obama team. She makes issues easy to understand. The clarity of her thinking, respect for China and awareness of how assertive it can be—and the stakes for the U.S.–bode well for how she would handle Beijing as president."^[20]

In a November 2001 op-ed, Clinton wrote, "President and Mrs. Bush have properly highlighted the mistreatment of Afghan women by the Taliban and insist that women play a role in Afghanistan's future. We can help in Congress by completing our work on legislation to provide educational and health care assistance to Afghan women and children and promote the training of women to aid in the development of democracy and a civil society."^[21]

In 2000, Clinton supported maintaining the embargo against Cuba.^[22] She later changed her mind. According to The Washington Times, Clinton "wrote that near the end of her tenure, she recommended that Mr. Obama take another look at the U.S. embargo against Cuba." Clinton also praised Obama's willingness to work with Cuba. She said, “Despite good intentions, our decades-long policy of isolation has only strengthened the Castro regime’s grip on power. As I have said, the best way to bring change to Cuba is to expose its people to the values, information and material comforts of the outside world.”^[23]

In 1999, Clinton advocated for declaring Jerusalem the "indivisible eternal capital of Israel."^[24] In 2011, Clinton reversed her position and filed a brief with the Supreme Court, which opposed the U.S. recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. According to The New York Sun, "Mrs. Clinton’s brief alleges that any American action that 'symbolically or concretely' signals it recognizes Jerusalem being in Israel would 'critically compromise the ability of the United States to work with Israelis, Palestinians and others in the region to further the peace process.' The brief contends that American policy is to remain neutral over all sovereignty issues, leaving them to negotiations, and that the U.S. thus 'does not recognize Palestinian claims to current sovereignty' in the West Bank or Gaza either."^[25]

Read more of Hillary Clinton's public statements on foreign affairs.

The 2016 Democratic Party Platform on foreign affairs

“

A Leader in the World

American leadership is essential to keeping us safe and our economy growing in the years ahead. It would be a dangerous mistake for America to abandon our responsibilities. We cannot, as Donald Trump suggests, cede the mantle of leadership for global peace and security to others who will not have our best interests in mind.

Asia-Pacific
From the Asia Pacific to the Indian Ocean, we will deepen our relationships in the region with Australia, Japan, New Zealand, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand. We will honor our historic commitment to Japan. We will continue to invest in a long-term strategic partnership with India—the world’s largest democracy, a nation of great diversity, and an important Pacific power. We will build on the historic opening with Burma and advocate for greater human rights protections and national reconciliation among Burma’s many different ethnic groups. We will help Pakistan stabilize its polity and build an effective relationship with the predominantly young population of this strategically located, nuclear-armed country. We will also work with our allies and partners to fortify regional institutions and norms as well as protect freedom of the seas in the South China Sea.

Democrats will push back against North Korean aggression and press China to play by the rules. We will stand up to Beijing on unfair trade practices, currency manipulation, censorship of the internet, piracy, and cyberattacks. And we will look for areas of cooperation, including on combatting climate change and nuclear proliferation. We will promote greater respect for human rights, including the rights of Tibetans. We are committed to a “One China” policy and the Taiwan Relations Act and will continue to support a peaceful resolution of Cross-Strait issues that is consistent with the wishes and best interests of the people of Taiwan.

Middle East
In the Middle East, Democrats will push for more inclusive governance in Iraq and Syria that respects the equal rights of all citizens; provide support and security for Lebanon and Jordan, two countries that are hosting a disproportionate number of refugees; maintain our robust security cooperation with Gulf countries; and stand by the people of the region as they seek greater economic opportunity and freedom. A strong and secure Israel is vital to the United States because we share overarching strategic interests and the common values of democracy, equality, tolerance, and pluralism. That is why we will always support Israel’s right to defend itself, including by retaining its qualitative military edge, and oppose any effort to delegitimize Israel, including at the United Nations or through the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement.

We will continue to work toward a two-state solution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict negotiated directly by the parties that guarantees Israel’s future as a secure and democratic Jewish state with recognized borders and provides the Palestinians with independence, sovereignty, and dignity. While Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations, it should remain the capital of Israel, an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths. Israelis deserve security, recognition, and a normal life free from terror and incitement. Palestinians should be free to govern themselves in their own viable state, in peace and dignity.

Europe
Europe remains America’s indispensable partner and a cornerstone of global security. Democrats will stand with our European allies and partners to deter Russian aggression, address security challenges to Europe’s south, and deal with unprecedented economic and social challenges. We will maintain our steadfast commitment to the special relationship with United Kingdom and the transatlantic partnership with the European Union. We will seek to strengthen our strategic partnership with Turkey while pushing for reforms, end the division of Cyprus, and continue to support a close relationship with states that seek to strengthen their ties to NATO and Europe, such as Georgia and Ukraine.

We reject Donald Trump’s threats to abandon our European and NATO allies, all while he praises Putin. When the United States was attacked on September 11, 2001, our NATO allies invoked Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty, stating that an attack against one is an attack against all—for the first and only time in its history. Our NATO allies fought alongside us in Afghanistan and are still there today. We will maintain our Article 5 collective security commitments to NATO because we are stronger when we have our allies at our side. And we will continue to push NATO members to contribute their fair share.

Americas
The Americas are a region of singular strategic, economic, and cultural importance and opportunity for the United States. Democrats reject Donald Trump’s proposal to build a wall on our southern border and alienate Mexico, a valuable partner. We will instead embrace our neighbors and pursue strong, fruitful partnerships across the region, from Canada to Latin America and the Caribbean. We will bolster democratic institutions, promote economic opportunity and prosperity, and tackle the rise of drugs, transnational crime, and corruption. We will strengthen the U.S.- Caribbean regional relationship through economic development and comprehensive immigration reform. And we will build on our long-term commitment to Colombia and work with Central American countries to stabilize the Northern Triangle.

In Cuba, we will build on President Obama’s historic opening and end the travel ban and embargo. We will also stand by the Cuban people and support their ability to decide their own future and to enjoy the same human rights and freedoms that people everywhere deserve. In Venezuela, we will push the government to respect human rights and respond to the will of its people. And in Haiti, we will support local and international efforts to bolster the country’s democratic institutions and economic development. We will also help more Haitians take advantage of Temporary Protected Status. Finally, we will close the School of the Americas, now known as the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, because we believe that military and police forces should support democracy, not subvert it.

Africa
Africa is home to many of the fastest growing economies in the world. Democrats will strengthen our partnership and collaboration with the African Union, emphasizing trade while increasing development assistance to bolster the continent’s domestic economies. We will engage our African partners on the full range of global challenges and opportunities, and we will continue to strengthen democratic institutions and human rights, fair trade and investment, development, and global health. We will help our African partners improve their capacity to respond to crises and protect citizens, especially women and girls. And we will work to end the reign of terror promulgated by Boko Haram, al-Shabaab, AQIM, and ISIS.

Democrats applaud President Obama’s National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking, and his commitment to preserving the earth’s natural beauty for future generations. Democrats support science-based management of iconic wildlife in Africa, including stronger regulations banning the importation into the United States of hunting trophies that are not supported by current science-based evidence and are related to or funded by non-scientific special interests.

Global Economy and Institutions
Democrats will protect and grow the global economy. While Donald Trump wants to default on our debt, which would lead to a disastrous global economic crisis, we believe we must be responsible stewards and work with our partners to prevent another worldwide financial crisis.

Democrats believe that global institutions—most prominently the United Nations—and multilateral organizations have a powerful role to play and are an important amplifier of American strength and influence. Many of these organizations need reform and updating, but it would be reckless to follow Donald Trump and turn our back on the international system that our country built. It has provided decades of stability and economic growth for the world and for America. ^[26]

”

—2016 Democratic Platform^[27]

Tim Kaine

After voters in the United Kingdom backed a referendum to leave the European Union (EU) on June 23, 2016, Tim Kaine said that the U.S. must sustain its ties with Europe and the United Kingdom. He also noted a generational gap between those who voted to stay in the EU and those who voted for Brexit. "Young voters, those under 50, especially millennials, overwhelmingly voted to stay," Kaine said. "And it was older voters who voted to leave."^[28]
Kaine called for establishing safe zones to protect civilian lives and supply lines for food, water, and medical supplies in Syria. In 2014, he led an effort in the Senate to pass the Syrian Humanitarian Resolution. It called for fully implementing UN Security Council Resolution 2139 to ease the delivery of humanitarian aid to Syrians. The resolution also pressed the Obama administration to submit to Congress a comprehensive strategy to address the Syrian humanitarian crisis.^[29]
In the U.S. Senate, Kaine served on four Senate Foreign Relations Committee subcommittees: Subcommittee on Near East, South Asia, Central Asia, and Counterterrorism; Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Transnational Crime, Civilian Security, Democracy, Human Rights, and Global Women's Issues; Subcommittee on Europe and Regional Security Cooperation; and Subcommittee on State Department and USAID Management, International Operations, and Bilateral International Development.^[30]

Read more of Tim Kaine's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.

Republican ticket

Donald Trump

Trump met with Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, in New York on September 26, 2016. Netanyahu was in the country for the United Nations General Assembly meeting. A statement from the Trump campaign said, “Mr. Trump recognized that Israel and its citizens have suffered far too long on the front lines of Islamic terrorism. He agreed with Prime Minister Netanyahu that the Israeli people want a just and lasting peace with their neighbors, but that peace will only come when the Palestinians renounce hatred and violence and accept Israel as a Jewish State.”^[31]

On September 19, 2016, Trump met with Egyptian president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi during a special meeting of the United Nations General Assembly. According to a readout of the meeting released by the Trump campaign, Trump “thanked President el-Sisi and the Egyptian people for what they have done in defense of their country and for the betterment of the world over the last few years. He expressed great respect for Egypt’s history and the important leadership role it has played in the Middle East.” He also, “expressed to President el-Sisi his strong support for Egypt’s war on terrorism, and how under a Trump Administration, the United States of America will be a loyal friend, not simply an ally, that Egypt can count on in the days and years ahead.”^[32]

Responding to a questionnaire from Scientific American on September 13, 2016, Trump said, “Space exploration has given so much to America, including tremendous pride in our scientific and engineering prowess. ... We should also seek global partners, because space is not the sole property of America. All humankind benefits from reaching into the stars.”^[33]

At a "commander-in-chief" forum on NBC News on September 7, 2016, Trump discussed his views Russian president Vladimir Putin, saying, “[H]e does have an 82 percent approval rating, according to the different pollsters, who, by the way, some of them are based right here. … I think I’d be able to get along with him. … If he says great things about me, I’m going to say great things about him. I’ve already said, he is really very much of a leader. I mean, you can say, oh, isn’t that a terrible thing — the man has very strong control over a country. … Now, it’s a very different system, and I don’t happen to like the system. But certainly, in that system, he’s been a leader, far more than our president has been a leader.”^[34]

Trump met with Mexico president Enrique Peña Nieto on August 31, 2016. The meeting was in private, but afterwards Trump and Peña Nieto held a brief press conference and took questions. Trump reiterated his opposition to NAFTA and illegal immigration as well as his support for strong immigration laws and border security, saying, “having a secure border is a sovereign right and mutually beneficial.” But Trump also commented on his personal relationship with Mexicans, his desire to keep jobs in the western hemisphere, and the United States’ relationship with Mexico.^[35]
- Personal relationship with Mexicans and Mexican-Americans: “And I happen to have a tremendous feeling for Mexican Americans not only in terms of friendships, but in terms of the tremendous numbers that I employ in the United States and they are amazing people, amazing people. I have many friends, so many friends and so many friends coming to Mexico and in Mexico. I am proud to say how many people I employ.”
- Jobs in the western hemisphere: “There are many improvements that could be made that would make both Mexico and the United States stronger and keep industry in our hemisphere. We have tremendous competition from China and from all over the world. Keep it in our hemisphere. Workers in both of our countries need a pay raise, very desperately. … When jobs leave Mexico, the U.S. or Central America and go over seas, it increases poverty and pressure on social services as well as pressures on cross border migration.”
- U.S.-Mexico relations: “The United States and Mexico share a 2,000-mile border, a half a trillion dollars in annual trade and one million legal border crossings each and every day. We are united by our support for democracy, a great love for our people and the contributions of millions of Mexican Americans to the United States.”

