The 2024 U.S. presidential election has captured the world’s attention, but the outcome holds particularly profound implications for Europe. What happens in the U.S. on Election Day will reverberate across the Atlantic, shaping Europe’s security, and economic stability, and place within a shifting global order. The race between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris offers starkly different visions for America’s future, and by extension, its relationship with Europe. While Trump and Harris represent the Republican and Democratic parties’ contrasting platforms, the election is about more than just partisan rhetoric. European leaders are bracing for either a continuation of U.S. support for multilateralism and collective security under Harris, or a potential return to Trump’s “America First” doctrine, which during his first term left Europe questioning the reliability of the transatlantic alliance.
Historically, the Republicans and Democrats have pursued distinct approaches to foreign policy. The Democrats, especially in the post-World War II era, have been staunch advocates for multilateralism and maintaining strong international alliances. Presidents like Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, and Barack Obama built and sustained alliances such as NATO, viewing them as essential to both American and global security. Harris, as the Democratic nominee, represents this continuation of Biden’s commitment to NATO and European partnerships. Her vision for Europe is rooted in shared values—democracy, collective security, and economic cooperation. She sees the United States’ role as pivotal in upholding these principles and maintaining stability in the face of rising authoritarianism, particularly from Russia and China.
On the contrary, Trump’s first term marked a dramatic departure from this cooperative tradition. His “America First” policy, which was characterized by a skepticism of international commitments and a focus on U.S. sovereignty, rattled Europe. Trump’s criticisms of NATO—his claims that Europe was not contributing enough to its own defense—introduced a sense of instability among European allies who had long depended on U.S. leadership. Trump’s transactional approach to foreign relations left many in Europe wondering about the future of the transatlantic alliance. A second Trump term could further destabilize NATO, particularly as European nations confront the ongoing threat posed by Russia’s challenging posture in Ukraine.
The war in Ukraine is arguably the most immediate concern for Europe in the 2024 election. Since the Russian invasion in 2022, the U.S., under Biden, has been one of the primary supporters of Ukraine, providing both military aid and rallying international sanctions against Moscow. Harris has made it clear that she intends to maintain, if not strengthen, this support. For Harris, the Ukraine conflict is not merely a regional issue; it is a battleground for democracy, a symbol of the broader struggle between democratic ideals and authoritarian expansionism. She sees Ukraine as a critical test of the West’s commitment to uphold the international order, and a Harris administration would continue to provide the resources and diplomatic backing that Ukraine needs to resist Russian aggression.
However, Trump’s stance on Ukraine is far more unpredictable. Throughout his political career, Trump has shown a willingness to engage with adversaries, including Russia, even at the expense of longstanding U.S. allies. His reluctance to fully commit to supporting Ukraine, combined with past efforts to withhold military aid, raises concerns among European leaders that a second Trump term could see the U.S. reduce its involvement in the conflict. Trump has suggested that he could negotiate a peace deal with Russia that might appeal to some European states struggling under the economic and energy crises exacerbated by the war. The sanctions on Russia have driven up energy prices across Europe, which has long been dependent on Russian gas. These European leaders, quietly balancing their economic interests with their support for Ukraine, may find Trump’s call for peace negotiations appealing if it offers a path to revive trade and stabilize energy markets, even if it involves difficult compromises.
Beyond Ukraine, the U.S. election will also have far-reaching consequences for U.S.-China relations, and by extension, Europe’s own approach to Beijing. During his first term, Trump’s confrontational stance towards China included tariffs, trade wars, and efforts to decouple U.S. industries from Chinese supply chains. His hardline approach was seen by some in Europe as a necessary counter to China’s growing economic and military power. However, it also caused disruptions in global trade, negatively impacting European economies that rely heavily on trade with both the U.S. and China. A second Trump term could escalate this economic conflict, leaving Europe in a difficult position, and forcing it to navigate its economic ties with China while maintaining its strategic alliance with the United States.
Kamala Harris, while critical of China’s human rights abuses and territorial ambitions, is expected to adopt a more nuanced approach. Her platform suggests that she would manage competition with China through diplomacy and multilateral cooperation, rather than outright confrontation. This is likely to resonate more with European leaders, who prefer balanced engagement with China rather than being drawn into an intensifying trade war. Harris’s strategy would allow Europe to continue its economic ties with China while still addressing shared security concerns through global forums, reflecting a more pragmatic approach to balancing economic interests with geopolitical realities.
The U.S. election will also significantly affect Europe in terms of trade and technology. Trump’s protectionist policies during his first term, including tariffs on European goods like steel and aluminum, strained transatlantic trade relations. His administration’s unilateral approach to trade and its emphasis on nationalistic economic policies upended the global economic order, and a second Trump term could reignite economic tensions between the U.S. and Europe. This would particularly affect sectors like technology, where Europe’s efforts to regulate data privacy and digital markets have challenged U.S. dominance.
Conversely, Harris is expected to pursue a more cooperative approach to trade with Europe. Democrats have traditionally supported free trade agreements, focusing on labor rights, environmental standards, and mutual economic benefits. Harris’s platform suggests she would work to rebuild economic bridges with Europe, especially around shared priorities such as digital innovation and climate change mitigation. New trade agreements under a Harris administration could strengthen the transatlantic economic partnership, helping both regions navigate the complex challenges of global competition and technological disruption.
The 2024 U.S. election will also have significant implications for Europe’s approach to global challenges like climate change. Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement during his first term shocked European leaders, who have positioned Europe as a global leader in the fight against climate change. Trump’s emphasis on deregulation and support for the fossil fuel industry runs counter to Europe’s green energy ambitions. A second Trump term would likely see the U.S. further retreat from international climate commitments, complicating Europe’s efforts to meet its own environmental goals. However, Harris has pledged to re-enter the Paris Agreement and work closely with Europe on clean energy initiatives. Her vision for U.S.-Europe cooperation on climate action aligns with the broader Democratic commitment to tackling global warming through international collaboration. A Harris presidency would provide Europe with a strong partner in advancing ambitious climate policies, helping drive the global transition to renewable energy. It is interesting to observe the outcome of this election that will shape Europe’s security, economy, and role in the global order for years to come. Whether Trump or Harris prevails, European leaders will need to navigate an increasingly polarized world, balancing their ideals with the practical realities of securing their own interests in an uncertain future.
Dr. Gul.i.Ayesha Bhatti
The writer is a current affairs analyst and faculty member at the National University of Science and Technology (NUST), Islamabad. She can be reached at guleayeshabhatti@gmail.com