There is no doubt that both allies and enemies of the United States are closely following recent events to decipher how the presidential elections will play out and who will have the best chances of winning the White House.
Now that President Joe Biden has given up on a second term, Democrats hope to have a better chance of preventing Republican Donald Trump from being elected. A circumstance that would radically change the rules of the national and international game.
A second Trump presidency is raising anxiety among allies, for whom the most pressing question is: Will the United States continue to be an active participant or will it let others save the world from a global war?
Trump’s remarks seemed to suggest that he remains critical of NATO, that Taiwan should spend more to deter an attack from mainland China and that Ukraine should cede territory lost to Russian invaders in exchange for a ceasefire and give up any ambition to join the Western alliance.
At first glance, if the Trumpist vision were implemented, it would represent one of the most dramatic shifts in American foreign policy in modern times.
It’s true that Trump has a history of unexpected turns — one need only recall his surprise, if unsuccessful, meeting with Kim Jong Un, the leader of North Korea, when in an unprecedented move he became the first sitting American president to cross the 1953 armistice line separating North and South Korea, meeting with Kim for about 50 minutes.
The one issue on which he demonstrated complete consistency, however, was when he demanded that allies “play fair” and spend more on defense. While during his first term (2017 and 2021), he was thinking primarily of NATO, he is now broadening his mantra to encompass Taiwan, South Korea, Japan and anywhere else where U.S. taxpayer dollars are spent, to deter aggression from regional adversaries.
Taiwan is a good example.
In a recent interview with Bloomberg, Trump said it was time for Taiwan to spend more to defend itself against the growing threat posed by China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA), and that Taipei should reimburse the United States for the enormous cost of maintaining a deterrent presence in the region.
When he pointed out that Taiwan was 6,500 miles from the United States and only 68 miles from China, it was interpreted to mean that the United States would not necessarily have to come to the island’s defense if the PLA invaded it.
Under President Biden, the long-standing strategic ambiguity about Washington’s response if China were to occupy Taiwan was somewhat less hesitant as Biden assured aid to Taiwan, presumably with aircraft carriers, anti-ship missiles and the U.S. Marine Corps in mind.
Although he has promised to intervene, given his past approach to China on trade and the PLA’s expansionist efforts in the South China Sea, he seems unlikely to allow Beijing to seize Taiwan. Moreover, the Republican Party hierarchy favors Taiwan.
It all comes down to money, meaning that if he were to authorize the military defense of Taiwan against a possible Chinese attack, he would certainly expect to be compensated for the cost.
Trump has sent the same message to South Korea and Japan, where there are currently a combined total of about 82,000 US troops and for which he requires more money to offset the burden of protecting these allies from China and North Korea.
This greater distribution comes at a higher price for Europe.
In 2021, the old continent was concerned about Trump’s threat to withdraw the United States from NATO.
Although the alarm was short-lived, Trump criticized NATO members for not contributing the required 2%, considering it unfair that the United States, despite being a military superpower, had to spend more, in fact, much more than the rest of the Alliance combined.
NATO’s European members will now spend a combined $380 billion on defence, equivalent to 2% of their GDP, according to Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, but he admitted that “despite progress, some allies still have a long way to go”.
