Actually, there were two presidential elections with geostrategic implications on 5 November. While the US elected Donald Trump again, the Western Pacific island state of Palau handed a second successive term to President Surangel Whipps Jr. 

The geostrategically interested will mostly notice that Whipps was the most pro-US candidate. The other candidate, former president Tommy E Remengesau, was also pro-US, just less so. So, actually, not a lot was immediately at stake geostrategically. 

Palau, independent but closely associated with the United States, is 1700km from the South China Sea. US military presence there is therefore growing, and China is trying hard to gain influence over the country. A tilt away from the United States that Beijing might eventually engineer would have strong security implications. 

But the concerns of outsiders were not the concerns of Palauans as they voted. For them, the choice of president was based on local issues—as shown by what the candidates campaigned on. And both candidates are better understood as having been, first and foremost, pro-Palau. 

With nearly all locally cast votes counted, Whipps leads Remengesau, who is also his brother-in-law, with 58.1 percent of the vote. Absentee ballots won’ t be counted until 12 November, but Whipps cannot now lose. In a statement on broadcaster Palau Wave Productions, Remengesau congratulated him on victory. 

As with most elections anywhere, the outcome in Palau was driven by issues affecting Palau, such as taxation, inflation, environmental conservation, crime and drug use. Another was emigration, since locals worry that too many of them are leaving their country of 18,000 people. 

Palauans were aware of their country’s international importance and of foreign views of the election. Chinese influence is not hidden, but it was not a campaign issue.  

Over the years, Whipps has often discussed the pressure China has put on Palau to cease recognising Taiwan. (Palau is one of only 12 countries that do so.) But he did not make the issue part of his campaign.

In conversations with Palauans during the campaign, I usually heard them say that the biggest issue was the high cost of living. Remengesau told voters it was caused by the 10 percent goods and services tax that Whipps introduced last year.  

Whipps pointed to international oil-price rises that followed Russia’s attack on Ukraine. He tried to explain the structure and effects of the tax. 

Whipps has proposed increasing the minimum wage to stem emigration. He wants to reduce the national marine sanctuary from 80 percent of its exclusive economic zone to 50 percent. That would address high fish costs, he says. 

Transnational crime and drug trafficking have been an especially prominent domestic issue, following two drug-related deaths in the past year, one of them a murder. 

Many of these issues have a foreign component: rising prices from Russia, foreign fishing in Palau’s waters, transnational drug trafficking, and emigration to affluent countries. However, that is not how Palauans look at these issues. They see prices they can’t afford, decreasing fish stocks, people leaving their homes and family members addicted to drugs.  

This domestic perspective is evident in Whipps’s longtime campaign slogan: ‘a kot a rechad er Belau,’ meaning ‘Palauans First.’  

This contrasts with most international media coverage of the election, which focused on its possible international consequences, such as the US losing one of its footholds in the Western Pacific. 

Still, the US and China do come up as political issues in Palau. Whipps is sometimes asked about increasing US military presence. His frequent response has been, ‘Presence is deterrence’—meaning that US forces being in Palau does not increase the likelihood of an attack by China but, rather, decreases it. 

In Palau, China is associated with domestic problems. Increasing tourism from China may again threaten Palau’s pristine environment. Malign actors from China have been intermingled with tourists, worsening Palau’s drug crisis and engaging in other criminal pursuits. Chinese investors have bought 50- or 99-year leases on much of Palau’s prime real estate, locking out commercial development. 

‘Presence is deterrence’ is equally relevant domestically. The US is helping with fighting crime and influence operations emanating from China. It has increased its diplomatic, national security, cybersecurity and law enforcement presence in Palau, with some success against those domestic threats. 

That’s very good for the US’s standing among Palauans. In the future, as in their presidential election, they’ll be thinking of Palau.