During an interview that aired on ABC News on July 31, 2016, Trump said that he was not concerned with Russian President Vladimir Putin entering Ukraine. “He’s not gonna go into Ukraine, all right? You can mark it down. You can put it down. You can take it anywhere you want.” When host George Stephanopoulos countered that Russia had already entered Ukraine, Trump said, “OK― well, he’s there in a certain way. But I’m not there. You have Obama there. And frankly, that whole part of the world is a mess under Obama with all the strength that you’re talking about and all of the power of NATO and all of this. In the meantime, he’s going away. He take ― takes Crimea.” He added that he heard that Crimeans “would rather be with Russia than where they were.”^[36]

In an interview with The New York Times published on July 20, 2016, Trump “called into question whether, as president, he would automatically extend the security guarantees that give the 28 members of NATO the assurance that the full force of the United States military has their back. For example, asked about Russia’s threatening activities that have unnerved the small Baltic States that are among the more recent entrants into NATO, Mr. Trump said that if Russia attacked them, he would decide whether to come to their aid only after reviewing whether those nations ‘have fulfilled their obligations to us.’”^[37]
- Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) rejected Trump’s proposal that NATO allies will only be defended by the United States if they have “fulfilled their obligations to us.” McConnell said, “NATO is the most important military alliance in world history. I want to reassure our NATO allies that if any of them.” He added, “I think he's [Trump] wrong on that. I don't think that view would be prevalent or held by anybody he might make secretary of state or secretary of defense."^[38]
- During an interview with NBC host Chuck Todd on July 24, 2016, Trump said that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s comments that Trump’s questioning of NATO was a "rookie mistake” was "100 percent wrong.” Trump added, “Frankly it's sad. We have NATO, and we have many countries that aren't paying for what they're supposed to be paying, which is already too little, but they're not paying anyway. And we're giving them a free ride."^[39]

On July 16, 2016, Donald Trump attributed the attempted coup in Turkey over the weekend to failed policies of the Obama administration. He said, “We’re seeing unrest in Turkey, a further demonstration of the failures of Obama-Clinton. You just have to look ― every single thing they’ve touched has turned to horrible, horrible, death-defying problems.”^[40]

On June 24, 2016, Trump appeared in Turnberry, Scotland, to celebrate the reopening of his golf course and resort there. His trip came the day after the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, sparking a major drop in the value of the pound. Trump highlighted the potential benefit of this plunge for businesses like his, saying, “Look if the pound goes down, they're gonna do more business. You know, when the pound goes down, more people are gonna come to Turnberry, frankly, and the pound has gone down, and let's see what the impact of that is." A protester at the event also attempted to pass out golf balls with swastikas on them. He said, “These are the new balls available from the clubhouse — part of the new Trump Turnberry range.”^[41]
- The Clinton campaign released a national ad on June 25, 2016, criticizing Trump’s comments. "Every president is tested by world events but Donald Trump thinks about how he can profit from them," the ad’s narrator says.^[42]
- “Clinton is trying to wash away her bad judgement call on BREXIT with big dollar ads. Disgraceful!” Trump responded in a tweet.^[42]

In an interview on June 5, 2016, Trump appeared to reverse his position on Libya, saying that he would have supported a “surgical” strike to remove Muammar Qadhafi. During a debate in February, Trump had previously held, “We would be so much better off if Qadhafi would be in charge right now." Asked to explain this shift in policy, Trump said, “I wasn't for what happened. Look at the way — I mean look at with Benghazi and all of the problems that we've had. It was handled horribly. … I was never for strong intervention. I could have seen surgical where you take out Qadhafi and his group.”^[43]

Former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger disputed Trump’s assertion that he approved of his foreign policy approach. “On foreign policy, you identify many key problems. I do not generally agree with the solutions. One-shot outcomes are probably not possible,” Kissinger said of Trump on May 27, 2016.^[44]

President Barack Obama (D) said on May 26, 2016, at a press conference in Japan that world leaders were concerned with Donald Trump’s candidacy. “They're rattled by him and for good reason. Because a lot of the proposals that he's made display either ignorance of world affairs or a cavalier attitude or an interest in getting tweets and headlines instead of actually thinking through what is required to keep America safe,” Obama said.

Responding to Obama's critique, Trump said,"When you rattle someone, that's good."^[45]

Trump was scheduled to meet with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on May 18, 2016, to discuss his foreign policy. According to The Washington Post, “Meeting with Kissinger has become a rite of passage for many ambitious Republicans, especially those who land on the party’s presidential ticket. Sarah Palin had a high-profile meeting with him in 2008 when she became the GOP vice-presidential nominee, seeking his counsel and association with his credentials.”^[46]

London’s newly elected mayor, Sadiq Khan, who is the first Muslim to hold the office, criticized Trump’s plan to ban all Muslims from entering the country “until political leaders can ‘figure out what is going on’ with jihadist terrorism.” Kahn wrote on Twitter, “Trump’s ignorant view of Islam could make both our countries less safe. It risks alienating mainstream Muslims. London has proved him wrong.”^[47]

Trump said on May 5, 2016, that he supported Britain leaving the European Union (EU). “I think the migration has been a horrible thing for Europe. A lot of that was pushed by the EU. I would say that they’re better off without it, personally, but I’m not making that as a recommendation. Just my feeling,” he said.^[48]

On May 2, 2016, Pakistani Interior Minister Chaudry Nisar Ali Khan said in a statement that Trump “should learn to treat sovereign nations with respect” after he said in an interview last week that he would get Shakeel Afridi released “in two minutes” if he were president. Afridi has been in prison for five years since assisting the CIA in locating Osama bin Laden. “Pakistan is not a colony of the United States of America,” Khan said^[49]

On April 27, 2016, Donald Trump delivered prepared remarks on foreign policy at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. He said that the overarching theme of his administration would be “America first,” criticized the Obama administration for a “list of humiliations” on the international stage, and made the following policy points:
- On democracy in the Middle East, Trump said, “We went from mistakes in Iraq to Egypt to Libya, to President Obama’s line in the sand in Syria. Each of these actions have helped to throw the region into chaos and gave ISIS the space it needs to grow and prosper. Very bad. It all began with a dangerous idea that we could make western democracies out of countries that had no experience or interests in becoming a western democracy.”
- On the financial responsibilities of America’s allies, Trump said, “Secondly, our allies are not paying their fair share, and I’ve been talking about this recently a lot. Our allies must contribute toward their financial, political, and human costs, have to do it, of our tremendous security burden. But many of them are simply not doing so. … In NATO, for instance, only 4 of 28 other member countries besides America, are spending the minimum required 2 percent of GDP on defense. … The countries we are defending must pay for the cost of this defense, and if not, the U.S. must be prepared to let these countries defend themselves. We have no choice.”
- On preventing terrorism and defeating ISIS, Trump said, “We should work together with any nation in the region that is threatened by the rise of radical Islam. But this has to be a two-way street. They must also be good to us. … The struggle against radical Islam also takes place in our homeland. There are scores of recent migrants inside our borders charged with terrorism. … We must stop importing extremism through senseless immigration policies. … And then there’s ISIS. I have a simple message for them. Their days are numbered. I won’t tell them where and I won’t tell them how. We must … as a nation be more unpredictable. We are totally predictable. We tell everything. We’re sending troops. We tell them. We’re sending something else. We have a news conference. We have to be unpredictable. And we have to be unpredictable starting now. But they’re going to be gone. ISIS will be gone if I’m elected president. And they’ll be gone quickly. They will be gone very, very quickly.”
- On increasing military spending, Trump said, “Secondly, we have to rebuild our military and our economy. The Russians and Chinese have rapidly expanded their military capability, but look at what’s happened to us. Our nuclear weapons arsenal, our ultimate deterrent, has been allowed to atrophy and is desperately in need of modernization and renewal. And it has to happen immediately.”
- On modernizing NATO’s mission, Trump said, “After I’m elected president, I will also call for a summit with our NATO allies and a separate summit with our Asian allies. In these summits, we will not only discuss a rebalancing of financial commitments, but take a fresh look at how we can adopt new strategies for tackling our common challenges. For instance, we will discuss how we can upgrade NATO’s outdated mission and structure, grown out of the Cold War to confront our shared challenges, including migration and Islamic terrorism.”^[50]

During a meeting with “reporters from Jewish and Israel-focused publications and Orthodox activists” on April 14, 2016, Trump was asked how he would refer to the West Bank. Instead of answering, Trump said, there are "many words that I've seen to describe it. … Jason, how would you respond to that?" Jason Greenblatt is “the chief legal officer for the Trump Organization.” According to CNN, “Many Israelis call the area, which their government controls, by the biblical names of Judea and Samaria, terms often embraced by pro-Israel activists and evangelical Christians.”^[51]

In a wide-ranging interview with The New York Times on March 25, 2016, Trump discussed economic policy, national security and foreign affairs.
- Trump said that he would consider stopping oil purchases from Saudi Arabia unless the country offers soldiers to join the ground fight against the Islamic State or “substantially reimburse[s]” the U.S. for its military protection.
- According to The Times, Trump would also “be open to allowing Japan and South Korea to build their own nuclear arsenals rather than depend on the American nuclear umbrella for their protection against North Korea and China.”
- Discussing when America was last at its height of power, Trump pointed to Theodore Roosevelt’s presidency at the turn of the century.
- On ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Trump initially said he did not want to “specifically” address any policy because he “would love to see if a deal could be made.” He later clarified this statement, noting that he supported a two-state solution with the caveat that “the Palestinian Authority has to recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.”^[52]

On March 24, 2016, Trump continued to criticize the mission and expense of NATO. He tweeted that the alliance “is obsolete and must be changed to additionally focus on terrorism as well as some of the things it is currently focused on” and that the U.S. shoulders “a disproportionate share” of its cost.^[53]

During a press conference on March 22, 2016, the leadership of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) condemned Trump’s direct attacks against President Obama in his speech on March 21. “We say, unequivocally, that we do not countenance ad hominem attacks, and we take great offense to those that are levied against the president of the United States of America from our stage said. While we may have policy differences, we deeply respect the office of the president of the United States and our president, Barack Obama. We are disappointed that so many people applauded a sentiment that we neither agree with nor condone,” said AIPAC President Lillian Pinkus.^[54]

During a campaign rally on December 19, 2015, Trump said of U.S.-Russia relations, "I mean you look, we're all tough guys, but wouldn't it be nice if like Russia and us could knock out an enemy together? Russia has plenty of problems, but I'll tell you what, if Putin likes me, and he thinks I'm a good, smart person, which, I mean I hope he believes it." Trump added. "I mean I am brilliant actually ... If he says something positive, that's a good thing, that's not a bad thing."^[55]

Trump returned the compliment to Vladimir Putin on December 18, 2015, after the Russian president lavished praise on Trump the day before. On MSNBC's Morning Joe Trump said,"When people call you 'brilliant' it's always good, especially when the person heads up Russia." After the program's hosts pointed out that Putin kills journalists, political opponents and invades countries, Trump still embraced the Russian leader, NBC News reported. "At least he's a leader unlike what we have in this country," Trump said, adding "Our country does plenty of killing also."^[56]

On December 17, 2015, Russian President Vladimir Putin praised Trump, saying, "He's a very colorful person. Talented, without any doubt. But it's not our affair to determine his worthiness. That's up to the United States voters. … He wants to move to a different level of relations, to more solid, deeper relations with Russia. And how can Russia not welcome that? We welcome that. … As for his internal political issues and his turns of speech which he uses to raise his popularity, I repeat, it’s not our job to judge them.”^[57]

A petition to ban Trump from entering the United Kingdom has received 300,000 signatures, CNN reported on December 9, 2010. Since it has passed the 100,000-signature threshold to be considered by the Parliament's Petitions Committee, the House of Commons has reported that committee will consider whether to place it up for debate on January 5, 2016.^[58]

Trump said he did not believe Russia was directly involved in shooting down Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 in 2014. “They say it wasn't them. It may have been their weapon, but they didn't use it, they didn't fire it, they even said the other side fired it to blame them. I mean to be honest with you, you'll probably never know for sure,” he said on October 14, 2015, after Dutch investigators announced the plane had been shot down with a Russian-made rocket and warhead.^[59]

Appearing on Fox News on September 8, 2015, Trump said the United States should accept some refugees from Syria. “I hate the concept of it, but on a humanitarian basis, you have to. This was started by President Obama when he didn't go in and do the job he should have when he drew the line in the sand, which turned out to be a very artificial line. But you know, it's living in hell in Syria. There's no question about it. They're living in hell, and something has to be done,” Trump said.^[60]

In an interview with the Daily Caller published on September 7, 2015, Trump stated that the United States “lost a lot of credibility” when it did not back the former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, when he was ousted in 2011 and that he supported opening relations with Cuba.^[61]

During Trump's presidential bid announcement on June 16, 2015, he warned that China is not only economically but also militarily outpacing the United States. Trump stated, "[China is] building up their military to a point that is very scary. You have a problem with ISIS. You have a bigger problem with China."^[62]

Trump argued in 2014 that European countries should be more engaged than the United States in addressing Russian military intervention in the Ukraine.^[63]

In his 2000 book, The America We Deserve, Trump cautioned against becoming "involved in a long-festering conflict for humanitarian reasons. If that's our standard, we should have troops stationed all over Africa, and much of Asia as well."^[64]

Read more of Donald Trump's public statements on foreign affairs.

