On October 1, 2024, the vice presidential candidates from both major parties in the United States are set to participate in the only vice presidential debate of the 2024 election cycle. Republican candidate JD Vance will make his first official appearance in front of American voters. Let’s take a look at Vance’s views on various issues such as the U.S. economy, overseas wars, military strength, tariffs, fentanyl, China, Taiwan, big tech companies, and artificial intelligence (AI) over the past period to get a glimpse of the style and stance he may display in the debate.
Since mid-July of this year, after former President Trump announced Vance—a new U.S. Senator and a post-80s born in August just turning 40—as his running mate for vice president, Vance’s memoir “Hillbilly Elegy” published in 2017 has gained popularity in China. A Bloomberg report mentioned that “Vance’s nomination has struck a chord with many Chinese because there are about 300 million ‘hillbillies’ in China… President Xi Jinping’s emphasis on high-end manufacturing is leaving them behind.”
Vance’s rapid rise as an American “hillbilly” symbolizes a typical American dream, which is likely to help Trump win the attention and support of many young American voters. Trump’s choice of Vance also appears to have a multi-faceted effect.
To a certain extent, if elected, Vance will be an important spokesperson and executor of Trump’s policies and agenda during his second presidential term, possibly becoming a successor to the Trump policy in the post-Trump era.
With a Juris Doctor degree from Yale Law School, Vance’s articulation of affairs is more clear and precise. Let’s delve into some of Vance’s key statements on issues related to Trump.
Vance believes that a country’s strong economy equals strong power, and he hopes to make America “strong” in terms of economy, military, and culture.
How to make America strong again? Vance believes this requires a revitalization of industrialization within the United States.
On May 19th of this year, Vance stated on CBS’s “Face the Nation” program, “Look, the reason Europe has weakened is that they’ve ‘de-industrialized.’ Why did they de-industrialize? Because they pursued a green energy agenda under the Biden administration—this will inevitably empower China and Russia.”
Vance emphasized that “re-industrialization” will bring much-needed innovation to America. He said, “I hope that one thing we do is to broaden our horizons, not only think about software innovation but also consider innovation in transportation, logistics, energy—innovation in all aspects.”
“We have this idea: we can separate the manufacturing of things from the design of things… But if you want to build a high-tech, high-energy growth economy, then you must have some domestic manufacturing and some self-sufficiency capability.”
Vance believes that the industrial base of America’s civilian sector was indispensable for manufacturing war supplies during World War II, indicating that the strength of a country’s military power is the result of its industrial strength.
In a column for The New York Times on June 19th, he said, “The most important lesson of World War II was… military power is downstream of industrial power. Currently, we are still the world’s military superpower primarily due to our industrial strength in the 1980s and 1990s. However, China is now a stronger industrial country than us, which means they will have a stronger military power in 20 years.”
Vance supports Trump’s broad tariff policy, as he believes that in the long run, it can help bring manufacturing back to the United States. When CBS host Margaret Brennan pointed out on the “Face the Nation” program on May 19th that tariffs by definition could lead to inflation, Vance responded, “I don’t necessarily buy the underlying premise of that.”
“If you impose tariffs, in reality, what you’re saying is that we will punish you for using slave labor in China and importing those things into the U.S. Over time, this punishment will help internal industry, not only in line with national security interests but also in the long run, it will reduce prices for Americans.”
Vance stated he does not like the idea that “China has stolen a lot of American jobs.”
In September 2023, Vance introduced the Drive America Act in the Senate, which aims to replace electric vehicle subsidies with fuel vehicle subsidies. He stated, “If we subsidize anything, it should be for the workers in Ohio, not for those who outsource jobs to China under the ‘green energy daydream.'”
Vance also supports the CHIPS and Science Act promoted by the Biden administration, a $280 billion bipartisan initiative approved by Congress in August 2022 to promote domestic semiconductor research and manufacturing, as well as the reshoring of critical industries. Both parties view this as an urgent matter of U.S. national security. Vance praised the act, saying, “This is a great piece of legislation that breaks the policy of our reliance on China.”
In addition to seeking scrutiny of China’s investments in the U.S., Vance also seeks scrutiny of U.S. investments in China. During an interview with the American Conservative website on March 15, 2023, discussing foreign policy, Vance mentioned the harm of Sino-American joint ventures to U.S. sovereignty: “The typical form of Sino-American joint ventures is U.S. company X joining with Chinese company Y, then pouring a lot of money into mainland China, but anything developed by company X in the future, even things in the past, are controlled by the Chinese side. We should essentially work hard to completely block such arrangements.”
“Business executives might say, ‘If the cost of opening these markets to our business is a little theft along the way, then economically it makes sense.’ For a sovereign nation like the United States, this simply doesn’t make sense.”
When Brennan asked Vance on the “Face the Nation” program about how he would “put appropriate pressure on Chinese and Mexican drug trafficking groups to stop them from exporting fentanyl drugs into the U.S.,” Vance replied, “Well, I think you go to Beijing, talk to Xi Jinping, and say to him, ‘Your whole economy is going to collapse unless you’re able to reach the U.S. market. You need to take this fentanyl problem seriously, otherwise we will impose severe tariffs and economic penalties on you because you’re not abiding by our laws, not helping us stop the flow of this deadly poison.'”
Brennan then asked Vance, “Wouldn’t you be concerned about the impact on the U.S. economy?”
