The International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1] based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly conducts analyses of events spanning the Middle East, the Balkans, and global affairs. Following the U.S. presidential election on 5 November 2024, IFIMES prepared an analysis examining global expectations for the foreign policy direction of the new American administration. From the analysis "USA 2024: Donald Trump’s victory – a new global reality," we present the key insights and highlights.
With a calm, exhausted tone and in words that, for the first time, lacked the harsh bitterness marking his speeches of the past four years, Donald Trump (R) addressed a small audience in Florida on the night of 5–6 November 2024. Announcing his victory in the U.S. election, he declared, “We overcame obstacles that nobody thought possible, and it is now clear that we've achieved the most incredible political thing. Look what happened—is this crazy?”
It appears he has indeed accomplished something remarkable. According to the final electoral vote results, Trump secured 312 votes, while Kamala Harris (D) received 226. From a former president pursued by numerous legal cases that could land him in prison, who survived two assassination attempts, and who faced a strong and highly organised Democratic opponent wielding considerable power and with a larger campaign budget, along with various polls predicting he would place second in the race, Trump emerged as the victor. Donald Trump defied television networks, newspapers, and polling institutions that forecasted a close presidential race, clinching a decisive victory for his second term as President of the United States. On 5 November, he ascended to the world’s most powerful position, becoming the next President of the United States.
Trump’s victory was both decisive and impressive, with a lead of more than four million votes over his opponent, Kamala Harris. He won more than 74 million votes, compared to 70 million for his Democratic rival. The significance of Trump’s presidential victory was further amplified by the Republican Party’s success over the Democrats in the Senate, with a 53/46 margin, and in the House of Representatives, with a count of 212 to 200. This means that Republicans now have complete control over the executive, legislative, and judicial branches, allowing them to implement their policies, particularly domestically. These include providing tax cuts to stimulate the economy, imposing high tariffs on imports—especially from China—and continuing construction of the wall on the southern border with Mexico to curb illegal immigration. The economy and immigration were the main pillars of the Republican presidential and congressional campaign, with much of Trump’s rhetoric centred on connecting the two, as the economy was seen as the primary factor behind his Democratic opponent’s failure in leadership, driving voters towards the Republicans.
At 78, Trump has become the oldest candidate ever elected to the presidency, breaking the record previously held by Joseph Biden. Now the 47th U.S. president, Trump returns to office four years after serving as the 45th president, becoming only the second president in American history, after Grover Cleveland, to serve two non-consecutive terms[2] .
While the Republican campaign centred heavily on domestic policy, offering extensive details and information, many unknowns remain regarding foreign policy issues. This topic was always addressed only in passing or with rhetorical statements, such as Trump’s frequent claim that he would end the Russia-Ukraine war within 24 hours and his recent pledge to Arab-American voters in Michigan, promising “peace over there in the Middle East” but without clarifying how this would be achieved. Despite the scarcity of information and plans, some aspects of Trump’s foreign policy can be anticipated based on his previous term as president from 2016 to 2020.
The defeat of the sitting U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris by Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election is sure to be remembered and discussed for years to come. The topic is expected to generate numerous books, as well as a wealth of academic and expert discussions, with media analysts in particular examining data from various pre-election polls.
Although Harris began her campaign on a strong note, she struggled to connect with voters through her speeches, much like Hillary Clinton (D) in 2016. She spent most of her time attempting to convince voters that Trump was unfit for office but struggled to clearly explain why she herself was the better choice.
Jason Miller, Trump’s campaign manager and communications strategist, highlighted what he described as a turning point in the election race. This shift came after several weeks in which polls favoured Harris. Miller noted that Harris’s campaign truly started to unravel after her awkward response to a straightforward question from Sunny Hostin, host of “The View,” on 8 October: “Would you have done anything differently than Biden over the past four years?” Clearly flustered, Harris replied, “Nothing comes to mind,” which sent her advisers into a panic and prompted a wave of online ridicule from Trump supporters.
