Why the US Presidential Election is Crucial for International Alliances The upcoming US presidential election is drawing attention as an issue that will profoundly impact not just one nation's political choices, but also the international community and the global alliance system. Given the nature of US politics, characterized by deepening ideological confrontation between the Democratic and Republican parties, this election holds the potential to reshape major alliance systems, including the European Union (EU) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), as well as the security landscape of East Asia, beyond mere domestic issues. Therefore, it is necessary to discuss what these changes will mean for South Korea, a geopolitical linchpin. In early 2025, The Economist, in an analytical article titled 'Five Big Questions the US Election Poses to the World,' presented the potential impact of the election results on key policy areas such as global trade, security, alliance relations, and climate policy. This special feature condensed the fundamental changes that the candidates' policy directions could bring to the international order into five core questions. First, will the US strengthen protectionism in the global trade system? Second, will traditional security alliances, including NATO, be maintained? Third, will US leadership in addressing climate change continue? Fourth, how will the strategic competition with China be reshaped? Fifth, will democratic values and human rights diplomacy remain at the center of US foreign policy? These questions are amplifying concerns among allies worldwide, in that they could yield vastly different answers depending on the election outcome. The discussion about the possibility of former President Trump's re-election received particular attention in this article. His policy stance is summarized as "America First," which tends to weaken cooperation with traditional allies and prioritize national interests above all else. This direction was already witnessed during his previous administration, with demands for increased NATO burden-sharing and the shifting of defense costs to allies. The Trump administration strongly demanded that NATO member states increase their defense spending to over 2% of GDP, and even exerted pressure by suggesting that US defense commitments could be re-evaluated if this was not met. In contrast, the Biden administration focused on maintaining the traditional international order through the restoration of alliances and the strengthening of multilateralism. Immediately after taking office, President Biden declared "America is back" and moved to restore relations with European allies, reaffirming alliance solidarity through NATO summits. Another point to note is a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) column published in October 2025, titled 'Trump's Election and the Future of Europe.' In that column, Joseph C. Sternberg explained how significant a threat former President Trump's re-election would pose to the unity of the European Union and the existence of NATO. He stated, "The Trump administration is highly likely to pressure European countries to increase their independent defense capabilities," raising questions about NATO's pivotal role. Sternberg analyzed that Trump's re-election could serve as a 'wake-up call' for Europe. The outlook is that pressure will intensify for Europe to reconsider its decades-long reliance on the US security umbrella and to build independent defense capabilities. Specifically, he pointed out that European NATO member states would move towards reducing their military dependence on the US, which will inevitably lead to the strengthening of Europe's own defense agreements. Sternberg predicted that the concept of 'European strategic autonomy,' championed by French President Macron, would gain further momentum if Trump were re-elected. Germany also undertook a historic shift, significantly increasing its defense budget for the first time since the end of the Cold War, and this trend is expected to accelerate if Trump's pressure resumes. However, Sternberg simultaneously presented a skeptical outlook, suggesting that due to the varying economic conditions and political wills of individual European countries, building a unified European defense system would take a considerable amount of time. These discussions offer direct implications for South Korea. As Korea pursues both security and economic interests simultaneously as part of the US-centric alliance system, the possibility of renegotiating the Special Measures Agreement (SMA) for US Forces Korea defense cost-sharing and re-evaluating the Korea-US FTA could be raised depending on the election outcome. During the Trump administration, South Korea faced unprecedented pressure in defense cost-sharing negotiations. The US side at the time proposed a plan to increase the contribution by nearly five times, which imposed a significant financial burden on the Korean government. If Trump is
Related Articles