Vance responded, “I think we have a strong economy, with the best workers in the world. If we need to fight a trade war with China, we will and we will win.”
For Vance, the fentanyl crisis is a pressing issue as he stated on the American Conservative website, “China manufactures fentanyl and ships it to our country, destroying American communities, jobs, and families.”
Above any economic goals, global warming, or the Iran nuclear issue, Vance’s greatest concern—more than any other—is a sudden event in the Taiwan Strait as it directly impacts U.S. national security and economic security. On April 27, 2023, during a speech at the Heritage Foundation, Vance said, “What we most need to prevent—beyond anything else—is China’s invasion of Taiwan. This will be disastrous for our country. It will destroy our entire economy, the computer chips—many of which are manufactured in Taiwan… this will drag our country into a major depression.”
In a column for The New York Times, Vance stated he hopes to immediately end the Russia-Ukraine war, “freeze the (two countries’) territorial lines closer to current ones,” and offer “some long-term U.S. security assistance.” He does not advocate for Ukraine or favor Russia, but rather, he is a realist who believes, “China poses the greatest threat to the U.S.” and “Today, America’s ‘de-industrialization’ is too severe to support a strong military to simultaneously counter Russia and deter China.”
In the Heritage Foundation speech, Vance said, “Now, you know Joe Biden (the president) won’t deliver weapons to Taiwan—weapons we promised to Taiwan—because we are delivering those weapons to Ukraine or elsewhere. Does that make sense?”
“A lot of us find it hard to accept that the ‘arsenal of democracy’ in World War II (referring to the United States) now produces only one-twentieth of the shells that Russia produces. But that’s the reality.”
In The New York Times column, Vance mentioned, “These weapons (referring to the ‘Patriot missile system’) are not only needed by Ukraine. If China sets its sights on Taiwan, the Patriot missile system is crucial for Taiwan’s defense. In fact, the U.S. has promised Taiwan nearly $1 billion worth of Patriot missiles, but the delivery of these weapons and other critical resources has been significantly delayed, partly due to the Ukraine war.”
During an interview with Fox News on April 28, Vance stated, “The United States is already stretched thin. We don’t have the industrial capacity to support a war in Ukraine, a war in Israel, and potentially provoke a war in East Asia if China invades Taiwan, so the U.S. must make choices…”
“You have to ask yourself, is China more likely to be deterred if we are chest-thumping in Europe or showing strength, or if we have the necessary weapons to prevent them from invading Taiwan?
“My argument is that China pays attention to real power. They don’t care how strong our statements on TV are, or how firm our resolve is. They care about how strong we actually are—to be strong enough to counter China, we must pay attention to this. Now, we are already stretched thin.”
On March 17, 2023, as Xi Jinping and Russian President Putin had just signed a declaration that China-Russia relations had entered a “new era,” Vance voiced his opinion on the X (former Twitter) platform, saying, “I hear many people saying our goal in Ukraine policy is to show China that we are ‘tough’ and won’t be easily manipulated. Clearly, the Chinese don’t care.”
These statements suggest that Vance hopes to reduce military aid to Ukraine in order to increase U.S. deterrence and deterrence against the Chinese Communist Party in a potential Taiwan Strait conflict. If the Russia-Ukraine war continues, the U.S. will find it difficult to fully shift its military focus to the Asian region.
For staunch realists like Vance, the West’s “resolve” or “unity” towards Ukraine does not hold much practical significance in deterring the Chinese Communist Party from invading Taiwan unless there are sufficient “missile systems, artillery systems, and bullets” as backing. Therefore, Vance believes that the U.S. and its allies are not fully prepared for combat or ready to face off against the CCP.
If China were to militarily invade Taiwan, would Vance want the U.S. to send troops to defend Taiwan?
Vance has never explicitly confirmed what actions the Trump administration would take in response. President Biden has unequivocally stated at least four times that the U.S. will send troops to protect Taiwan, though his forthrightness has sparked controversy.
In a column for The New York Times, Vance used diplomatic language to respond, saying, “The honest answer is that we will figure out what to do if they launch an attack.”
Last year, during an interview with the American Conservative website, Vance said, “Look, we might ultimately be compelled to go to war with China. But if that’s what we are going to do, God forbid, then we need to be more self-sufficient economically.”
On July 17th at the Republican National Convention (RNC), Vance said in his acceptance speech for the vice presidential nomination, “We will only send our children to the battlefield when we have to. But as President Trump demonstrated in defeating ISIS, when we hit, we will hit hard.”
Mainstream media has been trying to understand Vance’s policies on artificial intelligence (AI) and big tech companies.
On one hand, Vance calls for “looser regulations;” on the other, he “publicly supports open-source AI.” On July 11, four days before Trump announced Vance as the vice presidential candidate, during a Senate hearing, Vance posed a question: “Many times, it is the CEOs—especially the CEOs of big tech companies that I think have a dominant position in the AI field—coming over talking about the frightening security dangers of this new technology and how Congress needs to act quickly and regulate. I can’t help but worry that if we do something under the thumb of these incumbents, it will benefit these incumbents rather than benefit American consumers.”
Vance believes that regulatory actions driven by AI-dominant big tech companies will only consolidate their existing advantages, rather than promote competition.
At the same time, Vance “calls for the breakup of Google,” and “urges more investment in U.S. (technology) companies to help them compete with China.”