What a Trump presidency would mean for global wars and European security

Published

7 months ago

November 4, 2024

admin

Donald Trump says he would end Russia’s war in Ukraine should he return to the White House – but any rushed deal will likely leave Kyiv much weaker and European security in even greater peril.

Another major flashpoint a Trump presidency would immediately seek to influence is the escalating conflict between Iran and Israel.

Mr Trump came close to direct war with Tehran during his first term in office and prior restraint could well give way to direct confrontation this time around.

US election latest: Harris and Trump make final pitches

Then there is the overwhelming longer-term challenge posed by China, with North Korea another growing headache especially after Mr Trump tried but failed to woo the leader of the hermit state during his first stint as commander-in-chief.

With the US election on a knife edge, hostile and friendly capitals around the world have been gaming what a second Trump White House might mean for their respective national interests and for the most pressing global security threats.

Mr Trump’s track record of unpredictability is a challenge for traditional foes – but also for Washington’s closest allies, in particular fellow members of the NATO alliance.

The Republican nominee has made no secret of his frustration at how the US has for decades bankrolled the security blanket that protects Europe.

During his first term as president, Mr Trump threatened to withdraw the US from the alliance – a move that would almost certainly sound its death knell. His rhetoric did help to spur allies to dig deeper into their pockets and spend more on their militaries, though.

But the damage of years of underinvestment is deep and the pace of recovery is too slow for European NATO allies and Canada to credibly stand on their own as a potent military force any time soon.

In terms of immediacy when it comes to global crises, the impact of a Trump victory on 5 November would be felt most acutely by Ukraine and also by Iran.

The presidential candidate has repeatedly claimed that he would quickly end the Ukraine war, though without explaining how or what peace would look like.

In an indication of where his priorities lie, however, he has accused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy of being the “greatest salesman on earth” for securing tens of billions of dollars in weapons and other assistance that Washington has given to Kyiv.

Yet – coupled with Ukraine’s willingness to fight – that military aid is the biggest reason why Ukraine has managed to withstand almost 1,000 days of Vladimir Putin’s war.

Stop the flow of American weapons, and Ukrainian troops – despite their own ingenuity and the support of other allies – will simply lack the firepower to keep resisting the onslaught.

By contrast, US vice president Kamala Harris, who is vying for the top job, has made clear that she views continued support to Ukraine as being as vital to US and Western interests as it is to Kyiv’s – a far more familiar stance that echoes the view of her NATO partners.

While US support for Ukraine would undoubtedly change under a Trump administration, that is not the same as facilitating a complete surrender.

The former president – who portrays himself as the ultimate dealmaker and has adopted a new election slogan – “Trump will fix it” – will not want to be held responsible for the total absorption of Ukraine into Mr Putin’s orbit.

Putin and Iran

His relationship with the Russian president is a particularly interesting dynamic.

When president, he infamously said he trusted Mr Putin’s denials over his own intelligence agencies when it came to claims about Russian interference in the 2016 US election.

But with the right advice, might a future President Trump be able to use his connection with Mr Putin to the West’s advantage?

At the very least, it adds a new level of unpredictability – which is perhaps the most important element when it comes to assessing the potential impact on the world of a second Trump term.

On Iran, in stark contrast to his approach to Russia’s war in Ukraine, a future President Trump may well back much greater US military support for Israel’s conflict against Tehran and its proxies – perhaps even direct involvement by US forces in strikes on Iran.

Mr Trump has an even tougher stance towards Tehran and its nuclear ambitions than Joe Biden’s administration.

His decision to rip up a major nuclear deal with Iran was one of his most significant foreign policy acts during his four years as president.

It is also personal, with Iran accused of hacking the Trump campaign in recent months – an attack that would surely only heighten tensions with Iran during any second Trump term.

On election night, Sky News will have access to the most comprehensive exit poll and vote-counting results from every state, county and demographic across America through its US-partner network NBC.

You can find out more about Sky News’ coverage here.

World

Israel had ‘no choice’ but to attack Iran because it was ‘rushing’ to nuclear bomb, president Isaac Herzog claims

Published

4 hours ago

June 16, 2025

admin

Israel had 'no choice' but to attack Iran because it was 'rushing' to nuclear bomb, president Isaac Herzog claims

Israel had “no other choice” but to attack Iran because it was proceeding “dramatically” towards a nuclear bomb, Israeli President Isaac Herzog has claimed.

Speaking to Sky News’ Yalda Hakim, he said Iran was “rushing” to the bomb “under disguise”.

He also suggested the Israeli war cabinet was discussing Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, amid reports that President Donald Trump vetoed a plan to kill him.

It comes as Israel and Iran continue to fire missiles at each other after Israel launched an unprecedented strike on Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities.

Tehran has long denied that its nuclear program has been attempting to obtain a nuclear weapon.

Mr Herzog was asked why Israel attacked Iran when it did.

“When you take such decisions of historic magnitude and proportions, you have to analyse all facets and all facts,” he replied.

“The truth of the matter is there was no other choice.”

He claimed Iran was proceeding “dramatically” towards the bomb, both in terms of the enrichment of uranium and, “clandestinely”, the armament part of the process.

