The outcome of the 2024 US presidential election will affect the security of Europeans in a way that is difficult to predict.
– Trump’s re-election as president is a realistic risk, says François Heisbourg.
Heisbourg is a respected French security and defense policy expert and advisor.
If Donald Trump to win the election, he would likely reduce aid to Ukraine and direct US defense resources away from Europe. It could mean that Europe would have to cope with Russia without US support.
According to the researcher, Europe must react to the risk already now. We need to put more money into weapons and discuss the European countries’ own nuclear weapons.
When Donald Trump was the president of the United States, he made a mess in NATO as well. Trump demanded other countries to contribute more to NATO’s defense spending and unnerved the leaders of other countries with his criticism and blunt style.
However, Trump increased US military power in Europe and, for example, the relationship between Finland and the US deepened.
The fear that Trump could withdraw his support from Europe or the United States from NATO remained smoldering in Europe.
Joe Biden’s term returned the relationship to normal, but the concern is here again.
Trump could withdraw his military support from Ukraine
Until now, the United States has been by far the biggest supporter of Ukraine militarily.
During the presidential elections in the United States, the discussion about whether support for Ukraine could be reduced has become more widespread. Ukraine policy is also related to the security of the rest of Europe.
The longer-term goals of the United States lie elsewhere. The country has concerns and interests in the Indo-Pacific region.
If a lot of resources are tied up in Ukraine, it is difficult to realize other goals.
Trump might think that the United States will leave Ukraine to the Europeans.
– The probability that Trump as president would reduce or stop handing over weapons to Ukraine is very high, says Heisbourg.
Trump rarely does strategic analyses, but this is one of them, Heisbourg says.
If the US stops supporting Ukraine, European countries will have to decide what to do. The solution is impossible to know.
– I can say with certainty that the reaction of Poland, the Baltic countries and Finland would be extremely sharp, but elsewhere the discussion would be more open.
The end of the war in Ukraine is not in sight so far.
Until a new US president is elected, Putin hardly wants to discuss ending the war. That is why the upcoming US elections are already having an impact politically and militarily.
The US presidential elections are causing concern among decision-makers and researchers across Europe.
– Everyone is constantly thinking about this, says a senior researcher at the Norwegian Foreign Policy Institute Karsten Friis.
If the US no longer supports Ukraine, this could affect the security of the countries on the eastern edge of NATO.
– If the United States signals that it does not support the Baltics and Finland, Russia would test what it means. And this would be a dangerous situation, says Friis.
When Trump was president the last time, there was talk of “adults in the room”. This meant advisers who moderated Trump and did their best to keep politics from being so fast-paced.
– Next time Trump will have loyal employees with him, says Karsten Friis.
Europe must follow the example of Poland
Europe should not wait to see what Trump will do when he becomes president, says Heisbourg.
There are two things that Europe needs to work on. First of all, we need to follow the example of Poland.
Poland spends almost four percent of its total production on defense.
A few countries have recently increased their defense budgets. Sweden just announced a 30 percent increase, but the country starts from a very low level compared to Finland. France will raise its own by 30 percent in seven years.
NATO’s lower limit is two percent of total production, but the vast majority of countries do not reach it.
It is clear that before long the United States will shift its attention from Europe to the Indo-Pacific region.
If Trump were to do this right away, it would be really dangerous for Europe, says Heisbourg.
Nuclear weapons should be discussed in fair weather
According to Heisbourg, Europe, on the other hand, needs to discuss how it strengthens its nuclear deterrence.
Britain and France have their own nuclear weapons, but the biggest deterrent in NATO is the armed force of the United States and the nuclear weapons it has placed in Europe.
If the United States moves its nuclear weapons away from Europe, Britain and France will have to organize their weapons differently than now, the researcher suggests.
Heisbourg says that France would be ready to discuss the matter, but its European partners do not seem at all interested.
If Trump were to leave an active NATO policy, chaos would ensue, and it would not be the right time for a nuclear weapons discussion, Heisbourg states.
But would the Europeans’ weapons be enough of a deterrent? NATO’s deterrence is mainly based on the military power of the United States and its nuclear weapons.
Even if France promised to protect the country threatened by Russia with its nuclear weapons, it would hardly be effective against Russia. Heisbourg illustrates with an example: “Very nice, French, but we don’t believe you, because we have 5,000 nuclear weapons and you only have 300”.
– Russia considers itself a nuclear weapons superpower and is unfortunately right. France is not a nuclear power.
According to Heisbourg, right now it is difficult to see what will happen in the near future.
The French expert and former diplomat considers Trump’s election a realistic risk. If the choice is a risk, should we be afraid?
– Yes, of course. It is a great opportunity for Putin.
The United States could become a sleeping NATO country
The mutual trust between the United States and NATO countries melted into a crisis during Trump’s previous term. The main reason for the crisis was that Trump did not support the military alliance. That’s what the meritorious ones said US researchers.
According to the researchers, Trump was the first president who did not believe that NATO brings absolute security to Americans and the United States.
In the United States, politicians from far and wide have presented a law recommended by researchers that would prevent the president from withdrawing the United States from NATO without Senate approval.
However, the initiative has not progressed.
– The majority of both parties are in favor of NATO, professor of North American studies Benita Heiskanen Reminds me of the University of Turku.
In Heiskanen’s opinion, the departure talks from NATO are mainly seeking attention and loose points.
Could the US leave NATO?
It was feared that Trump would withdraw the United States from NATO at the 2018 NATO meeting. The confusion was resolved in an extra meeting in the middle of the summit.
Trump’s former security policy adviser John Bolton claimed in his book in 2020 that at the time he had to persuade Trump not to withdraw the United States from NATO.
Bolton also told For Washington Post 2022 that he believed that if Trump had been re-elected in 2020, he would have pulled the US out of NATO.
Trump has subsequently explained his actions differently. He claimed last year, that NATO would no longer existif he had not required other members to increase their funding.
Benita Heiskanen believes that the separation talks were a solution that arose in the situation.
– He has interpreted things with a bit of a businessman’s attitude, rather in terms of politics than ideology. “Why do they pay less than us, why should we solve other people’s problems, let them take care of their own”, describes Heiskanen.
You can leave NATO. If a member country decides to leave, it can notify the US government and inform the governments of other countries. The separation will take effect one year from now.
But if Trump decided to withdraw the United States from NATO, a political storm would erupt.
That’s why it would be easier to just leave NATO’s promised obligations unfulfilled and become a dormant member, security policy expert Heisbourg estimates.
NATO can function without the United States being actively involved, says Heisbourg.
An example of this is from 2011, when NATO operated in Libya against the regime of Muammar Gaddafi. The United States withdrew from the operation, but France and Britain continued it with others willing.
Politically, the situation is different now. The war in Ukraine directly affects European security, unlike Libya in the past, Heisbourg points out.
What thoughts does the story evoke? You can discuss the topic on 29.9. until 11 p.m