The 2016 Republican Party Platform on foreign affairs

“

Challenges of a Changing Middle East

The Middle East is more dangerous now than at any time since the Second World War. Whatever their disagreements, presidents of both parties had always prioritized America’s national interests, the trust of friendly governments, and the security of Israel. That sound consensus was replaced with impotent grandstanding on the part of the current President and his Secretaries of State. The results have been ruinous for all parties except Islamic terrorists and their Iranian and other sponsors. We consider the Administration’s deal with Iran, to lift international sanctions and make hundreds of billions of dollars available to the Mullahs, a personal agreement between the President and his negotiating partners and non-binding on the next president. Without a two-thirds endorsement by the Senate, it does not have treaty status. Because of it, the defiant and emboldened regime in Tehran continues to sponsor terrorism across the region, develop a nuclear weapon, test-fire ballistic missiles inscribed with “Death to Israel,” and abuse the basic human rights of its citizens. A Republican president will not be bound by it. We must retain all options in dealing with a situation that gravely threatens our security, our interests, and the survival of our friends.

Over the last four years we have seen the rise of a murderous fanaticism in the form of ISIS, the so called Islamic State. Its reach now extends far beyond the Middle East to virtually every continent. ISIS has brought ancient butchery into the 21st century. Nations are imploding, erasing long-established borders. The Obama Administration and its Secretary of State so mishandled the Arab Spring that it destabilized the entire region. The hope some saw in the Arab Spring has transformed into disappointment. The dictator of Syria, Bashar Assad, has murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people and created millions of refugees, and an American president has been unable to rally the world against him. Understandably, our allies fear for their future in a region far more dangerous than it was eight years ago. A Republican administration will restore our nation’s credibility. We must stand up for our friends, challenge our foes, and destroy ISIS. Hezbollah, controlling over 100,000 missiles in Lebanon, must be isolated and Lebanon’s independence restored.

We will support the transition to a post-Assad Syrian government that is representative of its people, protects the rights of all minorities and religions, respects the territorial integrity of its neighbors, and contributes to peace and stability in the region. The Iraqi people have been on the front lines in the fight against terror. Hundreds of thousands have been killed, and the attacks against them continue, even in Baghdad. Our partnership with them should continue as long as ISIS and others like it survive in the region. We are deeply concerned that, in the face of genocide against them, Christian communities in cities like Erbil are receiving no financial support from either the U.S. government or the UN to help with displaced persons and urban refugees. Their survival is sustained only by private charities. This must change immediately. Defeating ISIS means more than pushing back its fighters while abandoning its victims. It must mean aiding those who have suffered the most — and doing so before they starve. It means supporting the long-term survival of indigenous religious and ethnic communities, punishing the perpetrators of crimes against humanity, and conditioning humanitarian and military assistance to governments on their observable commitment to human rights.

We continue to support the Kurdish people, whose bravery and cooperation with our forces merit our respect and their autonomy. Many countries in the region have given, and continue to give, substantial assistance to the United States because they understand that our struggle against terrorism is not an ethnic or religious fight. They consider violent extremists to be abusers of their faith, not its champions. We applaud their courage and value their counsel. The U.S. government, together with its global partners, should mobilize its political, economic, and military assets to support the creation of a safe haven in northern Iraq to protect those ethnic and religious minorities continuing to face genocide at the hands of ISIS.

Our Unequivocal Support for Israel
Like the United States of America, the modern state of Israel is a country born from the aspiration for freedom and stands out among the nations as a beacon of democracy and humanity. Beyond our mutual strategic interests, Israel is likewise an exceptional country that shares our most essential values. It is the only country in the Middle East where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are found. Therefore, support for Israel is an expression of Americanism, and it is the responsibility of our government to advance policies that reflect Americans’ strong desire for a relationship with no daylight between America and Israel. We recognize Jerusalem as the eternal and indivisible capital of the Jewish state and call for the American embassy to be moved there in fulfillment of U.S. law.

We reaffirm America’s commitment to Israel’s security and will ensure that Israel maintains a qualitative military edge over any and all adversaries. We support Israel’s right and obligation to defend itself against terror attacks upon its people and against alternative forms of warfare being waged upon it legally, economically, culturally, and otherwise. We reject the false notion that Israel is an occupier and specifically recognize that the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement (BDS) is anti-Semitic in nature and seeks to destroy Israel. Therefore, we call for effective legislation to thwart actions that are intended to limit commercial relations with Israel, or persons or entities doing business in Israel or in Israeli-controlled territories, in a discriminatory manner. The United States seeks to assist in the establishment of comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, to be negotiated among those living in the region. We oppose any measures intended to impose an agreement or to dictate borders or other terms, and we call for the immediate termination of all U.S. funding of any entity that attempts to do so. Our party is proud to stand with Israel now and always.

U.S. Leadership in the Asian Pacific
We are a Pacific nation with economic, military, and cultural ties to all the countries of the oceanic rim and treaty alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand. With them, we look toward the establishment of human rights for the people of North Korea. We urge the government of China to recognize the inevitability of change in the Kim family’s slave state and, for everyone’s safety against nuclear disaster, to hasten positive change on the Korean peninsula. The United States will continue to demand the complete, verifiable, and irreversible dismantlement of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program with full accounting of its proliferation activities. We also pledge to counter any threats from the North Korean regime.

We salute the people of Taiwan, with whom we share the values of democracy, human rights, a free market economy, and the rule of law. Our relations will continue to be based upon the provisions of the Taiwan Relations Act, and we affirm the Six Assurances given to Taiwan in 1982 by President Reagan. We oppose any unilateral steps by either side to alter the status quo in the Taiwan Straits on the principle that all issues regarding the island’s future must be resolved peacefully, through dialogue, and be agreeable to the people of Taiwan. If China were to violate those principles, the United States, in accord with the Taiwan Relations Act, will help Taiwan defend itself. We praise efforts by the new government in Taipei to continue constructive relations across the Taiwan Strait and call on China to reciprocate. As a loyal friend of America, Taiwan has merited our strong support, including free trade agreement status, the timely sale of defensive arms including technology to build diesel submarines, and full participation in the World Health Organization, International Civil Aviation Organization, and other multilateral institutions.

China’s behavior has negated the optimistic language of our last platform concerning our future relations with China. The liberalizing policies of recent decades have been abruptly reversed, dissent brutally crushed, religious persecution heightened, the internet crippled, a barbaric population control two-child policy of forced abortions and forced sterilizations continued, and the cult of Mao revived. Critics of the regime have been kidnapped by its agents in foreign countries. To distract the populace from its increasing economic problems and, more importantly, to expand its military might, the government asserts a preposterous claim to the entire South China Sea and continues to dredge ports and create landing fields in contested waters where none have existed before, ever nearer to U.S. territories and our allies, while building a navy far out of proportion to defensive purposes. The complacency of the Obama regime has emboldened the Chinese government and military to issue threats of intimidation throughout the South China Sea, not to mention parading their new missile, “the Guam Killer,” down the main streets of Beijing, a direct shot at Guam as America’s first line of defense. Meanwhile, cultural genocide continues in Tibet and Xinjiang, the promised autonomy of Hong Kong is eroded, the currency is manipulated, our technology is stolen, and intellectual property and copyrights are mocked in an economy based on piracy. In business terms, this is not competition; it is a hostile takeover. For any American company to abet those offenses, especially governmental censorship and tracking of dissenters, is a disgrace.

The return to Maoism by China’s current rulers is not reason to disengage with the Chinese people or their institutions. We welcome students, tourists, and investors, who can see for themselves our vibrant American democracy and how real democracy works. We caution, however, against academic or cultural operations under the control of the Chinese government and call upon American colleges to dissociate themselves from this increasing threat to academic freedom and honest research.

Most of the nations of Southeast Asia have set aside crippling ideologies and sought material progress in free enterprise and democracy. We congratulate the people of Burma on their emergence from authoritarian rule and urge their respect for the rights of their country’s minority populations. Our improved relations with Vietnam — including arms sales — must advance efforts to obtain an accounting for, and repatriation of the remains of, Americans who gave their lives in the cause of Vietnamese freedom. We cannot overlook the continued repression of fundamental rights and religious freedom, as well as retribution against ethnic minorities and others who assisted U.S. forces during the conflict there.

India is our geopolitical ally and a strategic trading partner. The dynamism of its people and the endurance of their democratic institutions are earning their country a position of leadership not only in Asia but throughout the world. We encourage the Indian government to permit expanded foreign investment and trade, the key to rising living standards for those left out of their country’s energetic economy. For all of India’s religious communities, we urge protection against violence and discrimination. Republicans note with pride the contributions to our country that are made by our fellow citizens of Indian ancestry.

Conflicts in the Middle East have created special political and military challenges for the people of Pakistan. Our working relationship is a necessary, though sometimes difficult, benefit to both, and we look toward the strengthening of historic ties that have frayed under the weight of international conflict. This process cannot progress as long as any citizen of Pakistan can be punished for helping the War on Terror. Pakistanis, Afghans, and Americans have a common interest in ridding the region of the Taliban and securing Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. That goal has been undermined by the current Administration’s feckless treatment of troop commitments and blatant disregard of advice from commanders on the ground, particularly with regard to Afghanistan. A Republican president will work with all regional leaders to restore mutual trust while insisting upon progress against corruption and the narcotic trade that fuels insurgency.

Renewing the European Alliance
With bipartisan support, President Truman forged the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as an alliance of the western democracies. Its continued effectiveness is vital, especially in light of recent military challenges in Eastern Europe. With the American people spending on defense, per capita, four times the amount spent by Euro-peans, we demand, as we have in the past, that our fellow members of NATO fulfill their commitments and meet their need for greater investment in their armed forces.

Our historic ties to the peoples of Europe have been based on shared culture and values, common interests and goals. Their endurance cannot be taken for granted, especially in light of the continent’s economic problems and demographic changes. We recognize with regret the increasing trend among many of our allies to move away from rights and liberties that Americans hold dear, especially freedom of speech. It would be a tragic irony if the nations of Europe which withstood Soviet repression were to now impose a form of it upon themselves.