“I’ve always been very crystal clear with regards to a nuclear capability of our enemies – it has to be removed at once.”

Mr Herzog added: “We have to remove the Iranian nuclear program because we see the negotiating process as being futile because they are lying whilst talking to us.

“They are lying whilst talking to the United States and other allies.”

He was questioned whether the strikes on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure could provoke a response that causes a mass casualty event in Israel.

“(We are) very much aware of the risks of this war,” he replied. “Every night there are missile attacks, heavy missile attacks on Israel.

“We have our air defence systems, which are excellent.

“Unfortunately, we have casualties. Brothers and sisters of ours from toddlers all the way up to the age of 94.”

He continued: “No, we don’t accept it at all… That’s why we are fighting also, to eliminate their capability of firing at us.”

He also suggested the Israeli war cabinet was discussing Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, after reports Mr Trump vetoed an Israeli plan to kill him.

“Let’s just remember that the Supreme Leader of Iran has for years called for the annihilation of Israel.”

World

Iran’s response to Israeli strikes a ‘matter of principle’, ambassador to UK says

Published

24 hours ago

June 15, 2025

admin

Iran's response to Israeli strikes a 'matter of principle', ambassador to UK says

Iran’s response to Israeli attacks on its nuclear facilities is “self-defence” and a “matter of principle”, the Iranian ambassador to the UK has told Sky News.

Speaking exclusively to The World With Yalda Hakim, Seyed Ali Mousavi said the “barbaric Israeli regime” is “violating international law” – describing Israel’s actions in recent days as “an act of aggression against the Iranian people”.

The conflict between Israel and Iran – once played out in a series of proxy wars – has escalated in the past three days.

Follow Israel-Iran conflict live

On Friday morning, explosions hit Tehran as Israel carried out a major attack on its top army leaders, nuclear sites, and nuclear scientists.

Iran threatened “severe punishment” and quickly retaliated with a wave of missiles.

When questioned about whether Iran could continue fighting Israel, the Iranian ambassador told Yalda Hakim that “it is a matter of principle”.

He said: “This is about self-defence, there is no doubt about it.

“We are a responsible member state of the UN and we do all activities according to our international obligations.

“Any activities are only in the framework of self-defence.”

He added that his country would “do our best to preserve our territorial integrity”, and that “with the help of God”, Iran will “materialise endeavours concretely against our enemy – the Israeli regime”.

Mr Mousavi also told Hakim that Iran’s nuclear activities are “monitored”, and that recent comments by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were “politically motivated”.

The UN nuclear watchdog’s board of governors found Iran was not complying with its nuclear obligations for the first time in 20 years.

Iran said it has “always adhered” to the safeguarding obligations laid down by the watchdog.

Announcing Operation Rising Lion on Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed Iran had recently taken steps to weaponise enriched uranium, which could be used to make nuclear weapons.

But Mr Mousavi stressed that Iran’s “peaceful activities” at its “nuclear fields” were only for the “generation of electricity, and other peaceful” things.

Iran was due to continue its round of negotiations with the US in Muscat – however, this was cancelled, given recent tensions.

World

UK government advises against all travel to Israel

Published

1 day ago

June 15, 2025

admin

UK government advises against all travel to Israel

The government is warning people not to travel to Israel under any circumstances, as the country’s missile exchange with Iran shows no sign of abating.

On Friday, the Foreign Office warned against “all but essential travel” to most of Israel.

The areas around Gaza, the West Bank and the Golan Heights were already classed as red zones, with warnings to avoid travel to these areas.

But the government has now updated the warning for the remainder of the country to red.

Follow live: Tehran and Israel exchange strikes

This puts Israel on the same level as Iran, and the change of advice is also likely to impact travel insurance.

However, with Israel’s airspace closed, it is unlikely many people will be attempting the journey, and Israel’s national airline El Al has announced it is cancelling flights to and from many European cities, as well as Tokyo and Moscow, until 23 June.

The change in travel advice comes after a second night of ballistic missile barrages from Iran following Israel’s attack in the early hours of Friday morning.

On Sunday morning, Israel’s health ministry said 12 people had been killed over the past day, taking the total since Friday to 15. It also said 385 people had arrived at hospital with injuries overnight.

Iran has not provided a total number of deaths or overall casualties, but has claimed dozens have been killed.

Iran’s health minister has said most of those injured and killed in Israeli strikes were civilians. According to comments carried by news agency IRNA, he said the majority were women and children.

What is the UK doing?

The UK government is sending military assets, including fighter jets, to the Middle East.

While the prime minister would not confirm to reporters that UK forces could be used to defend Israel from future Iranian attacks, the chancellor told Sky News earlier that the government is “not ruling anything out”.

Speaking to Sky’s Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, Rachel Reeves said sending military assets to the Middle East “does not mean that we are at war”, and emphasised that “we have not been involved in these strikes or this conflict”.

“But we do have important assets in the region,” she continued. “And it is right that we send jets to protect them. And that’s what we’ve done. It’s a precautionary move, and at the same time, we are urging de-escalation.”

Pushed on the question of what the UK would do if Israel asked for support with its operations, the chancellor replied: “I’m not going to rule anything out at this stage. It’s a fast-moving situation, a very volatile situation. But we don’t want to see escalation.”