History teaches us that isolation can have significant consequences on the global stage. After World War I, the United States adopted a non-interventionist stance that allowed Germany, Italy, and Japan to expand and conquer territories without effective opposition. These Axis powers knew that the U.S. had reduced its armed forces and was unprepared to engage in a two-front war in Europe and Asia. They seized this opportunity to establish their regional spheres of influence without fear of American intervention.
In the 21st century, we observe unsettling parallels. A considerable portion of Americans does not favor intervention in Ukraine or the defense of Taiwan. Some advocate limiting arms sales to countries like Israel, while others support continuing to arm the Jewish state. This division reflects a growing trend toward isolationism in U.S. foreign policy.
The aid provided to Ukraine's defense and the promise to intervene if Taiwan is invaded have prevented Russia and China from advancing further in their plans for dominance. However, if Ukraine and Taiwan were to fall, these powers might have no limits in their efforts to change the world order, endangering the liberal democracy they repudiate.
The possible reelection of Donald Trump could intensify this stance. Trump has repeatedly expressed that other countries should assume a greater share of defense expenses, especially in NATO and Asia. His vision implies that the United States reduces its traditional role as a leader in international alliances, potentially redefining the global balance of power and creating opportunities for powers like Russia and China to expand their influence.
In the Middle East, a Trump administration could grant greater freedom to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to intensify actions against Palestinian groups considered terrorists and funded by Iran. This could include operations in Gaza and Lebanon, potentially increasing the exodus of Palestinians from their territories and prolonging the conflict in the region.
On the other hand, the continuity of Biden administration policies under Kamala Harris's leadership would provide some stability to allies like Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelensky is aware that, with Trump, maintaining the current level of aid would be more difficult, possibly forcing him to negotiate a peace with Russia that involves losing territories.
Regarding China, the past four years have seen efforts to limit Chinese influence in Latin American investments and promote the return of companies to the U.S. or their relocation to countries like Vietnam, India, or Mexico. These moves aim to counteract China's economic power, but a change in administration could alter this strategy.
The upcoming elections will not only determine the internal direction of the United States but also its role on the international stage. A shift toward isolationism could have significant repercussions on global conflicts and the stability of key regions.
It is essential to reflect on the lessons of the past. American non-interventionism once allowed the expansion of totalitarian regimes that triggered a world war. In an interconnected world, global challenges require leadership and international cooperation. The decision lies in the hands of the American electorate, whose choices will impact far beyond its borders, shaping the future of global politics in the years to come.
El Autor
