Jörg Rockol is president of the European School of Management and Technology, Berlin.
Too close to call and too hard to predict.
With two months to go until the US presidential election in November, it’s already fair to say that this race has given us a more dramatic turn than any other in recent decades.
the following Assassination attempt on former President Donald TrumpHis victory seemed certain. Then, then President Joe Biden’s withdrawal announcementThe momentum shifted, with Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris raising $200 million in just the next week. July brought in a total of $310 million — more than doubling the already enormous amount Trump raised that month. And now, she has started Elections ahead in three key battleground states Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.
In light of all this, it would not be surprising if the race took another unexpected turn, making it more difficult to predict any kind of outcome and thus prepare for what lies ahead. Given the considerable global importance and influence of the race, this need for preparation was felt almost worldwide – although perhaps most acutely in Europe during this time of the war. And the significant differences between the two candidates, and their consequent impact on the continent’s security and prosperity, are undeniable.
It is often overlooked, however, that large-scale strategic changes in US politics are underway regardless of election results, or rather – one could argue – that Trump is less the driver of these changes and more their symptom. And this should change Europe’s strategic response.
Europe should not look at the election result like a rabbit on a snake, hoping for an apparently favorable outcome. Instead, it must independently and quickly define and work toward its own goals regardless of the outcome—even more so given its unpredictability.
As it stands, the US is in the midst of shifting its focus increasingly to the Indo-Pacific region, independent of its strong support for Ukraine and the planned return of long-range US missiles to Europe. It’s a process that began under former President Barack Obama — the “pivot to Asia” and “rebalance” — and continued under Trump.
Today, the Biden administration sees China as the biggest and most pervasive challenge to American security. As a result, China will remain America’s main competitor for the foreseeable future, receiving commensurate attention. and the US Demands that other parts of the world, including Europe, choose sides in this competition will only grow louder, possibly forcing the EU to make tough decisions.
In addition, Washington’s economic policy was also changing, most notably with the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The tariffs on steel and aluminum introduced by the Trump administration were not a single exception to the rules-based order. And the Biden administration’s decision not to extend generous rebates to European manufacturers for electric vehicles in the U.S. highlights the strain on transatlantic cooperation.
From what we know of Harris’s economic policies at this point, this approach is unlikely to change if she becomes president. So, no matter the outcome of the election, Europe and the US There is a real risk of increased competition between, both sides trying to attract investment through protectionist instruments, jeopardizing the benefits of free trade and investment.
Given these developments now, they will have several important implications for Europe:
First, the EU should increase its spending on security and defence. This would not only strengthen Europe’s own capabilities, but it would also increase the likelihood of US support in times of crisis, countering the repeated charge of “European free-riders”. This strengthening should include greater cooperation between several European countries with significant defense industries, creating a European system that can benefit the civilian sector through innovation and economic growth.
Second, Europe needs larger European capital markets, as well as strengthening the euro as a global reserve currency. This will improve the financing of innovation and growth in Europe, while increasing the continent’s weight in international capital markets, improving its independence and strategic independence. Europe does not have a capital problem, but a capital allocation problem. And the integration of European capital markets would be a great step to overcome this and allow businesses to start and scale.
Finally, Europe needs comprehensive trade agreements. Even early critics of the failed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement realized its potential merits and regretted their initial reservations when the Trump administration launched its tariffs on steel and aluminum. This mistake must not be repeated with other parts of the world, and the Mercosur agreement will be an important step forward in the right direction.
The US is in many ways Europe’s most important ally – especially through NATO. Therefore, Europe’s relations with China and America cannot be the same. However, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election, Europe’s interests are not entirely aligned with Washington’s. It is finally time to recognize this and draw the right conclusions.
Post How Europe should react to the US presidential elections appeared first Politico.