The 2024 U.S. Presidential Election: Geopolitical Impacts on the Middle East, Ukraine, Europe, and ASEAN.
The 2024 U.S. presidential election presents a critical juncture, showcasing two markedly divergent leadership viewpoints: former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris. This view analyzes the ramifications of the election outcomes—whether Trump or Harris is elected—on US foreign policy and their impact on critical geopolitical locations. It explores the areas of the Middle East, Ukraine, Europe, and ASEAN, particularly the Philippines and Taiwan. The article analyzes the prospective effects of each candidate's strategy on regional stability, US alliances, and the global power equilibrium in these strategically vital areas.
The United States profoundly impacts global geopolitical dynamics via its foreign policy choices. The 2024 US Presidential Election between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris, represents a pivotal moment for U.S. foreign engagement. Trump's foreign policy is defined by "America First" nationalism and an emphasis on transactional diplomacy. Conversely, Harris employs a multilateral, alliance-oriented strategy that corresponds with the Biden administration's dedication to international collaboration and the advancement of democratic principles.
The outcomes of this election will profoundly influence global security and stability, particularly in four critical regions: The Middle East, Ukraine, Europe, and ASEAN, with a specific focus on the Philippines and Taiwan. The policy of each candidate will influence U.S. ties with major nations including Russia, China, and the European Union, as well as the balance of power in regions facing increased tensions.
The Middle East – Realignment, Security, and Energy
1.1 If Trump Wins: Economic Focus and Pragmatic Alliances
It is likely that a subsequent Trump Presidency would return to the pragmatic, transactional diplomacy that characterized his initial tenure. It is expected that Trump will continue to prioritize economic interests and reduce direct U.S. military engagement in the region, while also maintaining strong relationships with critical allies such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. The Trump administration prioritized economic agreements and stability over human rights issues, fostering closer relationships with authoritarian countries.
Security Implications: Trump may further reduce U.S. military obligations in the region, as he may prioritize local partners in addressing security issues, particularly in counter-terrorism initiatives. This transition will result in a greater reliance on countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel to maintain regional stability.
Iran: The probable outcome of Trump's re-entry into the White House is the perpetuation of the "maximum pressure" strategy against Iran, which could lead to the reinstatement of sanctions, increased isolation of Tehran, and an increased likelihood of armed conflict. His rejection of the Iran nuclear agreement (JCPOA) during his first term suggests that there is no room for diplomacy.
Israel and the Arab World: The Abraham Accords are likely to be extended by Trump, which would likely result in the further normalization of relations between Israel and Arab nations. This would strengthen economic and geopolitical connections in the region, while initiatives to resolve the Israeli Palestinian conflict would be neglected.
1.2 If Kamala Harris Wins: Diplomacy and Multilateralism
A Harris presidency would continue the Biden administration's various endeavors to re-engage diplomatically with the Middle East. Harris would most likely push for a balanced approach, maintaining partnerships with key countries while attempting to revive multilateral agreements like the Iran nuclear deal.
Security Implications: Harris could maintain a sensible US military presence in the Middle East, particularly in areas where terrorism and instability continue to threaten US interests. In contrast to Trump, Harris may promote the alignment of regional security with human rights and democratic principles.
Iran: A Harris administration would most likely seek to revive the JCPOA and engage in diplomatic relations with Iran to prevent nuclear proliferation and reduce tensions. This might lead to renewed negotiations and even reduce regional tensions over Iran.
Israel and the Arab World: Although Harris will continue to support Israel's security, she may highlight the Palestinian issue, calling for renewed peace talks and supporting a two-state solution. She would strengthen ties with Arab allies while emphasizing human rights.
Ukraine and U.S.-Russia Relations
1.1 If Trump Wins: Isolationism and a Possible Realignment with Russia
Trump has consistently questioned the United States' role in the Ukraine issue and has a worrisome relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin. A Trump victory may result in reduced US aid to Ukraine, drastically altering the current dynamics of the conflict with Russia.
NATO: Trump's critical view of NATO, which questions its value and urges European countries to increase defense spending, suggests that the United States may withdraw from its leadership role in the alliance. This would reduce NATO's deterrent effectiveness against Russian aggression.
Ukraine: Under Trump, US military and financial assistance to Ukraine may be reduced, forcing Kyiv to negotiate with Moscow, which might result in a frozen conflict or concessions to Russia. This would embolden Putin and signal a shift toward US isolationism in European security concerns.
Russia: Trump's forgiving approach to Russia, along with his reluctance to condemn Putin, may result in the lifting of sanctions and a reshaping of US-Russia relations. This has the potential to weaken the present US-led alliance supporting Ukraine, breaking Western solidarity in the face of Russian aggression.
1.2 If Kamala Harris Wins: Strengthening NATO and Continued Support for Ukraine
Harris would maintain the Biden government's strong backing of Ukraine and its commitment to offset Russian aggression through military aid, sanctions, and diplomatic activities. To increase European security, her government would actively coordinate with NATO allies.
NATO: Under a Harris presidency, U.S. commitments to NATO would be strengthened, therefore strengthening the alliance's deterrence against Russian aggression and safeguarding of collective security. Harris probably would support further NATO cooperation to raise military readiness and lessen Russian influence.
Ukraine: Under Harris, the United States will keep military and financial support for Ukraine underlined on the preservation of Ukraine's sovereignty and support of a diplomatic solution that preserves its geographical integrity. Harris would like to keep sanctions on Russia until a suitable solution is reached.