Harris faced an almost insurmountable challenge in trying to counter the steep decline in approval ratings and growing dissatisfaction with Biden, as roughly two-thirds of voters believed the country was heading in the wrong direction. Throughout 2024, Biden and prominent members of his party were convinced he merited a second term due to his impressive political career.
Following the 2022 U.S. Midterm elections, in which the Democrats performed far better than expected—largely credited to an anti-Trump sentiment—Biden seemed overly self-assured. When journalists asked him the day after the election what he might do differently to address voter concerns about the economy and the prevailing sense that the country was on the wrong track, he simply replied, “Nothing.”
After Biden’s prolonged delay in withdrawing his candidacy, Harris was thrust from behind the scenes into the spotlight, with only three months to promote herself. By contrast, Trump had spent eight years shaping his public image, including his four years in office, followed by four years of relentless self-promotion.
Amid rising inflation and two major wars—in Europe and the Middle East—many voters looked back nostalgically to the pre-pandemic period, which, under Trump, had experienced relative economic stability and growth. Following his decisive victory for the Republican Party’s nomination, even those who had previously opposed him resigned themselves to the reality and embraced his narrative.
Meanwhile, the public and Trump’s supporters had become accustomed to a steady stream of negative news about him, blunting the impact of many of the allegations made against him. For many, it was of little consequence that he faced 91 criminal charges, with 34 convictions and a ruling holding him liable in a sexual assault case. Instead, his derogatory labels for Harris—like “low IQ,”, “crazy Kamala,” and “Comrade Kamala”—struck a chord and captured the attention of a large segment of voters.
The political landscape in 2024 was primed for Trump’s return. Voter sentiment had shifted in ways that Harris’s campaign team didn’t fully grasp—for instance, cultural issues now held far greater importance than they had for decades, possibly even overshadowing economic concerns in their impact. In other words, the progressive issues that had permeated the Democratic Party, referred to as the “woke era”[3], proved disastrous to Harris’s campaign, particularly as Trump and the Republicans managed to frame them as a far-left agenda, disconnected from the concerns of the average voter.
As Harris lost support among certain social groups traditionally loyal to the Democrats, such as Arabs, Muslims, and young Black Americans, Trump played on exaggerated fears of migrants and focused on what he viewed as the average American’s main concern — the economy, in line with the catchphrase from President Bill Clinton’s era, “It’s the economy, stupid!”[4]. High inflation rates (9.59% in 2022, 4.06% in 2023, and 3.1% in 2024)[5] eroded the real value of income for the vast majority of citizens, especially those in rural areas outside major urban centres. Trump’s approach was rooted in isolationism, flat tariffs and fiscal adjustments, promising to revive the economy through protectionist policies reminiscent of 19th-century practices. These policies would undermine the foundations of capitalism, which has long been a driving force of the United States. He also vowed to dismantle the structure of the current American system according to the conservative “Project 2025” agenda. This message resonated with tens of millions of voters who have seen the “American Dream” of prosperity collapse, while extreme wealth accumulates in the hands of the ruling class, the expert class, and elites who control the government for their own benefit.
Trump’s triumphant return appears to be reigniting a period of uncertainty, not only within a deeply divided American society but also on the global stage. During his first term (2016–2020), his actions were hard to anticipate due to his distinct personal style, unconventional proposals, and unusual relationships with leaders like Russian President Vladimir Putin, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, and other authoritarian figures worldwide. Today, despite having had four years of experience with him in power and another four watching him prepare for a comeback, uncertainty around his foreign policy prevails. There’s little doubt that many outside the United States—from Beijing and Moscow to Brussels (EU), Tehran, and Tel Aviv—are attempting to anticipate the shape of the new administration’s policies and the extent to which it might seek to change the rules of engagement between the United States and the rest of the world. What is clear is that Trump does not trust the current state administration managing U.S. interests and will appoint a cadre of loyal supporters to influential positions, individuals who will act on his whims without regard for the consequences.
When American voters chose Trump for president in 2016, U.S. allies responded with various “hedging strategies”[6] for self-protection. This time, however, it seems they are in a far weaker position than they were a decade ago.
