US election: What's at stake for the world?
Commentators tell Sky News about the possible implications that the US election result has for the rest of the world.
Thursday 3 November 2016 01:30, UK
The world is bracing itself as America prepares to choose its next president.
Sky News asked experts and former policy makers: What's at stake in the election for the world outside America?
:: How important is this election for the rest of the world?
Martin Wolf, chief economics commentator, Financial Times:
"I think it is possibly the most important election of my lifetime.
"The US has been the dominant source of global security, the shaper of the international system since it entered the world as a great power.
"And if it changes its stance on how open it is, how supportive it is on trade, on its security, its alliances and relations with other powers then it changes the world far more profoundly than it has in the past even under say Reagan."
:: This has been a highly unusual election. Has it already done lasting damage to America's standing in the world and its ability to maintain stability of the post war world order?
Martin Wolf:
"I don't think we have ever seen a candidate emerging of this kind in the US, actually really ever - certainly since it has been a great power.
"And I think we are right to be worried about the potential implications of this transformation of the basis of American democracy."
:: Should the world be worried by the prospect of a Trump presidency?
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, former NATO Secretary General:
"We don't know what will be the concrete policies of a Trump administration but if his statements were to be taken at face value it could very dangerous for the world.
"Mr Trump has praised President Putin. He has indicated a willingness to recognize the illegal annexation of Crimea into the Russian Federation.
"And I think such statements. If they were transferred into concrete policy would weaken NATO, would weaken the deterrence and tempt Mr. Putin to test the resolve of the western alliances."
Sir Christopher Meyer, former British ambassador to the US:
"What disqualifies him from office is his temperament, his thin skin, his bigotry and his ignorance of world affairs.
"Let all that stuff run wild if he's sitting in the Oval Office, and we're in for a very, very bumpy geopolitical ride.
"He has already suggested that Article 5 of the NATO treaty, the one that says if a member state is attacked then all the other members of the alliance are duty bound to come to the assistance of that state, he's already said if that state is not paying its dues to the NATO budget then Article 5 will be suspended.
"That is truly a nail in the coffin of the post Second World War international order."
:: What should the world expect of the next US president whoever they are?
Aaron David Miller, former US State Department adviser:
"The notion that somehow Mrs Clinton or Mr Trump will somehow be able to come up with comprehensive fixes for the world's problems or America's I think is an illusion.
"Our Constitution talks about creating a more perfect union.
"Nowhere in the document does it say it is the objective of the American polity to create a more perfect world.
"That does not mean we need to abandon the world - we can't.
"But it does mean particularly in the wake of Iraq and Afghanistan we need to take a very hard look at what American interests are and figure out the most effective and smart way of protecting them."