Russia: Harris would take a strong stance on Russia, supporting European partners to reduce Russian aggressiveness and influence in Europe and beyond and enforcing sanctions to thus counteract Russian influence.
Europe – Transatlantic Relations and the Future of NATO
1.1 If Trump Wins: A Possible Breakdown of U.S.-European Relations
Trump's prior administration experienced tense relations with European partners, as he challenged NATO's significance, exited multilateral agreements, and levied tariffs on European products. A subsequent Trump administration may intensify these tensions.
NATO: Trump may diminish U.S. involvement in NATO, insisting that European countries increase their defense contributions. This may undermine transatlantic cohesion, rendering Europe more susceptible to Russian attacks.
EU Relations: Trump's transactional strategy may exacerbate tensions with the European Union about trade, security, and climate policy, thereby jeopardizing collaborative U.S.-EU initiatives.
Eastern Europe: Countries such as Poland and the Baltic states, which are significantly dependent on U.S. security assurances, may see heightened vulnerability under Trump, particularly while Russia persists in asserting its influence in the region.
1.2 If Kamala Harris Wins: Strengthening the Transatlantic Alliance
Harris is expected to bolster the Biden administration's initiatives to reestablish and enhance connections with European partners. Her administration would emphasize NATO's function in guaranteeing collective security and strive to improve U.S.-EU collaboration.
NATO: Under Harris, the United States would persist in leading NATO initiatives to prevent Russian aggression and bolster defense efforts in Eastern Europe. This would probably lead to enhanced military cooperation and augmented resources allocated to European security.
EU Relations: Harris intends to enhance U.S.-EU collaboration on international matters, encompassing climate change, commerce, and military. Her administration would presumably endeavor to mend any divisions created by Trump's last term, promoting stronger transatlantic relations.
Eastern Europe: Countries susceptible to Russian attack, like Poland and the Baltic states, would receive sustained U.S. backing under Harris, so assuring a formidable military posture along NATO’s eastern flank.
ASEAN, the Philippines, and Taiwan – U.S.-China Rivalry in the Asia-Pacific
1.1 If Trump Wins: A Transactional Approach and Unpredictability
Trump visited Asia during his first term with a mix of harsh language directed against China and disengagement from international projects such as The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). His attitude on the region is probably still unknown since he prefers bilateral deals over multilateralism.
China: Focused on lowering China's economic influence in ASEAN and maybe increasing tariffs or economic pressure, Trump is likely to keep his aggressive attitude against China. Trump's contradicting foreign policies, however, would leave ASEAN countries wondering about the degree of US military presence in the area.
Philippines: Trump's inclination for decisive and strong leaders could result in a better personal relationship with Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., hence strengthening US-Philippines security cooperation especially with President Marcos Jr’s. One Hundred Eighty Degree Pivot to the US compared to the previous administration. This strategic move of the Marcos Jr administration is backed by more than 80% of the Philippine population whose had enough with China’s aggression in the Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone toward Filipino Fisher Folks, Philippine Coast Guard, etc. whose claim has been debunked by Geneva and reinstated Philippine sovereignty over its EEZ. In 2016.
Taiwan: Trump's posture toward Taiwan could be erratic. Although he might increase armament shipments to Taiwan to challenge China, his general unpredictability could lead to contradicting statements about US military support, therefore exposing Taiwan to Chinese pressure.
1.2 If Kamala Harris Wins: Strengthening Multilateralism and Defending Taiwan
Harris would underline multilateral diplomacy in Southeast Asia while keeping robust defense pledges to counter China's growing sway over the area.
China: Harris would adopt a tough stance opposing China's aggressive actions in the South China Sea and increasing sway in ASEAN. She would advocate for economic and security cooperation through international organizations, therefore strengthening the ties the United States has with regional allies such as Japan, Australia, and South Korea.
Philippines: Harris would enhance the US-Philippines cooperation so that the Mutual Defense Treaty stays a pillar of regional security. Her government most likely supports democratic government and human rights while giving military cooperation through combined drills top priority.
Taiwan: Harris would uphold the United States' robust support of Taiwan, including more military expenditure and cooperation meant to thwart Chinese invasion. Her government is probably going to increase diplomatic contacts with Taipei while keeping the Taiwan Strait stable and peaceful.
Conclusion
Especially in the Middle East, Ukraine, Europe, and ASEAN, the 2024 US presidential contest will have far-reaching consequences for world security and stability.
Most certainly, a Trump presidency would highlight isolationism, transactional diplomacy, and an emphasis on economic interests, hence causing reconfiguration of US alliances and lower military commitments.
While a Harris presidency would support global leadership of the United States through multilateralism, alliance strengthening, and preservation of democratic values. The course the United States chooses after this election will affect the balance of power in regions vital to world peace and security, therefore impacting the international order for years to come.
About the Writer:
Ferdinand A. A. Limbo, or "Ferdie," Q2's Head of Strategic Management and Management Consultant. With over 28 years of expertise in HR, Facilities Services, Engineering Consultancy, Retail, and Manufacturing, Ferdie is a seasoned C-Suite executive.
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of Q2 HR Solutions or its employees.
References: Brian Katulis, with Benjamin Freedman and Sydney Taylor; Council on Foreign Relations; Sanna Raita-Aho