News Analysis: Trump could benefit from appearing tougher than Clinton in reacting to EgyptAir crash

U.S. presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump was tougher than his likely Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in reacting to the crash of an EgyptAir plane, in an attempt to show his leadership in fighting terrorism, experts said.

Sixty-six people were killed last Thursday when the EgyptAir flight 804, en route from Paris to Cairo, crashed into the Mediterranean Sea. While no terror group has claimed responsibility, analysts said terrorism was a likely cause.

The crash comes at a time when terror group Islamic State (IS) has launched massive terror attacks in Western countries including France and Belgium.

The radical group is now calling on supporters to strike the United States and Europe during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, in a bid to prove it is still deadly despite losses in its Middle East strongholds.

Trump wasted no time in calling last week's crash "another terrorist attack." "When will we get tough, smart and vigilant?" he tweeted.

"If anybody thinks it wasn't blown out of the sky, you are 100 percent wrong, folks," Trump told a fundraiser later.

Darrell West, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, told Xinhua that Trump wants to show that the world is dangerous and America needs a strong leader.

"Keeping the agenda focused on global affairs is good for Trump," West said.

After the terror attacks in Brussels, Belgium in March, Trump tweeted that he would be "the best by far in fighting terror." He also attacked Clinton for failing to solve the problem of terrorism, while calling for a change in the U.S. strategy.

For her part, Clinton also said the EgyptAir crash seems like terrorism. "It does appear that it was an act of terrorism -- exactly how, of course, the investigation will have to determine," Clinton said in an interview with the CNN.

Clinton also outlined her plan to deal with terrorism, saying the right response would be to defeat the terrorists on the ground, drive them out of Iraq and cooperate with other nations to intensify intelligence-gathering and law enforcement operations.

Analysts said Clinton's language has been more analytical, which could end up backfiring for her.

"The danger for Clinton is looking soft on terrorism," West said.

Clinton's rhetoric is more nuanced than Trump's but it is hard to explain nuance to voters. "She has to be careful that voters don't conclude she is not tough enough in a turbulent time," West said.

Julian Zelizer, professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University, echoed those thoughts, saying Clinton risks looking less tough on terrorism.

However, Trump will surely benefit from being tougher if the terror attack occurred in the United States, but in the case of a terror attack outside of the country, such benefit appears to be less certain.

"It's not clear how a terrorist attack like this impacts the campaign," Zelizer told Xinhua.

"As much as his 'get tough' rhetoric might be appealing in frightening times, voters might also find Hillary Clinton's experience and steady hand comforting as they realize the perils that exist," he added. Endit