By Bond Robertson 
Comment Expresses the author's views.
What will be presidential candidate Kamala Harris' foreign policy?
The Democratic National Convention is over, and the race to November has begun. Harris was leading national polls before the convention began, and she is expected to get another boost from the convention.
As the likelihood of a Harris administration coming to power grows, those of us with a vested interest in security policy are wondering whether she will take a different stance than the Biden administration. Or if she simply wants to be a continuation of the same.
As for NATO and the US’s role as our chief security guarantor, will it continue a foreign policy that has been stuck since World War II? Trump poses a potential threat to that policy. That’s why Republicans like Adam Kinzinger spoke on Harris’ behalf at the national convention.
Kinzinger served for twelve years in the House of Representatives, is a veteran of both Afghanistan and Iraq as an Air Force pilot, and is still a lieutenant colonel in the Air National Guard. He is a classic Republican who disagrees with much of what Harris stands for on domestic policy. But in his speech, he said he sees Trump as a threat to democracy in the United States and internationally, and his policy differences with Harris pale in comparison.
Action taken against Putin
Biden’s foreign policy was also within the classic American line. But there are always nuances. Biden’s presidency saw the first large-scale war in Europe since World War II.
Before Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Biden took some interesting and important steps. Among other things, he released intelligence assessments that indicated that Putin would invade on February 22.
Putin likes these sets of numbers to show he is in control. He invaded Georgia on 8/8/08. We should always be careful about diagnosing people from a distance, and I am not a psychiatrist, but I think we can all agree that the man has psychopathic traits.
Biden’s revelations led Putin to want to prove him wrong and delay the invasion for two days. Ukraine then got two more days to prepare, and the Russians spent another two days getting fuel and food supplies along the border before their invasion. It may have been decisive.
Jorn Sund Henriksen
Jørn Sund Henriksen was an election observer in Kyiv during the 2004 Orange Revolution and served in the Coast Guard Command. He has been involved in OSINT for over 10 years in various conflicts and is a leader in the Norwegian-Ukrainian Friends Association. His contributions are based on open source research and are therefore an accumulation and analysis of currently available information, with the risk of false sources.
Joe Biden warned
At the outset of the invasion, Biden and the United States led the way in providing arms and building political alliances. Biden has always been clear that Russia cannot win. But as the fortunes of the war in Ukraine have shifted, Biden has not been concerned about Ukraine winning the war. He continues his rhetoric that we cannot let Russia win.
What Biden, unlike Eastern European leaders, has not said is that Ukraine will win. Critics of Biden’s de-escalation approach, including myself, believe he seems as afraid of a Ukrainian victory as a Russian one. This has slowed arms deliveries and imposed many restrictions on how they can be used.
There is also speculation that Biden and Sullivan have reacted negatively to Russia's ongoing Ukrainian invasion and are trying to fend it off.
This line has many domestic critics as well. A number of senators from both parties have strongly urged Biden to remove restrictions and provide the types of weapons that could lead to a Ukrainian victory.
Anonymous sources close to decision-makers claim that both Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and Secretary of State Antony Blinken support lifting the arms embargo on Ukraine.
The person portrayed as the architect of the Biden administration’s de-escalation line is National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan. Those hoping for a more aggressive policy toward Ukraine from a potential Harris administration are hoping first and foremost that Sullivan does not join a new administration.
Unfortunately, Sullivan is a big star in the party and worked closely with both Obama and Hillary Clinton before becoming national security adviser, so there’s a good chance he’ll either keep his job or move up the ranks.
Read also: The US election is about the liberal world order, but no one cares
People around Harris
As a presidential candidate, Harris was of course familiar with security policy. His nomination letterAlthough she didn't go deep. She said the right things and stressed the importance of defending and supporting democracy against tyrants. And she pointed to Trump's friendship with tyrants.
It’s safe within established American foreign policy. Those of us hoping for a more aggressive policy in Ukraine won’t get any clear hints from Harris. So we almost have to look to the people close to her and what they say about it.
The aforementioned Adam Kinzinger is considered a possible candidate for Secretary of Defense. Democrats have a long tradition of having Republicans in their administration, often as Secretary of Defense. Bill Clinton had William Cohen, and Obama had Chuck Hagel. However, the latter had little influence over Obama.
Kinzinger was clear about the importance of a Ukrainian victory in Ukraine. His speech before the National Assembly He is regularly active in the Ukraine debate in the media and on social media. Another person who is clear about the same is Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, who many thought would be her vice presidential pick. He has a close relationship with Harris and has been wary In his speech Against Trump who says Russia can do whatever it wants with countries in Europe.
Vice President Walz has also been very vocal in his support for Ukraine and is the governor of a state with many Ukrainians. He may also be someone who, through his weekly lunch with the president, is pulling her in a more aggressive direction.
All of these will have influence, but her closest adviser on security policy will in any case be the person she appoints to the position that Jake Sullivan holds today.
Read also: Beyonce gives Trump a headache
Harris's character
Although Sullivan has been portrayed as the big bad wolf when it comes to Biden’s cautious approach to Ukraine, the president ultimately calls the shots. Biden’s age and Cold War experience may also be factors in his risk assessments.
Harris has shown in her political career that she is no stranger to taking risks when she thinks it matters. Two major lawsuits she won when she was California attorney general are good examples.
So my hope is that she will have the courage to pursue a foreign policy goal: winning the war in Ukraine, regardless of who she appoints to advise her. It will deter autocrats around the world, stabilize Europe and make Norway safer.
It would be interesting to do a similar analysis of who Trump is around and what his policies will be. But it is of little use because Trump is unpredictable in the first place. He likes to change his mind several times a day and likes to repeat the talking points of the previous person he spoke to.
This is one of the many reasons I look forward to a Harris win, even though I am not very happy with Joe Biden's Ukraine policy.