We honor our special relationship with the people of the United Kingdom and are grateful for their staunch support in the fight against terrorism. We respect their decision concerning their nation’s relationship to the European Union and pledge that, however much other international relationships may change, those who were first to our side in our hour of loss will always rank first in our policies and our esteem.

We thank the several nations of Europe that have contributed to a united effort in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. Their support and sacrifice in the fight against Islamic terrorism will not be forgotten. We applaud the ongoing reconciliation in Northern Ireland and hope that its success might be replicated in Cyprus. We urge greater coordination in economic and security affairs between the United States and the republics of Eastern Europe. We urge that Poland be granted visa waiver status and we support placement of NATO troops in Poland.

For the people of Russia, we affirm our respect and our determination to maintain a friendship beyond the reach of those who wish to divide us. We have common imperatives: Ending terrorism, combating nuclear proliferation, promoting trade, and more. We also have a common problem: The continuing erosion of personal liberty and fundamental rights under the current officials in the Kremlin. Repressive at home and reckless abroad, their policies imperil the nations which regained their self-determination upon the collapse of the Soviet Union. We will meet the return of Russian belligerence with the same resolve that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. We will not accept any territorial change in Eastern Europe imposed by force, in Ukraine, Georgia, or elsewhere, and will use all appropriate constitutional measures to bring to justice the practitioners of aggression and assassination.

We urge greater attention in U.S. diplomacy, trade, and strategic planning, to the nations of Eurasia, formerly parts of the Soviet Empire. Caught between their two authoritarian neighbors, their path toward democratic institutions has been uncertain. We urge our government and our allies to work toward the integration of the Central Asian republics into the global economy through foreign investment, which can bring with it market and political reforms and a firmer establishment of the rule of law. Those developments will not only improve the living conditions throughout that vast area but are likely to reduce the lure of the radical ideologies that already threaten the region.

Family of the Americas
Our future is intimately tied to the future of the Americas. Family, language, culture, environment, and trade link us closely with both Canada and Mexico. Our relations with both of these friends will be based upon continuing cooperation and our mutually shared interests. Our attention to trade and environmental issues will contribute to strong economic growth and prosperity throughout the Americas.

We thank our neighbors in Mexico and Canada who have been our partners in the fight against terrorism and the war on drugs. The Mexican people deserve our assistance as they bravely resist the drug cartels that traffic in death on both sides of our border. Their rich cultural and religious heritage, shared by many millions of our fellow citizens, should foster greater understanding and cooperation between our countries.

Our Canadian neighbors can count on our cooperation and respect. To advance North America’s energy independence, we intend to reverse the current Administration’s blocking of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Apart from its economic value, that project has become a symbol in the contest between the public’s desire for economic development and the government’s hostility to growth. We stand with the people.

We express our solidarity with all the peoples of the Western Hemisphere. Their aspirations for economic betterment and political liberty have deserved better from our government than its policies of the last eight years. The current Administration has abandoned America’s friends and rewarded its enemies. A Republican president will never embrace a Marxist dictator, in Venezuela or anywhere else. The current chief executive has allowed that country to become a narco-terrorist state, an Iranian outpost threatening Central America, and a safe haven for the agents of Hezbollah. Now, with their country ruined by socialism and on the verge of chaos, the Venezuelan people are fighting to restore their democracy and regain their rights. When they triumph, as they surely will, the United States will stand ready to help them restore their country to the family of the Americas.

We affirm our friendship and admiration for the people of Colombia and call on the Republican Congress to express its solidarity with their decades-long fight against the terrorist FARC. Their sacrifice and suffering must not be betrayed by the accession to power of murderers and drug lords.

We want to welcome the people of Cuba back into our hemispheric family — after their corrupt rulers are forced from power and brought to account for their crimes against humanity. We stand with the Women in White and all the victims of the loathsome regime that clings to power in Havana. We do not say this lightly: They have been betrayed by those who are currently in control of U.S. foreign policy. The current Administration’s “opening to Cuba” was a shameful accommodation to the demands of its tyrants. It will only strengthen their military dictatorship. We call on the Congress to uphold current U.S. law which sets conditions for the lifting of sanctions on the island: Legalization of political parties, an independent media, and free and fair internationally-supervised elections. We call for a dedicated platform for the transmission of Radio and TV Martí and for the promotion of internet access and circumvention technology as tools to strength Cuba’s pro-democracy movement. We support the work of the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba and affirm the principles of the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966, recognizing the rights of Cubans fleeing Communism.

Africa: The Promise and the Challenge
We recognize Africa’s extraordinary potential. Both the United States and our many African allies will become stronger through investment, trade, and promotion of the democratic and free market principles that have brought prosperity around the world. We pledge to be the best partner of all African nations in their pursuit of economic freedom and human rights. The Republican Congress has extended to 2025 the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and President George W. Bush’s health initiatives — AIDS relief under PEPFAR and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria — continue to save millions of lives. Peace Corps volunteers and U.S. Seabees teach and build in villages that know firsthand our country’s idealism.

We stand in solidarity with those African countries now under assault by the forces of radical Islam: Boko Haram, al-Shabaab, and others like them. Their terror falls on both Muslims and Christians, on anyone who will not submit to their savage ideology. We urge governments throughout the continent to recognize this threat to their own people. We support closer cooperation in both military and economic matters with those on the front lines of civilization’s battle against the forces of evil.

Sovereign American Leadership in International Organizations There is no substitute for principled American leadership. Since the end of World War II, the United States, through the founding of the United Nations and NATO, has participated in a number of international organizations which can, but sometimes do not, serve the cause of peace and prosperity. While acting through them our country must always reserve the right to go its own way. We must not be silent about our country’s cause. That is why we have long supported our country’s international broadcasting to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Asia.

Our continued participation in the United Nations should be contingent upon the enactment of long-overdue changes in the way that institution functions. American taxpayers, the chief funders of the U.N., deserve full transparency in the financial operations of its overpaid bureaucrats. We should no longer tolerate its managerial scandals, its Human Rights Council composed of some of the world’s worst tyrants, and its treatment of Israel as a pariah state. The U.N.’s Population Fund has, from its origin, been rooted in no-growth policies that limit economic development in the countries needing it most. Its complicity in China’s barbaric program of forced abortion led President Reagan to set a wall of separation — his Mexico City Policy, which prohibits the granting of federal monies to non-governmental organizations that provide or promote abortion. We affirm his position and, in light of plummeting birth rates around the world, suggest a reevaluation of the U.N.’s record on economic progress.

Precisely because we take our country’s treaty obligations seriously, we oppose ratification of international agreements whose long-range implications are ominous or unclear. We do not support the U.N. Convention on Women’s Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, and the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, as well as various declarations from the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development. Because of our concern for American sovereignty, domestic management of our fisheries, and our country’s long-term energy needs, we have deep reservations about the regulatory, legal, and tax regimes inherent in the Law of the Sea Treaty. We emphatically reject U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of U.S. sovereignty, and we oppose any form of Global Tax.

To shield members of our Armed Forces and others in service to America from ideological prosecutions overseas, the Republican Party does not accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. We support statutory protection for U.S. personnel and officials as they act abroad to meet our global security requirements, and we deplore the current inaction of the Administration in that regard. Our service members must be subject only to American law.

Defending International Religious Freedom
The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, an initiative of Congressional Republicans, has been neglected by the current Administration at a time when its voice more than ever needs to be heard. Religious minorities across the Middle East have been driven from their ancient homelands, and thousands, there and in Africa, have been slaughtered for their faith in what the State Department has, belatedly, labeled genocide. The United States must stand with leaders, like President Sisi of Egypt who has bravely protected the rights of Coptic Christians in Egypt, and call on other leaders across the region to ensure that all religious minorities, whether Yazidi, Bahai, Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant Christians, are free to practice their religion without fear of persecution. At a time when China has renewed its destruction of churches, Christian home-schooling parents are jailed in parts of Europe, and even Canada threatens pastors for their preaching, a Republican administration will return the advocacy of religious liberty to a central place in its diplomacy, will quickly designate the systematic killing of religious and ethnic minorities a genocide, and will work with the leaders of other nations to condemn and combat genocidal acts.

America’s Generosity: International Assistance that Makes a Difference Foreign aid must serve America’s interests first. In today’s world of complex challenges, international assistance is a critical tool for advancing America’s security and economic interests by preventing conflict, building stability, opening markets for private investment, and responding to suffering and need with the compassion that is at the heart of our country’s values. A strong commitment to international development and diplomacy, alongside defense, was a key component of President Reagan’s “peace through strength” strategy. It can sometimes serve as an alternative means of keeping the peace, far less costly both in dollars and in human lives than military engagement. The Millennium Challenge Corporation, spearheaded by the last Republican Administration, has established a new model of foreign assistance that helps ensure taxpayer dollars are spent on projects that are effective, results-driven, transparent, and accountable. We must embrace this model throughout our foreign assistance programs and efforts as a catalyst for private sector investment to combat corruption, strengthen the rule of law, and open new markets for American goods and services in a competitive global economy. Foreign assistance programs must not only project the best of American values, but must work to create self-sustainability and leverage the resources and capacity of the private sector. Even more important is the overseas assistance —billions of dollars and volunteer hours — provided by America’s foundations, educational institutions, faith-based groups, and charitable individuals. Their essential role in international development should be weighed in any revision of the tax code.

The advance of political freedom and entrepreneurial capitalism drives economic growth, catalyzes private sector development, and is the only sustainable solution to poverty. Over the last 50 years, the level of private investment overseas from the United States has eclipsed aid many times over. Our development strategy must build on recent Republican efforts to use foreign assistance to catalyze private sector investment and expertise in addressing global challenges that can build a more stable world and advance America’s national security and economic interests.

The integrity of our country’s foreign assistance program has been compromised by the current Administration's attempt to impose on foreign recipients, especially the peoples of Africa, its own radical social agenda while excluding faith-based groups — the sector with the best track record in promoting development — because they will not conform to that agenda. We pledge to reverse this course, encouraging more involvement by the most effective aid organizations and trusting developing peoples to build their futures through their own values.

Advancing Human Rights
To those who stand in the darkness of tyranny, America has always been a beacon of hope, and so it must remain. Radical Islamic terrorism poses an existential threat to personal freedom and peace around the world. We oppose its brutal assault on all human beings, all of whom have inherent dignity. The Republican Party stands united with all victims of terrorism and will fight at home and abroad to destroy terrorist organizations and protect the lives and fundamental liberties of all people. Republicans have led the way in promoting initiatives that have protected and rescued millions of the world’s most vulnerable and persecuted. Standing up for repressed religious groups, prisoners of conscience, women trafficked into sexual slavery, and those suffering from disease or starvation is not just consistent with American values. It advances important security and economic interests as well. A Republican administration will never say, as Hillary Clinton did as Secretary of State in 2009, that raising human rights concerns “can’t interfere with the global economic crisis, the global climate change crisis, and the security crisis.”

The United States needs a radical rethinking of our human rights diplomacy. A Republican administration will adopt a “whole of government” approach to protect fundamental freedoms globally, one where pressing human rights and rule of law issues are integrated at every appropriate level of our bilateral relationships and strategic decision-making. Republican policy will reflect the fact that the health of the U.S. economy and environment, the safety of our food and drug supplies, the security of our investments and personal information in cyberspace, and the stability and security of the oceans will increasingly depend on allowing the free flow of news and information and developing an independent judiciary and civil society in countries with repressive governments such as China, Russia, and many nations in the Middle East and Africa.

Liberty to Captives: Combatting Human Trafficking
As an estimated 21 million people worldwide are trapped in modern day slavery, we are reminded to be vigilant against human trafficking in whatever form it appears. We will use the full force of the law against those who engage in commercial sexual exploitation and forced or bonded labor of men, women, or children; involuntary domestic servitude; trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ removal; and the illegal recruitment and use of child soldiers. Building on the accomplishments of the last Republican administration in implementing the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, we call for increased diplomatic efforts and accountability for foreign governments to prosecute traffickers, including penalties for any public officials who may be complicit in this devastating crime. We will highlight the need to stop slave labor, taking steps to prevent overseas labor contractors who exploit foreign workers from supporting military bases abroad or exporting goods to the United States. A Republican administration will strategize with partners around the world to prevent the demand for trafficking victims that makes exploitation lucrative and will prosecute sex tourists and domestic buyers to the fullest extent of the law. We will work at home and abroad to ensure that trafficking victims are identified among migrants, refugees, and our own citizens so they receive the rehabilitative care needed to heal and thrive.

