Trump vs Harris: Whoever Wins, the UK’s Role in Europe Will be Vital

The upcoming US presidential election on 5 November – just over 100 days from now – will be about as consequential as they get for the US and its allies, especially the UK. If former President Donald Trump prevails, as some polls suggest, we can expect a return to American isolationism, cosying up to authoritarian leaders, erratic foreign policy decisions with frequent U-turns, and a revolving door of senior officials as they are summarily dismissed for disagreeing with Trump or not paying adequate homage to him. Strategies may be produced but – like last time – they are more likely to gather digital dust than be implemented.

If Vice-President Kamala Harris prevails in early November, it would be unprecedented – and not just because of the ‘firsts’ she would represent (woman/woman of colour). Critically, it would be because she had successfully campaigned in an incredibly short period of time (even if shorter election cycles, or ‘snap elections’, are normal for many other countries, including the UK). 

Many of us do not really know who Kamala Harris is, which is not surprising for a US vice-president. Very few ‘Veeps’ play a prominent role, and when they are tasked with leading on an issue, it is often the thorny and undesirable ones (such as immigration reform in her case). That being said, we will be learning a lot about her in the coming weeks, as her campaign goes into hyperdrive. Vast sums have already been raised – $81 million in the first day alone – and 60,000 volunteers have enlisted. Various advocacy groups, such as Emily’s List, have also sprung into action. The truncated campaign timeframe should work in her favour, especially in the run-up to and in the immediate aftermath of the Democratic Convention in Chicago from 19–22 August. 

Given that Harris has been enrolled for the last four years in the most extensive political apprenticeship programme ever designed, learning from one of the most experienced US foreign policy presidents, we can assume her foreign policy direction would in most cases represent a continuation of the current path. So, how might Trump and Harris differ on three of the big foreign policy issues, and what might these mean for the UK?

On Ukraine, one could expect highly divergent policies. Both Trump and his Vice-Presidential candidate, JD Vance, have been more than vocal about their desire to cut off US military assistance to Kyiv. Trump would also try to force Ukraine to cede some of its territory that is currently occupied by Russia, though it is far from certain that Ukraine would agree to do this. Conversely, if Harris wins, we can expect continued support for Ukraine, though not without significant challenges – especially if the Democratic Party loses control of the Senate, which is a strong possibility. 

In this regard, the new UK government’s shift toward a more Europe-friendly stance could not have come at a more opportune time. In President Joe Biden’s first in-person meeting with Prime Minister Keir Starmer on 10 July, on the margins of the NATO summit, the president encouraged Starmer to strengthen ties with Europe, in the manner of the ‘gatekeeper’ role the UK played before Brexit. Biden described the UK as the ‘transatlantic knot’ for the connective role it plays, including with NATO. 

For the UK, closer ties with Europe will be necessary in either scenario. If Trump wins, the UK will not be able to rely on the US for support, and not just with respect to Ukraine. Closer ties and greater efficiencies on defence and security for the UK and Europe will be critical. If Harris wins, she will still have trouble getting funding for Ukraine approved in a divided Congress, just as we saw this past year with Biden’s efforts. In both cases, the UK and Europe will have to act, and possibly without the US at their side.

On China, the policies of a Trump or a Harris administration would likely follow the current trajectory. The differences would be more about style than substance. Indeed, the Chinese also do not anticipate a change in policy. Tariffs and what the Chinese describe as ‘tech containment’ will continue. The nuance will be in the ways that the relationship is managed, with a Harris administration continuing Biden’s more predictable approach of ‘cautious engagement’ or ‘engagement with caveats’, while Trump would likely vacillate between conciliation and belligerence, as we saw last time.

For the third key issue, the conflict in Gaza, the US is likely to remain a firm supporter of Israel regardless of who wins the election. However, a Harris administration would make more of an effort towards a two-state solution than Trump might. Let’s not forget, Trump not only unilaterally moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, against the wishes of allies and Palestinians, but he also marginalised the Palestinians when finalising the Abraham Accords. 

This US presidential campaign has been extraordinary and unpredictable in so many ways, with the last few months producing numerous surprises. In the mid-1960s, then-UK Prime Minister Harold Wilson famously quipped that a ‘week is a long time in politics’. In today’s deeply interconnected TikTok world, the time it takes to refresh your browser can seem like a long time in politics. As we think about the various scenarios that could emerge from the US election, we shouldn’t rule out more shockwaves to come.

The views expressed in this Commentary are the author’s, and do not represent those of RUSI or any other institution.

Have an idea for a Commentary you’d like to write for us? Send a short pitch to commentaries@rusi.org and we’ll get back to you if it fits into our research interests. Full guidelines for contributors can be found here.