Current Affairs

It is all in the air with the US elective electing Trump to the presidency. Countries in Europe, China and right across the Middle East are wondering what his presidency will bring. For Europe it is about trade, for China it is about tariffs and for the Middle East it is about stability, all arguments that challenge the relationship that the northern hemisphere will have in future with the US.

The first argument anybody has is what exactly will Trump bring to the table. The idea that all arguments are just transactional challenges how the world will manage with a more aggressive United States than under Joe Biden. But there have been failures under Joe Biden and that is the way that the United States have managed crisis under his presidency and it is those failures that have cost his vice president the opportunity to manage a campaign clear of these failures and arguments.

“It is the economy stupid,” were the words that spring-boarded Clinton to the presidency. In many ways it was the economy and the failure of the Democrats to realise that the economy was vital to the success of Trump in winning this election. But it was more than the economy that changed the way that American’s voted, it was the alienation of an electorate from the presidency. The arguments that should have swung the election to the Democrats was the stability that American’s had experienced over the past four years and the ability of the Democrats to bring jobs and growth were mostly ignored.

For every voice that supported Kamala Harris, from ‘Cat Ladies’ to the ‘Rights of Women’, were undone by the fear of immigration and an economy that Trump argued was tanking. These failures to realise an argument that should have been put in the mainstream were undone by arguments of inflation and more than this – it was an argument of business interests being threatened by media companies such as Fox. But these arguments did not change the way the electorate voted, it was a simple message that made itself heard by millions and that was “do you think you are better off now than you were four years ago”. Most American’s are, but they also noticed what had happened to their weekly shop and though there had been massive growth in the economy, there was inflation.

The mainstream media pushed on all the arguments that were acceptable and though Trump was becoming more irascible, unpredictable and wandering off into another world when making speeches, the language itself was hitting home. Trump argued that America was involved in more wars since the end of his presidency and this was key to voters from the Middle East, who were aghast at the Biden presidency’s inability to find an answer to the escalating conflicts in not only Gaza, but also right across the Middle East. But it was also Kamala Harris’ inability to bring a foreign policy that meant a difference from the way that Joe Biden pushed his arguments. It was Harris’ inability to underpin an argument that would have been acceptable to the American people, which led to the ebbing away of an electorate that would have given her a chance to change the way that the Biden White House were doing business.

Europeans are already thinking about how they are going to manage a Trump presidency. In many ways the Europeans are wary of moving towards a presidency that is transactional. But they are also aware that Trump has been open to those who do not respect argument of democracy and that he disrupts the elements that make up the European Union. These arguments of transactional diplomacy means that countries such as the UK are vulnerable, both economically and in its security. Heather Grabbe, a senior fellow at Bruegel argues that it is in the interests of Europe and the United Kingdom to become closer on defence, trade and economically as a counter balance to Trumps transitional arguments.

But it is in Ukraine where the most difference will be made. Trump and Vance have argued that the war in Ukraine should never be at the stage it is. Trump has argued that it will be one of his priorities that the war will come to an end under his presidency. Though President Zelensky was one of the first to congratulate Trump on his election victory, there is a realisation that the transactional arguments of Trump are very much against the ambitions of the Ukrainian presidency to unite his country. The idea of the Dombas and Crimea becoming part of Ukraine once again is very much in a holding pattern. Ukraine’s ambitions to become a member of NATO is also on the table for discussion and the idea that Ukraine will be able to continue to fight the war with Russia is probably coming to an end. Guntram B.Wolff a senior fellow at Bruegel believes that Europe can take up some of the slack that a missing US will in the future be, but ultimately there will have to be a negotiated settlement that the Ukrainians can accept.

The missing element of a Trump presidency is that he is a spoiler and like most spoilers, he will try and divide countries from their alliances. This is particularly true in Europe where countries such as Hungary have their own approach towards Europe with their populist leader Victor Orban. Though the Europeans have found a way to negate his influence, there are pressures which will challenge the EU in the future, but there are already movements in Europe that are challenging the ideas and concepts that could disrupt the EU. These arguments have been pushed within Europe recently and though just talking points they are leading towards Europe moving towards defensive and economic alignments, which will pressure the US transactional arguments under Trump.

China is in an economic malaise at the moment. Though it is doing business with the US, it is already hamstrung by US tariffs under the Biden administration. The consensus is that a Trump presidency will increase the tariffs that China is facing and force the state to dump excess production on Europe and Africa. The alliances that have been put together under the Biden presidency in Asia will have a tough time from Trump, similar to his arguments about NATO, Trump will argue that defence spending in the region will have to increase. He will put pressure on countries such as Taiwan and argue that their spending will have to hit the 3.5% mark. Other Asian nations will be expected to also increase their spending on defence, especially as it looks as though the region will have some stability issues, especially if President Xi continues to expand China’s influence in the South China Sea and continues to destabilise Taiwan.  

Oil prices have already fallen and the US stock market opened on a bull, it is a pro business friendly Trump, who is expected to cut taxes and if his promise is to be believed, he will bring down inflation. Where the US will be in four years economically is dependent on whether the Trump administration will be able to manage an economy where the dollar will be stronger if his arguments come to fruition. But it is really a question of whether business will continue to grow in an economy, which under Trump is isolationist at heart. Countries in Europe and China will be looking to lessen the leverage that the US has on their economies especially if tariffs are placed on them in a heavy handed way.

For the global south, there will be questions about whether Europe and China can take up some of the slack that a tariff orientated America will put on these developing economies and whether these states will continue to haemorrhage their wealth to the global north. In many ways the global south will already be feeling the burden that the United States soon to be isolationist economy will have on their states and those that are producing raw materials are likely to face.

The Trump presidency is more about the idea of moving the United States from the wars that have occurred under Joe Biden. He is looking to move the US away from the world towards an isolationist approach that centres the economy on the US. His ideas in the election are to make US economically more central to the markets, rather than as a partner to the world economies. Whether this will work is questionable, but the United States is an important market to the world and as a nation it is integral to the world order that is being challenged by war and economies that are at the moment stagnant due to the wars in Europe, the Middle East and potentially Asia.