America’s continuing participation in the international campaign against human trafficking merits our support. The goal of our domestic anti-trafficking programs should be the rescue and safe return of victims to their homes, not creating a long-term dependency upon public support. We call for greater scrutiny of overseas labor contractors to prevent abuses against temporary foreign workers brought to the United States. The horrific deaths of smuggled workers on our southwestern border at the hands of drug cartels and other gangs highlight the need for total security in that region^[26]

”

—2016 Republican Platform^[65]

Mike Pence

During the vice presidential debate on October 4, 2016, moderator Elaine Quijano asked, "Two hundred fifty thousand people, 100,000 of them children, are under siege in Aleppo, Syria. Bunker buster bombs, cluster munitions, and incendiary weapons are being dropped on them by Russian and Syrian militaries. Does the U.S. have a responsibility to protect civilians and prevent mass casualties on this scale, Governor Pence?" Pence replied in part, "I just have to tell you that the provocations by Russia need to be met with American strength. And if Russia chooses to be involved and continue—I should say, to be involved—in this barbaric attack on civilians in Aleppo, the United States of America should be prepared to use military force to strike military targets of the Assad regime to prevent them from this humanitarian crisis that is taking place in Aleppo." During the October 9, 2016, presidential debate moderator Martha Raddatz asked Donald Trump if he agreed with Pence's response and Trump replied, “He and I haven't spoken, and I disagree.”^[66]
During his 2015 CPAC speech, Mike Pence expressed his support for Israel and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He said, "I saw first-hand the resolve and determination of this courageous leader who stands too often alone in times of great peril across the Middle East. Speaker Boehner was right to invite Prime Minister Netanyahu to address our Congress and our nation at such a time as this. Israel’s cause is our cause, and Israel’s enemies are our enemies. If the world knows nothing else, let it know this: America stands with Israel!"^[67]

In December 2014, Pence travelled to Israel. According to The Washington Post, Pence said, "I call Israel our most cherished ally."^[68]

In April 2014, Pence said, "With Russian aggression on the rise again, it is clear that our policy of conciliatory diplomacy has failed. While new sanctions are of some value, in the interest of our alliance, I believe the United States and the EU must respond with deeds more than words to strengthen our economic and strategic defenses. ...With continued instability in the Middle East, and Putin’s aggression in Ukraine, I believe we must take immediate steps to strengthen our mutual security by deploying a robust missile defense in all of Europe – including Poland and the Czech Republic – to protect the interests of our NATO allies and the United States in the region."^[69]
Read more of Mike Pence's public statements on 2016 campaign issues.

Green ticket

Jill Stein

Vox published an interview with Jill Stein on September 14, 2016, covering a range of policy issues, including immigration, student debt, gun control, climate change, and foreign relations.^[70]
- Stein criticized the role NATO plays in U.S. and international politics. "I think NATO has become an end-run around a democratic process for deciding when we engage in foreign wars and when we don’t. We’re using NATO as an excuse — not only to duck congressional responsibility for approving a war budget, but also NATO is used to duck the UN process and international law that says we cannot go to war unless a nation is specifically threatened and directly threatened," she said.
- Commenting on Russian military intervention in Ukraine, Stein said, "Ukraine was historically a part of Russia for quite some period of time, and we all know there was this conversation with Victoria Nuland about planning the coup and who was going to take over. Not that the other guy was some model of democracy. But the one they put in — with the support of the US and the CIA in this coup in Ukraine — that has not been a solution. Regime change is something we need to be very careful about. And this is a highly inflammatory regime change with a nuclear armed power next door. So I’m saying: Let’s just stop pretending there are good guys here and bad guys here. These are complicated situations. Yeah, Russia is doing lots of human rights abuse, but you know what? So are we.”

Stein was interviewed by the editorial board of The Washington Post on August 25, 2016, where she discussed a range of foreign policy issues.^[71]
- Stein said that "we need to take a good hard look at NATO. In my view NATO needs to be part of a re-examination of a foreign policy that has been based on economic and military domination and we need to look at what the consequences of this kind of foreign policy are."
- She called Russian President Vladimir Putin's goals in eastern Europe "not good." She continued, "I would have no faith and trust in Putin, but on the other hand I think to be needlessly militarizing this conflict is not in the interest of the American people. It’s certainly – and take the Middle East as a case in point, a case study of where we’ve had incredible chaos – who has benefitted from this? I don’t think the American people, I don’t think the people of the Middle East.”
- Stein also discussed how she would handle conflict in Syria, saying, "I think number one, we need a weapons embargo. Number two, we need to freeze the funds that are supporting ISIS and other terrorist groups. We need to stop the flow of jihadi terrorist groups and then we need to push very hard to have a peace process and to call a cease fire and to expand on the efforts that have been begun, which Barack Obama himself has put his weight behind. I think we need to put additional weight behind that and be working with a principled collaboration with everyone we can towards that immediate end of a weapons embargo, a freeze on the funding and a cease fire."
Read more of Jill Stein's public statements on foreign affairs.

The 2016 Green Party Platform on foreign affairs

“

At the start of a new century, we stand poised between the geopolitical conflict of East versus West; a future marked by the aftermath of the catastrophic events of September 11, 2001; the dangers of global terrorism; the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan followed by the unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq; the escalation of conflict in the Middle East; and the continued research and development of nuclear weapons and the stockpiling of bio-chemical weapons.

In the area of trade, third- and fourth-world economies and resources are being ravaged and our own economy and job security undermined by global corporatization, which concentrates greater power in the hands of fewer interests who are unaccountable to the vast majority of the world's people.

As we overcome continued conflicts and violence, we realize the difficulties inherent in encouraging democracy and of advancing the cause of peace. We face a more complex set of challenges in how our nation defines its national security. Greens support sustainable development and social and economic justice across the globe. Reducing militarism and reliance on arms policies is the key to progress toward collective security.

1. Foreign Policy—Peace and Disarmament

As one of the initiators and primary authors of the United Nations Charter, the United States is obligated to conform to the stipulations of the U.S. Constitution, which identifies all such agreements as treaties that hold the authority of U.S. law. The U.S. government is pledged to abide by its principles and guidelines in the conduct of foreign relations and affairs.

We recognize our government's obligation to take disputes with other nations or foreign bodies to the U.N. Security Council and General Assembly forum for negotiation and resolution. The U.N. and international laws, treaties and conventions that the U.S. has signed are the framework that controls U.S. military actions abroad.

The U.S. must recognize the sovereignty of nation-states and their right of self-determination.

We recognize and support the right of the U.N. to intervene in a nation-state engaged in genocidal acts or in its persistent violation and denial of the human rights of an ethnic or religious group within its boundaries, and the right to protect the victims of such acts.

The U.S. is obligated to render military assistance or service under U.N. command to enforce U.N. Security Council resolutions.

The U.S. must recognize and abide by the authority of the U.N. General Assembly to act in a crisis situation by passing a resolution under the Uniting for Peace Procedure when the U.N. Security Council is stalemated by vetoes.

We seek the permanent repeal of the veto power enjoyed by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.

We urge our government to sign the International Criminal Court agreement and respect the authority of that institution.

Our government does not have the right to justify preemptive invasion of another country on the grounds that the other country harbors, trains, equips and funds a terrorist cell.

Our government should establish a policy to abolish nuclear weapons. It should set the conditions and schedule for fulfilling that goal by taking the following steps: Declare a no-first-strike policy. Declare a no-pre-emptive strike policy. Declare that the U.S. will never threaten or use a nuclear weapon, regardless of size, on a non-nuclear nation. Sign the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT). Our pledge to end testing will open the way for non-nuclear states to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which has been held up by our refusal to sign the CTBT. Honor the conditions set in the NPT for nuclear nations. Reverse our withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and honor its stipulations. End the research, testing and stockpiling of all nuclear weapons of any size. Dismantle all nuclear warheads from their missiles. We urge our government to sign the Toronto treaty banning the production, stockpiling, use and sale of land mines, and assist other nations in unearthing and disabling land mines buried in their lands.

We urge our government to end all stockpiling of chemical and biological weapons and all research, use, and sale of such weapons; and sign the convention that will establish the decrease and inspection of all nations' stockpiles of such weapons, which the U.S. abandoned.

The U.S. must allow foreign teams to visit the U.S. for verification purposes at least annually.

Our defense budget has increased out of all proportion to any military threat to the United States, and to our domestic social, economic and environmental needs. The United States government must reduce our defense budget to half of its current size. The 2012 defense budget exceeded $700 billion, and that does not take into account military expenditures not placed under the defense budget.

The U.S. has over 700 foreign military bases. We urge our government to phase out all bases not specifically functioning under a U.N. resolution to keep peace and bring home our troops stationed abroad, except for the military assigned to protect a U.S. embassy. Many of these bases are small and can be closed immediately. We advocate further reductions in U.S. foreign military bases at a rate of closure of 1/4 to 1/5 of their numbers every year.

Close the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation, formerly known as the School of the Americas, in Ft. Benning, Georgia.

The U.S. is the largest arms seller and dealer in the world. We urge our government to prohibit all arms sales to foreign nations and likewise prohibit grants to impoverished and undemocratic nations unless the money is targeted on domestic, non-military needs. In addition, grants to other nations may not be used to release their own funds for military purposes.

The U.S. must not be a conduit for defense contractors to market their products abroad and must shift our export market from arms to peaceful technology, industrial and agricultural products, and education.

The U.S. must prohibit all covert actions used to influence, de-stabilize or usurp the governments of other nations, and likewise prohibit the assassination of, or assistance in any form for the assassination of, foreign government officials.

We must build on the Earth Charter that came out of the 1992 U.N. environmental Earth Summit. New definitions of what constitutes real security between nations must be debated and adopted by the foreign policy community.

2. A Real Road to Peace in the Middle East

The Green Party of the United States recognizes that our greatest contribution to peace in the Middle East will come through our impact on U.S. policy in the region.

Our commitments to ecological wisdom, social justice, grass-roots democracy, and non-violence compel us to oppose U.S. government support for "friendly" regimes in the region when those regimes violate human rights, international law, and existing treaties. We call on congressional intelligence committees to conduct comprehensive public hearings on the development and deployment of weapons of mass destruction by all states in the region.

U.S. policy should support the removal and/or destruction of all such weapons wherever they are found there.

Iran

The Green Party supports the "joint comprehensive plan of action" signed in July, 2015 by Iran and the P5+1 (five permanent members of the UN Security Council: China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States plus Germany), and the European Union, which confirms Iran's status as a zone free of nuclear weapons. According to the United States National Intelligence Estimate, Iran halted an alleged active nuclear weapons program in the Fall of 2003. Iran, which has signed the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, has consistently called for a nuclear-free zone in the entire Middle East.

The "joint comprehensive plan of action" provides that in return for Iran upholding its agreements to rid itself of nuclear material as verified by inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), current economic sanctions by the US, European Union and UN Security Council will be lifted. The Green Party supports the swift elimination of these economic sanctions on Iran and looks to the normalization of relations between Iran and the United States. In keeping with UN resolutions call for a nuclear-free Middle East, the Green Party also calls on Israel, the only nuclear power in the Middle East with at least 200 nuclear warheads, to dismantle its nuclear weapons program and sign on to the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty.

The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict

Our Green values oblige us to support popular movements for peace and demilitarization in Israel-Palestine, especially those that reach across the lines of conflict to engage both Palestinians and Israelis of good will.