Allies are likely to try to curry favour with him, offering concessions as a means of survival much as they did during his first term. Trump is expected to continue and expand his strategy of leveraging pressure on U.S. allies through diplomacy—a strategy that, at best, will yield superficial cooperation while leaving structural issues unaddressed.
The European Union (EU) faces the possibility that Trump will impose a set of additional taxes and tariffs on European exports to the U.S., a campaign promise that could threaten the already fragile European economy, strained by recession and inflation. Rather than issuing threats of counter-tariffs, the EU is now attempting to appease Trump by proposing certain trade agreements that might dissuade him from introducing the anticipated duties. It is unclear how China might respond to such a policy, as Trump may opt for a combination of tariffs and military posturing rather than direct conflict, given the interdependence of the Chinese and American economies.
On the other hand, Trump has publicly criticised President Joseph Biden’s administration’s policy on Ukraine, pledging to push for an end to the war there immediately following his election—even before taking office on 20 January of the coming year.
The president has expressed doubts about the necessity of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which has provided security for America’s allies since the end of World War II, preferring instead that they pay for the costs of American protection.
The return of former U.S. President Donald Trump to the White House could signal tougher enforcement of American oil sanctions against Iran, potentially reducing global supply and introducing geopolitical risks by challenging China, Iran’s largest oil importer.
Tough sanctions on Iran, a member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), could drive up global oil prices. However, this situation might be mitigated by other Trump measures, such as promoting domestic oil production, imposing tariffs on China to curb its economic activities, or softening relations with Russia, potentially allowing for increased Russian crude oil shipments. A return to Trump’s “maximum pressure” policy on Iran might cut Iranian crude oil exports by one million barrels a day. This could be implemented relatively quickly and without additional legislation, merely through the enforcement of existing sanctions. A tougher stance on Iran also translates to indirect but strict measures aimed at China, which does not recognise U.S. sanctions and remains the largest importer of Iranian oil. Trump has threatened to act on his campaign promises by imposing sweeping tariffs on Chinese imports to shield American industry, with rates as high as 60%.
In response, China might deepen its engagement with the BRICS bloc, which aims to become an Eastern alternative to the Western G7. China may also begin reducing its reliance on the dollar in oil and other commodity transactions. Trump is aware that such an aggressive sanctions policy poses a serious risk to the dollar’s dominance as the global reserve currency.
On 5 September 2024, at the Economic Club of New York, Trump discussed the potential risks that sanctions pose to the dominance of the U.S. dollar. He stated, "So I use sanctions very powerfully against countries that deserve it, and then I take them off. Because look, you’re losing Iran, you’re losing Russia." He further elaborated, "I was a user of sanctions, but I put them on and take them off as quickly as possible because, ultimately, it kills your dollar and it kills everything the dollar represents."[7]
China and Iran have created a trading system that relies mostly on the Chinese yuan and a network of intermediaries to bypass the dollar and American regulators, complicating the enforcement of sanctions.
Trump may also ease sanctions on Russia’s energy sector, which Western nations imposed in response to Russia’s intervention in Ukraine. He is expected to gradually lift all sanctions on Russia’s oil industry.
During his election campaign, Trump took a calmer and more pragmatic tone when discussing the conflicts in Gaza and Lebanon and the broader Middle East situation, in contrast to the Democratic camp, whose positions on various issues appeared vague or confusing, especially regarding the Palestinian question, pro-Iranian militias in Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq, as well as relations with Afghanistan.
Judging by his first term in office, it is expected that President Trump will likely prioritise the Middle East once again. In his first term, Trump made history by choosing Saudi Arabia as his first foreign visit and recognising Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. On the Palestinian issue, he sought to mediate the “deal of the century”[8] between Israelis and Palestinians and reinforced Israel’s regional ties with some Arab nations, such as the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan, where diplomatic relations were established.
Regarding his stance toward the current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, prominent Israeli economist and political advisor Eran Yashiv believes that Trump will aim to remove Netanyahu from power at the first opportunity, despite their prior friendship. According to Yashiv, Trump is likely to work toward Netanyahu’s ouster sooner or later.
