If Trump’s election promises are realised, the global landscape could shift dramatically, with potential economic strain on the EU and increased refugee flows
During his election campaign, Trump pledged to impose tariffs on Chinese and EU goods and vowed to end the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and between Israel and Palestine. This first commitment suggests a potential shift towards the deglobalisation of trade, while the latter raises the possibility of military outcomes that could potentially lead to the loss of independence for both Ukraine and Palestine.
Now that Trump has won the election, it remains to be seen whether he will follow through on these promises. Should he do so, we could indeed find ourselves in an entirely new economic and geopolitical landscape. In a worst-case scenario, the EU could face severe challenges, with economic strain from American protectionism and the added pressure of refugee influxes from a “pacified” Ukraine and Palestine.
The potential U.S. gains from a protectionist agenda remain uncertain, both in the short and long term. Historical precedent—such as the Smoot– Hawley Tariff Act of 1930—suggests that such policies could prove counterproductive, ultimately harming the U.S. economy and exacerbating broader economic downturns, as was the case during the Great Depression.
My sincere hope is that, as with other populist leaders, Trump’s election promises may not fully reflect the policies that will ultimately be implemented post-election
My sincere hope is that, as with other populist leaders, Trump’s election promises may not fully reflect the policies that will ultimately be implemented post-election. However, any part of Trump’s foreign policy agenda, when enacted, will likely have adverse effects on European stability, security and prosperity. At the very least, it could incite protectionist and populist movements at the national level.
The Western Balkan countries are deeply integrated into the EU’s economic sphere and will inevitably share in the economic consequences of Trump’s tariffs, especially if combined with the destabilising effects of conflicts involving Russia. Serbia’s case is particularly complex, as its hybrid regime shares much of its populist rhetoric with leaders like Trump, Putin, Erdogan and Orbán, while simultaneously maintaining its EU candidate status. Moreover, the recently rebranded “Serbian World Agenda”, representing a modern iteration of the Greater Serbia concept, poses a continual threat to regional stability.
As the U.S. shifts back to isolationist policies, the responsibility for establishing a new framework for security and cooperation in this region increasingly rests with EU institutions. This framework should encompass a more comprehensive approach to Serbia, addressing its foreign policy agenda, the rule of law and media freedoms.