We reaffirm the right of self-determination for both Palestinians and Israelis, which precludes the self-determination of one at the expense of the other. We recognize the historical and contemporary cultural diversity of Israeli-Palestinian society, including the religious heritage of Jews, Christians, Muslims and others. This is a significant part of the rich cultural legacy of all these peoples and it must be respected. To ensure this, we support equality before international law rather than appeals to religious faith as the fair basis on which claims to the land of Palestine-Israel are resolved.

We recognize that Jewish insecurity and fear of non-Jews is understandable in light of Jewish history of horrific oppression in Europe. However, we oppose as both discriminatory and ultimately self-defeating the position that Jews would be fundamentally threatened by the implementation of full rights to Palestinian-Israelis and Palestinian refugees who wish to return to their homes. As U.S. Greens, we refuse to impose our views on the people of the region. Still, we would turn the U.S. government towards a new policy, which itself recognizes the equality, humanity, and civil rights of Jews, Muslims, Christians, and all others who live in the region, and which seeks to build confidence in prospects for secular democracy.

We reaffirm the right and feasibility of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes in Israel. We acknowledge the significant challenges of equity and restitution this policy would encounter and call on the U.S. government to make resolution of these challenges a central goal of our diplomacy in the region.

We reject U.S. unbalanced financial and military support of Israel while Israel occupies Palestinian lands and maintains an apartheid-like system in both the Occupied Palestinian Territories and in Israel toward its non-Jewish citizens. Therefore, we call on the U.S. President and Congress to suspend all military and foreign aid, including loans and grants, to Israel until Israel withdraws from the Occupied Territories, dismantles the separation wall in the Occupied West Bank including East Jerusalem, ends its siege of Gaza and its apartheid-like system both within the Occupied Palestinian Territories and in Israel toward its non-Jewish citizens.

We also reject U.S. political support for Israel and demand that the U.S. government end its veto of Security Council resolutions pertaining to Israel. We urge our government to join with the U.N. to secure Israel's complete withdrawal to the 1967 boundaries and its compliance with international law.

We support a much stronger and supportive U.S. position with respect to all United Nations, European Union, and Arab League initiatives that seek a negotiated peace. We call for an immediate U.N.-sponsored, multinational peacekeeping and protection force in the Palestinian territories with the mandate to initiate a conflict-resolution commission.

We call on the foreign and military affairs committees of the U.S. House and Senate to conduct full hearings on the status of human rights and war crimes in Palestine-Israel, especially violations committed during Israel's 2008-2009 invasion of Gaza ("Operation Cast Lead") as documented in the 2009 "UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict"("The Goldstone Report") authorized by the UN Commission on Human Rights.

We recognize that despite decades of continuous diplomatic attempts by the international community, it has failed to bring about Israel's compliance with international law or respect for basic Palestinian human rights; and that, despite abundant condemnation of Israel's policies by the UN, International Court of Justice, and all relevant international conventions, the international community of nations has failed to stop Israeli violations of Palestinian human rights in Israel and the OPT, while Israeli crimes continue with impunity. We recall that ending institutionalized racism (apartheid) in South Africa demanded an unusual, cooperative action by the entire international community in the form of a boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign against apartheid South Africa, and that BDS can become the most effective nonviolent means for achieving justice and genuine peace between Palestinians and Israelis, and for the region, through concerted international pressure as applied to apartheid South Africa; and that Palestinian resistance to ongoing dispossession has mainly been nonviolent, including its most basic form—remaining in their homes, on their land; and that while Palestinian armed resistance is legitimate under international law when directed at non-civilian targets, we believe that only nonviolent resistance will maintain the humanity of Palestinian society, elicit the greatest solidarity from others, and maximize the chance for future reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians. However, we also recognize that our appeal to Palestinians to continue to resist nonviolently in the face of ongoing existential threats from Israel is hypocritical unless accompanied by substantial acts of international support. We recall that in 2005, Palestinian Civil Society appealed to the international community to support a BDS campaign against Israel, and that in response the Green Party of the US endorsed this BDS campaign in 2005. Therefore, we support the implementation of boycott and divestment initiatives against Israel similar to those applied to South Africa in the apartheid era, which includes pressuring our government to impose embargoes and sanctions against Israel; and we support maintaining these nonviolent punitive measures until Israel meets its obligation to recognize the Palestinian people's inalienable right to self-determination and fully complies with the precepts of international law by Ending its occupation and colonization of all Palestinian lands and dismantling the Wall in the West Bank Recognizing the fundamental rights of Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality; and Respecting, protecting and promoting the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194. We recognize that international opinion has been committed to a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Yet, we view the two-state solution as neither democratic nor viable in the face of international law, material conditions and "facts on the ground" that now exist in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Given this reality, we support a U.S. foreign policy that promotes the creation of one secular, democratic state for Palestinians and Israelis on the land between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan as the national home of both peoples, with Jerusalem as its capital. We encourage a new U.S. diplomatic initiative to begin the long process of negotiation, laying the groundwork for such a single-state constitution.

We recognize that such a state might take many forms and that the eventual model chosen must be decided by the peoples themselves. We also acknowledge the enormous hostilities that now exist between the two peoples, but history tells us that these are not insurmountable among people genuinely seeking peace.

As an integral part of peace negotiations and the transition to peaceful democracy, we call for the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission whose inaugurating action would be mutual acknowledgement by Israelis and Palestinians that they have the same basic rights, including the right to exist in the same, secure place.

3. Foreign Policy—Trade

We urge our government to do the following:

Re-formulate all international trade relations and commerce as currently upheld by the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), the World Trade Organization (WTO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank (WB) to protect the labor, human rights, economy, environment and domestic industry of partner and recipient nations so that the growth of local industry and agriculture has the advantage over foreign corporate domination. The U.S. government should call for replacing the WTO, IMF, and World Bank with new institutions that are democratic, transparent, and accountable to the citizens of all nations.

While the IMF and World Bank still exist in their current forms, re-structure the rules of performance of the IMF/WB to end the debts of recipient nations, prohibit the use of IMF/WB loans to impose structural adjustment programs that emphasize debt service and export-led development at the expense of social needs, and to install strict standards in the IMF/WB that control the use of grants or loans to prevent fraud, misuse, and subversion of funds by recipient governments.

Re-write the rules for investment of corporate capital in projects operated under the IMF/WB to guarantee the rights of the citizens of the nations receiving the investment and their right to public ownership and control of their own resources.

Mandate and protect labor's right to organize, create unions and negotiate with management in all countries receiving U.S. investment, and require U.S. corporations that operate in other countries to adhere to the core labor standards established by the International Labor Organization (ILO) Declaration of the Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work.

Legislate and enable oversight by an independent agency or a labor union to verify that foreign workers' rights are protected.

At home, secure the rights of our states to establish stricter standards for health, safety, and for the environment than those of our national government, and to protect themselves against substandard, imported goods.

Secure the right of states and municipalities to refuse to invest in foreign businesses that do not abide by their standards for imported goods, fair trade, and environmental protection. Prohibit U.S. corporations from avoiding or evading payment of their taxes by banking abroad or locating their charters offshore.

Every day over $1 trillion dollars circles the globe in currency trade—wreaking havoc on low-economy nations —without obligation to sustainable investment. We seek to restrict the unfettered flow of capital and currency trade, and levy the Tobin tax of .05% on cross border currency transactions. [See section E. 2. Fair Taxation in chapter IV]

We support the funding and expansion of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in their missions to educate and train people of less developed nations in initiating local business and economic development, and in providing health care and family planning.

Under the agency of the United Nations, we demand that our government renew and initiate government funding and support for family planning, contraception, and abortion in all countries that request it.

We reject the U.S. government's economic blockade of Cuba. We ask the U.S. Congress to lift the embargo and restore normal diplomatic relations and respect for national sovereignty, and demand that the U.S. government end its veto of U.N. resolutions pertaining to Cuba.

4. Human Rights

We propose the following amendment to the Constitution of the United States:

The rights established by this Constitution and the laws of the United States of America are exclusively the rights of living, breathing humans, citizens of this country or residing therein. No corporation or other type of association or organization can have the status of a "legal person" and thus cannot derive rights from such status.

These organizations have no permanent, constitutionally protected rights, though they may have such powers or immunities as are explicitly granted to them by legislative actions at either the federal or the state level. These powers or immunities may be modified or removed by later action of the same legislative bodies. In no case can these powers or immunities override the constitutionally protected rights of human beings.

5. Women's Rights

The Green Party makes a strong and urgent call for U.S. passage of CEDAW, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, which was adopted in 1979 by the UN General Assembly and ratified by 173 countries. It is also known as the Women's Convention, the Women's Bill of Rights, and an International Bill of Rights for Women. The United States is one of a very few countries and the only industrialized nation that has not ratified it. The illegal international trafficking in humans, primarily women, has reached staggering numbers and consequences around the world. The Green Party supports the UN Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking In Persons, Especially Women and Children, which supplements the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime adopted by the UN General Assembly in November 2000 as an important tool to facilitate international cooperation. The U.S. and 80 other countries signed the Protocol in December 2000 and by doing so have made a commitment to criminalize trafficking and to protect its many victims. We call for effective collaborative relationships between sending and receiving countries, including the U.S. We also call for studies analyzing and connecting the role of globalization in trafficking.

6. Puerto Rican Independence

In 1898, Puerto Rico was invaded by the United States and has been held by the U.S. in the form of a colony ever since. In response to international pressure, in 1952, the U.S. established the "Free Associated State" status for Puerto Rico but continued to claim that Puerto Rico belongs to, yet is not a part of, the United States. The root of the crisis is the colonial status of Puerto Rico as echoed in the UN Decolonization committee resolution on Puerto Rico adopted on June 22, 2015 which states ñthe condition of political subordination prevents Puerto Rico from taking sovereign decisions to attend to its serious economic and social problems including unemployment, marginalization and poverty (Olga Sanabria Davila, Crisis and Colonialism in Puerto Rico, 10/26/15).

Greens support the right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and independence in conformity with United Nations Resolution 1514(XV) of 1960. Greens call for the release of all Puerto Rican political prisoners, such as Oscar Lopez Rivera, who has been held in U.S. prisons since 1981.

Greens call for the appropriate environmental clean-up and sustainable development of Vieques, the island that was used as a firing range by the U.S. military. Greens oppose recruitment of the youth of Puerto Rico into the U.S. armed forces and their deployment to U.S. wars abroad, and denounce recruitment attempts at educational institutions.

Further, Greens recognize that:

- Puerto Rico's debt is unpayable.

- That in the last 20 years alone, foreign corporations operating in Puerto Rico have reaped over 600 billion dollars in tax free profits, 10 per cent of which would suffice to pay its current otherwise unpayable debt.

- Austerity measures like a "Financial Control Authority," which have proven to exacerbate economic suffering and strip away democratic rights to self-determination, must be opposed.

- The social cost of increasing the sales tax, of reducing workers' pay, education and health services, of eliminating labor rights gained and the dismantling of the retirement system among other recessionary measures, are a detriment to the quality of life of the people of Puerto Rico and to the strategic development of the country's economy.

Thus, these measures are not a solution.

The present fiscal and economic crisis in Puerto Rico is largely due to the United States' colonial power and exploitation in Puerto Rico. Further, although Puerto Rico is a tropical island country seriously being affected by climate change, it is powerless to participate in initiatives and international negotiations to control and mitigate climate change and global warming.

Conclusion

As as a colony of the United States, Puerto Rico's position of political subordination cuts across the problem and independence would break the stalemate and create the possibilities of a solution.

Commitment to grassroots democracy is totally consistent with support for the decolonization of Puerto Rico as colonialism is contrary to democracy. For the country ruled, democracy is non-existent where one country rules over another, even if there are elections every four years to elect local authorities.

Taking into account that in Puerto Rico the United States controls commerce, international relations, immigration, monetary issues, communications, postal matters, defense, labor relations, and others, to truly support democracy in Puerto Rico, its decolonization has to be supported as the first step for the Puerto Rican people to live in a democracy.

