A dangerous world is waiting for the next occupant of the White House

ONE of the depressing aspects of the 2016 American presidential campaign is the dearth of any serious discussion by the candidates about the state of the world and the role of the United States in it.

The most striking demonstration of the marginalisation of foreign policy issues in this sad electoral spectacle was the way the crude sexual remarks of one candidate ended up dominating Sunday's televised presidential debate, despite efforts by the moderators to interject the humanitarian crisis in Aleppo, Syria, into it. Indeed, Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party presidential nominee, responded with "What is Aleppo?" when asked by a reporter about the civil war in Syria.

Needless to say, Russia's annexation of Crimea and China's posture in the South China Sea, and the possible US responses, have hardly been discussed. Some candidates have pledged to defeat the Islamic State (IS) and other terrorist groups and to be "tough" in dealing with the US's adversaries, but much of this talk amounts to empty rhetoric without an accompanying coherent strategy on how to achieve this and other goals.