Who would be better for Europe and NATO?
Hussain Muhammad Imam
The Institute of Geo-economics claims that 2024 is an “election year” for Bangladesh, India, Taiwan, the European Union (E.U.), the United Kingdom, and the United States among other nations. These elections might change world politics, trade, policy, and geography and generate geopolitical and geo-economics concerns.
Democratic candidate Kamala Harris and Republican rival Donald Trump are in a head-to-head battle as the U.S. presidential race gets ready for tomorrow, November 5.
Lyse Doucet, the chief international correspondent for BBC, wrote Will Kamala Harris follow in Biden’s footsteps, certain that in “these unsettled times, it is clear America cannot retreat”? Alternatively, will it be Donald Trump, hoping that “Americanism, not globalism,” will set the standard?
Yle, Finnish Broadcasting Company, asked European Parliament members from Finland which of the two main contenders—Republican former president Donald Trump or current Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris—would be better for the future of Europe.
Among the Finnish MEPs who answered the survey, most tended towards Harris.
Finland has fifteen delegates to the European Parliament, fourteen responded to the survey. Thirteen declared Harris to be a better choice.
Newly elected Finns Party MEP Sebastian Tynkkynen was the only respondent who refused to provide an opinion on which candidate would be better.
Henna Maria Virkkunen from the National Coalition Party was the only MEP who hardly answered the poll at all. The E.U. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen named her the Executive Vice-President for Tech-Sovereignty, Security, and Democracy for Europe from 2024–2029.
Many MEPs claimed Harris would be a steady, and dependable partner for Europe to support Ukraine, human rights, the battle against climate change, the future of democracy, and political stability.
Several also mentioned that regardless of who is elected, the E.U. and its member states will be able to work with the U.S. president.
Former M.P. and vice-chair of the Finns Party Tynkkynen explained his rejection to choose a candidate by pointing out he belongs to the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the European Parliament. Finland, a small nation, should not reject any presidential contender before the election, he said.
“Finland will continue to cooperatively help the United States going forward, regardless of who is in the White House,” he said to Yle.
The four other Finnish foreign affairs committee members all agreed Harris would be better.
Among the few well-known Finnish politicians who have publicly backed Trump in the past are former Finns Party chairman Jussi Halla-aho, currently Speaker of Parliament. He posted on Twitter in 2019 “Trump is the best thing that has happened to the United States and the Western world in a long time.” More lately, he has declared he is “not worried” about the prospect of another Trump tenure in the White House.
“Donald Trump is Europe’s nightmare, with echoes of his threat to withdraw from NATO in everyone’s ears,” said former deputy secretary general Rose Gottemoeller.
Lyse Doucet said that US military spending is two-thirds of Nato’s 31 members. Beyond NATO, the United States spends more on its military than the following ten nations including China and Russia. Only 23 NATO nations have achieved the 2% GDP expenditure objective; so, Trump asserts he is employing a hardball approach to persuade other members to meet this target.
Gottemoeller thinks that “if Harris prevails, NATO will most certainly be in excellent Washington hands. She will be ready to keep collaborating with NATO and the European Union to bring about triumph in Ukraine but not relax on [spending] pressure on Europe.”
The Kiel Institute for the World Economy claims that top military aid (monetary value of donated weapons and equipment) to Ukraine to August 31, 2024: U.S. $61.1 billion, Germany $11.4 billion, U.K. $10.1 billion, Denmark $7.5 billion, Netherlands $5.5 billion, Sweden $4.6 billion, Poland $3.5 billion, France $3.4 billion, Canada $2.7bn and Finland $2.4 billion.
International Crisis Group President and CEO Comfort Ero stated that “Harris’s victory represents continuity with the current administration.” Should it be Trump, he “might give Israel an even freer hand in Gaza and elsewhere, and has intimated he could try to cut a Ukraine deal with Moscow over Kyiv’s head.”
“I will have peace in the Middle East, and soon,” Trump asserted boldly in his most recent interview with Saudi Arabia’s Al Arabiya T.V.
He persisted in a recent rally on Ukraine. He has made it clear that he wants the war in Ukraine to end along with US military and financial support. I’ll leave. We must leave.
During the conclusion of the BRICS summit in October 2024, Putin stated that Trump expressed his desire to do everything possible to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. He appears to be truthful.
Germany’s Chancellor, Olaf Scholz, remarked to reporters, “I know her well. She would certainly be a good president.”
Trump said “We will drill, baby, drill,” at the Republican National Convention in July after becoming a party nominee. He has advocated for increased fossil fuel production in order to decrease dependence on foreign energy imports. If Trump is elected, there may be less cooperation between the US and EU on renewable energy.
Conversely, Harris is probably going to follow the Biden administration’s renewable energy transition plans, which will create opportunities for EU countries.
Since the Cold War, the next U.S. president will have to deal with a most vulnerable world to big-power confrontation.
EU Bureau Chief, The Voice