7. Kurdistan

The Kurdish people are the largest ethnic group in the world that is without an independent state. As a result, Kurdish people have historically suffered persecution and injustice. The Kurdish people have been besieged to the point of a current humanitarian crisis in towns such as Kobani, Syria. The GPUS expresses solidarity for and affirms the right to self-determination, self-defense, communal autonomy, freedom from persecution, and release of political prisoners for the Kurdish population.^[26]

”

—2016 Green Party Platform^[72]

Ajamu Baraka

After the 2016 vice presidential debate on October 4, 2016, Baraka participated in Democracy Now!'s "Expanding the Debate" program and responded to the same questions that were posed to Tim Kaine and Mike Pence. Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! asked Baraka if he thought the "country is safer, or is it more dangerous, than it was eight years ago." He responded, "This country and the world is more dangerous as a consequence of the rampage that the U.S. has been involved in in the so-called Middle East. I think Governor Pence and Tim Kaine, I think they forgot that the real genesis of this—of this situation really has to be laid at the foot of the invasion of Iraq, an invasion that Hillary Clinton supported and an invasion that is where we see the expansion of the forces of the jihadists in that part of the world. So, it’s been the policies of both administrations. Under the Bush administration, there was a conscious decision to utilize jihadist forces to advance U.S. policies. The award-winning journalist Seymour Hersh clearly documented that. And that policy was continued under the Obama administration."

He also said, "So, the policies of using these jihadists to advance their interests in places like Syria, we see the blowback happening across—across the world. The policies have gone into—into Libya and destroying that state. You know, one of the things that did not come out in the hearings around Benghazi was what was happening at that annex. And I think the story is very clear. What they were involved in at the annex was a gun-running program to transfer the weapons from Libya, after they had destroyed that country, to Syria. So we see that it’s been the militarism, it’s been the policies of the Bush and the Obama administration, that has created the destabilization, not only in the Middle East, but also we are experiencing the blowback of the enhancement, the military enhancement, of these jihadist forces."

Baraka continued, "So, you know, any simple explanation that could be put on the—at the feet of either one of these parties is something that we have to look at very critically. This is part a collective process, a bipartisan process, to advance U.S. interests by using these unsavory forces and using and working through their vassal states like the Saudis, who even Joe Biden said they can’t stop from—they can’t stop the Saudis from providing finance to these various Wahhabist groups. So, this is a complex and a nasty game that is being played by the elites."^[73]

During the 2016 vice presidential debate between Democrat Tim Kaine and Republican Mike Pence on October 4, 2016, Baraka took to Twitter to express his views on foreign affairs and the Middle East. He tweeted:
- "Pence and Kaine seem to have forgotten that our current situation is the consequence of the invasion of Iraq."^[74]
- "We have seen how the policies of using jihadists to advance US interests, like in Syria, had and will continue to have major blowbacks."^[75]
- "The Bush and Obama administrations made the conscious decision to use jihadist militias to advance US policies."^[76]
- "The elites are playing a complex and nasty game in the Middle East, arming extremists and stoking wars."^[77]
- "The narrative that the US was standing on the side in Syria and not involved was a false narrative. The US's hands are not clean."^[78]
Read more about Ajamu Baraka.

Libertarian ticket

Gary Johnson

Johnson, addressing some of his past comments on foreign policy, said in an interview on MSNBC on October 4, 2016, “The fact that somebody can dot the I’s and cross the T’s on a foreign leader or a geographic location then allows them to put our military in harm's way. We elect people who can dot the I’s and cross the T’s on these names and geographic locations, as opposed to the underlying philosophy, which is, let's stop getting involved in these regime changes.”^[79]

When asked by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews on September 28, 2016, to “name one foreign leader that you respect and look up to,” Johnson said, “I guess I’m having an Aleppo moment in the former president of Mexico." Matthews followed up by asking “Well, which one?” Johnson then said, “I’m having a brain freeze.” Johnson’s campaign manager, Ron Nielson, defended the candidate in a Facebook post, saying, “The Clinton and Trump supporters are at it again. This is gotcha-ism at its finest. … Yes, asked to name a favorite foreign leader, Gov. Johnson didn’t quickly name a specific favorite. That really doesn’t mean much. Most Americans and certainly most political candidates would have to stop and think before responding, with the possible exception of a Donald Trump who is enthralled by Putin.”^[80]

When asked in an interview on MCNBC’s Morning Joe program on September 8, 2016, how he would address the refugee crisis in Aleppo, Syria, Johnson responded by saying, “What is Aleppo?” Mike Barnicle, a panelist on the show, asked if he was kidding, and Johnson said “No.” Barnicle replied, “Aleppo is in Syria. It’s the epicenter of the refugee crisis.” Johnson said, Okay, got it,” and then discussed his views on partnering with Russia to find a diplomatic solution to the crisis.^[81]

Gary Johnson discussed NATO and Russia in an interview with The Los Angeles Times published on August 1, 2016. Johnson said, “Well, we need to honor our obligations. We need to honor our treaty obligations. But that said, should they be reexamined, and do we really want to go to war with Russia over the Baltic states? And Russia did become democratic, tearing itself away from the USSR. And the states that we are talking about used to be part of the USSR. So honor those obligations but, going forward, Russia doesn’t have to be our ally but they don’t necessarily need to be a military threat to the U.S. either.”^[82]

In an interview with The Washington Post on July 7, 2016, Johnson engaged in the following exchange on Iraq and Afghanistan with deputy editor Jackson Diehl:^[83]
- DIEHL: On that subject, President Obama leaves behind 8,400 troops in Afghanistan and 5,000 or so in Iraq, if you took office in January would you leave those troops there and, if not, what would you do to prevent the Taliban from regaining power in Afghanistan and [to overturn] the Islamic State?
- JOHNSON: What I will be saying throughout this campaign, because that’s going to be a question that’s going to come up all the time is, is that I would get the troops out – that the consequence of getting the troops out, as horrible as that’s going to be – and I think that there has been precedent for, OK, we’re going to pull out of Afghanistan, how many Afghanis need citizenship within the United States because you’re going to lose your life having been allied with the United States? I mean, I think there are precautions here that there’s not a bloodbath. But as horrible as that’s going to be doing it in 2017, it’s going to be the same situation 20 years from now.
- DIEHL: So you’re prepared to have the Taliban regain power in Afghanistan?
- JOHNSON: Just like happens 20 years from now. Just like happens whenever we get out of Afghanistan.
- WELD: I agree by the way, and —
- DIEHL: Wait a minute, if the Islamic State – you’re prepared to have them consolidate power rather than leave U.S. troops there?
- JOHNSON: Well this is a question that gets constantly asked. Let me ask you: How long should we be there? Forever?
- BIll WELD: You mean Afghanistan?
- JOHNSON: Afghanistan.
- DIEHL: No, I’m talking about Iraq and Syria.
- JOHNSON: Same, all of the above. I mean, libertarians – I reject the fact that libertarians are isolationist. We’re just noninterventionist. The fact that when you get involved in other countries’ affairs, you end up with the unintended consequence — without exception, and please point out an exception – you have the unintended consequence of making things worse, not better.

During an interview on June 28, 2016, on America with Jorge Ramos, Ramos asked Gary Johnson “if the same ‘anti-immigrant sentiment’ of Brexit might make its way to the polls on November 8th in the U.S.” Johnson replied, “I don’t see Britain’s exit from the European Union as isolationist. I really see it as them staking out their own opportunity.” Johnson called the European Union “a giant bureaucracy” and a “crony capitalist” institution.^[84]

Johnson released the following statement on June 24, 2016, regarding the United Kingdom’s referendum to leave the European Union: "We can view Britain's exit from the [European Union] as some kind of catastrophic event, or as an opportunity. It is perfectly appropriate for the British people to make their own decisions about their own economic futures. It is not for us, either previously or today, to lecture them about their own best interests. The EU has, for some time, been pulling Britain down a path to unsustainable entitlements and away from the opportunities the free market offers. That voters rejected that path is not surprising."^[85]

At a townhall event on CNN on June 22, 2016, Johnson said, “And what is a Libertarian? In broad-brush strokes, fiscally conservative, socially accepting, tolerant. Look, people should be able to make choices in their own lives, always come down on the side of choice. And then from a military intervention standpoint, look, we're not isolationists in any way whatsoever, but we're noninterventionists. We don't want to get involved in other countries' affairs. We think that the interventions that have gone on have resulted in a less safe world, not a more safe world.”^[86]

On his campaign website, Johnson described his approach to foreign affairs. He said, “Looking back over the past couple of decades, it is difficult to see how the wars we have waged, the interventions we have conducted, the lives sacrificed, and the trillions of tax dollars we have spent on the other side of the globe have made us safer. If anything, our meddling in the affairs of other nations has made us less safe. … This imperialistic foreign policy makes it easier for ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other violent extremists to recruit new members. We need to build a strong military. But we should not use our military strength to try to solve the world’s problems. Doing so creates new enemies and perpetual war.”^[87]

In a statement on November 19, 2015, Johnson said, “I opposed the Iraq War. I supported going after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan after 9/11, but opposed – and continue to oppose – our failed attempt at Afghan nation building. And I opposed our involvement in overthrowing the government in Libya. … The cost of those interventions has been tremendous, with too many of our young men and women of the military killed and wounded…and trillions of dollars spent ineffectively.”^[88]

In May 2014, Johnson said that the U.S. should not involve itself in Russia's military intervention in Ukraine because there was "no national security interest...at stake." He analogized, "It would be like Russia getting involved in the affairs of Puerto Rico. They’re not going to do it! We shouldn’t be involved in Ukraine!"^[89]

Johnson questioned the efficacy of sanctions against Iran on October 22, 2012. He tweeted, "'Crippling' sanctions only cripples the Iranian people. That does NOT make us safer."^[90]

When asked in December 2011 for his position on U.S.-Israel relations and Palestinian statehood, Johnson said, "I've been to Israel. I've met wth Netanyahu. I've met with Shimon Peres. I've met with Ariel Sharon. I think that it's a real mistake for us to believe that we have solutions to issues that, really, only Israel should be and will be dealing with. Israel is an ally, will remain an ally, and I think it's a mistake for us to think that we're going to dictate to them actions when it comes to Palestinian statehood. It's just a mistake on our part. It's not reality. They're the ones who have to deal with this and they will."^[91]

Read more of Gary Johnson's public statements on foreign affairs.

The 2016 Libertarian Party Platform on foreign affairs

“	American foreign policy should seek an America at peace with the world. Our foreign policy should emphasize defense against attack from abroad and enhance the likelihood of peace by avoiding foreign entanglements. We would end the current U.S. government policy of foreign intervention, including military and economic aid. We recognize the right of all people to resist tyranny and defend themselves and their rights. We condemn the use of force, and especially the use of terrorism, against the innocent, regardless of whether such acts are committed by governments or by political or revolutionary groups.^[26]	”
—2016 Libertarian Party Platform^[92]

Bill Weld

During a live email chat with The New York Times during the second presidential debate on October 9, 2016, Jason Horowitz asked Weld what he thought U.S. policy should be in Syria and how much of a priority the Syrian situation is for the country. Weld said he thought a "no fly zone" for Syria risked war. He also said, "Half the population of rebel-held Aleppo have said they will leave if there is a path. I am afraid that Assad is going to take the territory." Weld continued, "My priority now would be to prevent further slaughter of innocents in Aleppo."^[93]
In an October 4, 2016, interview with The Boston Globe, Weld said, “I think Mr. Trump’s proposals in the foreign policy area, including nuclear proliferation, tariffs, and free trade, would be so hurtful, domestically and in the world, that he has my full attention.”^[94]
On October, 4, 2016, The Boston Globe reported that Gary Johnson's recent foreign policy-related gaffes had created "some tensions on the ticket" and contrasted Johnson's "apparent weak spots in his foreign-policy knowledge" with Weld’s "smoother command of foreign affairs." Weld maintained that he and Gary Johnson remained “happy warriors.”^[94]
During a CNN Libertarian town hall on June 22, 2016, Johnson and Weld discussed military intervention in Syria. Weld said, "the baseline position of the Libertarian Party is an 'invincible defense'" that includes the projection of military supremacy across the globe. He continued, "It does not encompass interventionism, boots on the ground, American blood on foreign soil." During the town hall, Weld also mentioned the letter sent to the Obama administration urging intervention in Syria and signed by 51 State Department officials. He said, "It takes a lot of the boots on the ground to effectuate regime change, if you want it to stick."^[95]
Weld was in 2016 and remains a longtime member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), "an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries"^[96]
Read more about Bill Weld.

