Trump is bad news for NATO. 

He damaged it in his first term and again during his campaign when he repeatedly threatened to either withdraw from the alliance or refuse to defend members that failed to meet the target of defence spending of at least two percent of GDP.

“We have been treated badly,” he told a Wisconsin election rally in September, “so badly, mostly by our allies. Our allies treat us actually worse than our so-called enemies. In the military, we protect them, and then they screw us on trade. We’re not going to let it happen anymore.”

Trump has threatened tariffs of up to 20 percent on EU and British goods. The clear implication is that if they want those tariffs reduced or eliminated then Europe’s NATO members will have to accept to spend more on defence which will allow the US to reduce its commitment. It is called transactional diplomacy.

Of course, Trump’s policy does not take into account that by beggaring his allies he also reduces their ability to spend more on defence.

Trump’s policy towards NATO is unpopular with the wider American public. More than 70 percent say they are enthusiastic supporters of the Alliance. This position was mirrored in July 2023 when—in a rare moment bipartisanship—Congress passed legislation which required US withdrawal from NATO to be approved by a two-thirds majority of the Senate, or through legislation which gives Congress a bigger say in overseeing alliances. The legislation was co-sponsored by Marco Rubio who has been tipped for the job of Trump’s Secretary of State.

The legislation, however, does not prevent Trump from closing bases, withdrawing troops or stopping investment or expenditure. Under the constitution, the president has wide powers to make and break treaties and order troops to occupy or withdraw from every part of the world. Trump, if he wanted, could hollow-out America’s commitment to defend Europe and leave America a semi-detached member of the alliance.

So European members of NATO remain NATO. But they sit easy compared to Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky is terrified

The election of Donald Trump raises the real possibility that his country’s lifeline of American military aid will come to a shuddering halt and push Ukraine under the heel of the Russian boot.

Trump has repeatedly opposed the economic drain of aid to Ukraine. He has added that if elected he would end the Ukraine war “in a day.”

The president-elect refuses to go into specifics, but there was a possible hint in a paper written in May by two of Trump’s former security advisers, General Keith Kellogg and Fred Fleitz.

They suggested that a Trump administration could propose immediate peace talks and a ceasefire based on current military positions. Ukraine would maintain its claim to territories currently occupied by Russia, leaving open the possibility of reunification at a later date. NATO membership—and possibly EU membership as well—would be taken off the table and pushed into an unknown future.

If Ukraine refused the American proposal then the Trump Administration would decrease American military aid. If Russia refused then the US would increase military aid to Ukraine.

Trump’s election could not have come at a worse time for Zelensky. The German government of Olof Scholz is on the verge of collapse. Europeans cannot continue the necessary support on their own and everyone is worried about the new international dimension created by the insertion of 10,000 North Korean troops.

At the same time the war on the ground is not going well. The Russians advance slowly but surely. They recently took the mining town of Selydove.

President Zelensky has ordered the call-up of 160,000 young men over the next three months, which has sent thousands into hiding. Without American support, Ukraine cannot withstand the Russian military steamroller.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is cock-a-hoop

His man is back in the White House. BUT the Trump-Netanyahu bromance is unlikely to be quite as warm the second time around.

But let’s first look at the upside for the Israeli leader. An American president who has himself ridden roughshod over the law to return to the White House will almost certainly turn a blind eye to Netanyahu’s illiberal politics.

So, a Trump Administration is unlikely to complain about Netanyahu’s efforts to rein in the Israeli Supreme Court by packing it with his backers. Netanyahu can also rest easy about the multiple indictments he is facing knowing that the man in the White House is himself a convicted felon who is thumbing his nose at the law by organising the dismissal of other charges against him.

As for the West Bank and Gaza. In January 2020 Trump unveiled his “Peace to Prosperity” plan which called for Israeli annexation of 30 percent of the West Bank. The plan was back-burnered when Biden won the presidency. Trump will probably also back any plans for future Israeli control of Gaza and he has been dismissive of the two-state solution.

Now the downside for Netanyahu. For a start, there is the personal level. Trump places a high premium on loyalty and was angered when Netanyahu congratulated Biden when he was challenging the election result.

Next, Trump boasts that he kept America out of foreign wars and, in fact he reduced troop levels in the Middle East and negotiated the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Trump, however—like President Biden—is worried that what started in Gaza on October 7 is spinning out of control.

Trump is likely therefore to pressure Netanyahu to wrap up Gaza, end the fighting with Hezbollah and back off threats against Iran. He accepts that this may mean more Gazan deaths in the short-term, but a few more dead bodies would—in Trump’s play book– be worth avoiding American entanglement and threatens to pull America into the vortex.

Netanyahu’s ultimate hope is a US-Israeli alliance to attack Iran. That is unlikely under Trump. But gaining a big chunk of the West Bank is a not too bad consolation prize.

Taiwanese President William Lai is worried

As far as Taiwan is concerned, Donald Trump, is a mountain of conflicting messages and the Chinese, whether in Beijing or Taipei, hate uncertainty.

Back in 2016, President-elect Trump caused delight in Taipei and worry in Beijing and everywhere else when one of Trump’s first moves was to phone Lai’s predecessor Tsai Ing-wen.

Since then he has paid homage to the traditional policy of US support for Taiwan. But at the same time, Trump’s America First policy combined with his penchant for transactional diplomacy and his unpredictability has raised the possibility that Taiwan could become a bargaining chip between Washington and Beijing.

A specific cause for concern is Trump’s call that Taipei increase defence spending to ten percent of its GDP with the bulk of the money going to America for its continuing support. This would be $79 billion a year and would mean that Taiwanese defense spending on a per capita basis would be the highest in the world at $3,400 per person per annum.

Meanwhile, China’s Xi Jinping continues to increase the pressure on what he called the “Taiwan Province of the People’s Republic of China.” During the August 2022 visit to Taiwan by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, the Chinese leader ordered the biggest ever military exercises ever around the disputed island. The blatant warning has been repeated several times along with the statement that “reunification” is “inevitable” and the military solution is very much on the cards.

* Tom Arms is foreign editor of Liberal Democrat Voice. He also contributes to “The New World” magazine and lectures on world affairs. He is the author of “America Made in Britain,” two editions of “The Encyclopaedia of the Cold War” and “The Falklands Crisis.”