According to this Israeli researcher, Trump’s stance is driven by two economic motives. First, he feels that Netanyahu’s policies come at a high price. Israel received roughly $18 billion in U.S. military aid last year, and Trump has expressed his reluctance to spend American funds either on Ukraine or Israel, stating that continued financial commitments in the Middle East are not on the agenda. The second reason is his desire for Israel to reach an agreement with Saudi Arabia under the 2020 Abraham Accords[9], with Saudi Arabia’s prerequisite for such a deal being the establishment of a Palestinian state. Netanyahu and his right-wing allies oppose this, which would prompt the Saudis to demand Netanyahu’s removal.
Some analysts describe Netanyahu’s relationship with Trump as complicated. Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli diplomat in New York and writer, believes that Netanyahu is somewhat wary of Trump, “He thinks he can manipulate him, but is afraid that if Trump realises this, he could get very angry—unlike Biden, who, for some reason, never pressured him or resisted his manipulations.” There is no doubt that the Middle East will be a focal point for the new U.S. administration.
Donald Trump’s electoral victory heralds a wave of sudden shifts in U.S. foreign policy. The newly elected president is expected to bring back the defining features of his first term: a trade war with China, deep scepticism—bordering on hostility—toward multilateralism, an affinity for powerful leaders, a style that defies diplomatic norms and standards, and an inclination for improvisational posts on his Truth Social platform. Trump’s advisors say, “His ‘peace through strength’ approach is exactly what the country needs in this critical moment.”
Trump has been given a mandate by the American people to change the course of U.S. foreign policy, and there is little doubt that this time he feels more assured in pursuing his bold and sometimes volatile ambitions. With his unique vision and unconventional style, Trump may well achieve a great deal. However, if he succeeds in restoring the United States to “greatness,” true to his slogan “Make America Great Again,” this greatness will inevitably come at a high cost to international relations. Until he officially takes the keys to the White House early next year, the rest of the world can only wait in apprehension, anticipation, and patience.
Ljubljana/Washington/Brussels, 14 November 2024
[1] IFIMES – International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has a special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN in New York since 2018, and it is the publisher of the international scientific journal "European Perspectives.", link: https://www.europeanperspectives.org/en
[2] Stephen Grover Cleveland (18 March 1837 – 24 June 1908) served as the 22nd and 24th President of the United States, holding office from 1885 to 1889 and again from 1893 to 1897. Cleveland was the first person to be elected to two non-consecutive presidential terms.
[3] Beginning in the 2010s, the term began to be used to signify a broader awareness of social inequalities such as racial injustice, sexism, and the denial of LGBT rights. Available at: www.vox.com/culture/21437879/stay-woke-wokeness-history-origin-evolution-controversy.
[4] “The economy, stupid” is a phrase coined by Jim Carville in 1992. It is often quoted from Carville’s televised quip as “It’s the economy, stupid.” Carville was the strategist behind Bill Clinton’s successful 1992 U.S. presidential campaign against then-President George H. W. Bush. Available at: www.nytimes.com/1992/10/31/us/1992-campaign-democrats-clinton-bush-compete-be-champion-change-democrat-fights.html
[5] The current inflation rates in the U.S. 2000-2024. Available at: www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/#google_vignette
[6] Hedging strategies are a comprehensive foreign policy approach that mixes competitive and cooperative approaches to manage competing national interests during uncertain conditions over the future distribution of power. Available at: www.allazimuth.com/2024/05/14/theorising-the-hedging-strategy-national-interests-objectives-and-mixed-foreign-policy-instruments/
[7] Trump’s economic address in New York, link: https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/4863990-trump-economic-agenda-elon-musk-commission-immigration-crackdown-tariffs/
[8] Peace to Prosperity . A Vision to Improve the Lives of the Palestinian and Israeli People, link: https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/peacetoprosperity/
[9] The Abraham Accords Declaration, link: www.state.gov/the-abraham-accords/