Withdrawn candidates

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms 2016 presidential candidates foreign affairs. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

2016 presidential candidates on foreign affairs - Google News

External links

Footnotes

[1] PollingReport.com, "Problems and Priorities," accessed September 13, 2016

[WSJ-2] Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named WSJ

[3] Time, "Read Hillary Clinton’s Speech Touting ‘American Exceptionalism’," August 31, 2016

[4] Yahoo, "Democrat Clinton vows to support Colombia-FARC peace deal," August 25, 2016

[5] Associated Press, "Putin's return to power ended Clinton's 'Moscow Spring,'" August 8, 2016

[6] The Hill, "Clinton urges support for Turkish government amid coup effort," July 15, 2016

[7] Reuters, "U.S. urges all countries to adhere to South China Sea ruling," July 12, 2016

[debatetrans-8] 8.0 ^8.1 The New York Times, "Transcript: Democratic Presidential Debate in Brooklyn," April 15, 2016

[9] CNN, "Clinton: I will have the delegates required to win," April 10, 2016

[10] Dan Merica, CNN, "Clinton: Trump win would be like Christmas for the Kremlin," March 23, 2016

[11] The New York Times, "Hillary Clinton Dismisses Rivals for 'Reckless Actions' in Foreign Policy," March 23, 2016

[12] The Washington Post, "Hillary Clinton gets to Donald Trump’s right on Israel," March 21, 2016

[13] The Jewish Journal, "Hillary Clinton: Taking the U.S.-Israel relationship to the next level," January 6, 2016

[14] Forward, "How I Would Reaffirm Unbreakable Bond With Israel — and Benjamin Netanyahu," November 4, 2015

[15] The Washington Post, "Hillary Clinton called Xi’s speech ‘shameless,’ and the Web went wild," September 28, 2015

[RussiaSanctions-16] 16.0 ^16.1 The Huffington Post, "Hillary Clinton Calls On United States To Accept 65,000 Syrian Refugees," September 20, 2015

[17] The New York Times, "Hillary Clinton Says U.S. Should Lead Effort to Help Syrian Migrants," September 9, 2015

[18] Salon, "Hillary joins the chorus against BDS: On Israel, she aligns herself with the right, and people like Sheldon Adelson," July 8, 2015

[19] Telegraph, “Hillary Clinton: Europe should toughen sanctions on Russia after MH17 crash," July 18, 2014

[20] Wall Street Journal, “A Closer Look at Hillary Clinton’s Approach to China," July 28, 2014

[21] Time, “New Hope For Afghanistan's Women," November 24, 2001

[22] Council on Foreign Relations, “The Candidates on Cuba Policy," July 17, 2008

[23] Washington Times, "Hillary Clinton supports Obama on Cuba," accessed January 29, 2015

[24] The New York Sun, “Clinton Reminds Voters Of Commitment to Israel," September 17, 2007

[25] NY Sun, “Clinton, in a Sharp Turnaround, Warns Against Even Symbolically Recognizing Jerusalem as Capital of Israel," September 27, 2011

[quotedisclaimer-26] 26.0 ^26.1 ^26.2 ^26.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.

[27] Democratic Party, "The 2016 Democratic Party Platform," accessed August 24, 2016

[28] PolitiFact, "Tim Kaine on Brexit vote: Young people voted to stay, old people voted to leave," June 26, 2016

[29] Tim Kaine United States Senator for Virginia, "Foreign Relations Committee," accessed July 25, 2016

[30] United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, "Subcommittees," accessed July 25, 2016

[31] ABC News, "Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump Meet With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu," September 26, 2016

[32] Donald J. Trump, "Readout of Donald J. Trump's meeting with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi," September 19, 2016

[33] Scientific American, "What Do the Presidential Candidates Know about Science?" September 13, 2016

[34] Time, "Read Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s Remarks at a Military Forum," September 7, 2016

[35] The Washington Post, "Donald Trump’s Mexican press conference, annotated," August 31, 2016

[36] The Huffington Post, "It Appears Donald Trump Doesn’t Know About The Crimea Annexation Or Doesn’t Care," July 31, 2016

[37] The New York Times, "Donald Trump Sets Conditions for Defending NATO Allies Against Attack," July 20, 2016

[38] Politico, "McConnell: Trump 'wrong' on NATO," July 21, 2016

[39] CBS News, "Donald Trump on Muslim ban "expansion," possible Roger Ailes campaign role," July 24, 2016

[40] The Huffington Post, "Trump Blames Clinton, Obama For Chaos In Turkey And France," July 16, 2016

[41] NPR, "Make Britain Great Again? Donald Trump's Remarkable Reaction To 'Brexit'," June 24, 2016

[CNNBrexit-42] 42.0 ^42.1 CNN, "Clinton ad knocks Trump over Brexit response," June 26, 2016

[43] Politico, "Trump shifts position on Libya," June 5, 2016

[44] TIME, "Donald Trump Says Henry Kissinger Backs His Foreign Policy Stance—But He Begs to Differ," May 27, 2016

[45] CNN, "Trump on Obama critique: 'When you rattle someone, that's good'," May 26, 2016

[46] The Washington Post, "Donald Trump to meet with Henry Kissinger, GOP’s foreign-policy eminence," May 16, 2016

[47] The New York Times, "Sadiq Khan, London's Muslim Mayor, Calls Trump 'Ignorant About Islam'," May 11, 2016

[48] The Guardian, "Donald Trump backs Brexit and says UK 'better off without' EU – as it happened," May 5, 2016

[49] The Washington Post, "Pakistan calls Donald Trump ‘ignorant’ after Bin Laden comments," May 2, 2016

[50] The New York Times, "Transcript: Donald Trump's Foreign Policy Speech," April 27, 2016

[51] CNN, "Donald Trump skips West Bank answer," April 14, 2016

[52] The New York Times, "In Donald Trump’s Worldview, America Comes First and Every Body Else Pays," March 26, 2016

[53] Eliza Collins, Politico, "Trump: 'It is amazing how often I am right'," March 24, 2016

[54] Foreign Policy, "AIPAC Condems Donald Trump Speech: 'We Take Great Offense'," March 22, 2016

[55] ABC News, "Donald Trump: Vladimir Putin's praise is 'a good thing'," December 19, 2015

[56] NBC News, "Trump Continues His Embrace of Putin," December 18, 2015

[57] ABC News, "Russian President Vladimir Putin Praises Donald Trump as 'Talented' and 'Very Colorful'," December 17, 2015

[58] CNN Politics, "Petition to ban Trump from UK passes 300K, could be debated in Parliament," December 9, 2015

[59] CNN Politics, "Donald Trump says Russia isn't to blame for MH17, despite evidence," October 15, 2015

[60] Politico, "Trump calls for taking in Syrian refugees," September 9, 2015

[61] Daily Caller, "Donald Trump on His Nuclear Doctrine, Democracy Promotion And Why He Refuses To Use Term ‘Supreme Leader,’" September 7, 2015

[WSJscript-62] The Wall Street Journal, "Donald Trump Transcript: ‘Our Country Needs a Truly Great Leader,’" June 16, 2015

[63] WTOP, "Donald Trump: Contempt for America won’t help Ukraine relations," July 22, 2014

[64] Trump, Donald. (2000). The America We Deserve. Los Angeles, CA: Renaissance Books. (page 142)

[65] Republican Party, "The 2016 Republican Party Platform," accessed August 24, 2016

[66] Slate, "Mike Pence Takes Donald Trump’s Side in His Public Disagreement With Mike Pence," October 10, 2016

[cpac2015-67] MikePence.com, "Governor Pence CPAC Speech," accessed April 1, 2015

[vision-68] The Washington Post, "Mike Pence lays out vision for a presidential campaign. But will he be a candidate?" December 12, 2014

[69] Free Beacon, "Governor Mike Pence In Berlin: Diplomacy with Russia Has Failed," April 17, 2014

[70] Vox, "A conversation with Jill Stein: what the Green Party candidate believes," September 14, 2016

[71] The Washington Post, "A transcript of Jill Stein’s meeting with The Washington Post editorial board," August 25, 2016

[72] Green Party, "The 2016 Green Party Platform on Democracy," accessed August 24, 2016

[73] Democracy Now!, "Expanding the Debate: Ajamu Baraka Spars with Pence & Kaine in Democracy Now! Special - Part 2," October 5, 2016

[74] Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 4, 2016

[75] Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 4, 2016

[76] Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 4, 2016

[77] Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 4, 2016

[78] Twitter, "Ajamu Baraka," October 4, 2016

[79] The Hill, "Gary Johnson: You can’t get into a war with a country you can’t find," October 4, 2016

[80] Politico, "Gary Johnson blunders again: ‘I guess I’m having an Aleppo moment,'" September 28, 2016

[81] The Wall Street Journal, "Questioned on Syria Crisis, Gary Johnson Draws a Blank; ‘What Is Aleppo?'" September 8, 2016

[82] The Los Angeles Times, "Editorial Possible presidential spoiler Gary Johnson speaks to The Times editorial board about siphoning votes from Hillary Clinton," August 1, 2016

[post-83] The Washington Post, "A transcript of The Washington Post editorial board’s meeting with Gary Johnson and William Weld," July 7, 2016

[84] The Libertarian Republic, "WATCH: Gary Johnson Defends Brexit, Slams the EU," June 28, 2016

[85] The Washington Post, "On Brexit and immigration ruling, Libertarian presidential hopeful swerves," June 24, 2016

[cnn-86] CNN, "Transcript: CNN Libertarian Town Hall moderated by Chris Cuomo," June 22, 2016

[87] JohnsonWeld, "Foreign policy and national defense," accessed September 2, 2016

[initiative-88] Our American Initiative, "Gary Johnson: ISIS is today’s Nazi fascism," November 19, 2015

[89] RT, "US involvement in Ukraine is like ‘Russia getting involved in Puerto Rico,'" May 1, 2014

[90] Twitter, "Gov. Gary Johnson," October 22, 2012

[91] YouTube, "U.S., Israel & Palestinian Statehood - Gary Johnson & Clarke Cooper Q&A," accessed January 7, 2016

[92] Libertarian Party, "The 2016 Libertarian Party Platform," accessed August 24, 2016

[93] The New York Times, "What does Weld Say" Real-Time Reaction From a Libertarian," October 10, 2016

[Globe-94] 94.0 ^94.1 The Boston Globe, "VP hopeful Weld is more interested in attacking Trump," October 4, 2016

[95] Reason.com, "Gary Johnson/William Weld: ‘Skeptics’ of Intervention That Will Involve Congress in Decisions on Military Action," June 22, 2016

[96] Council on Foreign Relations, "Mission Statement," accessed January 13, 2016

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

[75]

[76]

[77]

[78]

[79]

[80]

[81]

[82]

[83]

[84]

[85]

[86]

[87]

[88]

[89]

[90]

[91]

[92]

[93]

[94]

[95]

[96]

2016 presidential candidates on foreign affairs

Contents

Democratic ticket

Hillary Clinton

Tim Kaine

Republican ticket

Donald Trump

Mike Pence

Green ticket

Jill Stein

Ajamu Baraka

Libertarian ticket

Gary Johnson

Bill Weld

Withdrawn candidates

Recent news

See also

External links

Footnotes

Information about voting

2024 Elections

2024 Election analysis

2025 Elections

Trending

Public Policy

Information for candidates

Get Engaged

Services

Additional analysis

SITE NAVIGATION