What would Kamala Harris’ victory mean for the EU?

When considering Kamala Harris run for presidency, uncertainty surrounds her candidacy, albeit for different reasons than her opponent. On one hand, we have seen the policies that the US government has enacted during the Biden-Harris administration. On the other hand, as a vice president, Ms. Harris has made very few foreign policy statements and holds no important roles that would demonstrate her unique stances. For these reasons, we are starved of any hints about what a Harris presidency might differ from Biden’s, but we can infer that the direction of the White House could diverge slightly if she assumes control. 

This article is the second in a two-part series, examining the implications of a potential Kamala Harris victory. You can read our analysis of the potential Donald Trump presidency here. 

Ukraine & NATO

A US administration led by Kamala Harris would, to some extent, continue the same security doctrines of Joe Biden. However, we cannot expect her national security strategy to mirror the same policies of President Obama in the 2010s. According to experts, even under a Harris presidency, the US will still slowly remove the security umbrella from Europe, pivoting the focus of the US foreign policy toward the Asia-Pacific as well. 

Despite this gradual shift, Harris remains deeply committed to NATO and Ukraine. At the 2024 Munich Security Conference, she reaffirmed the US dedication to NATO, stating that “our sacred commitment to NATO remains ironclad” and that the alliance is the “greatest military alliance the world has ever known.” Following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the Biden-Harris administration has given Ukraine $64 billion in military aid and supported NATO expansion, notably by pushing for the approval of Finland’s and Sweden’s accession bids. 

Under a Harris administration, Washington would continue encouraging European nations to increase their defense spending

Harris has strongly condemned Russia's actions in Ukraine and pledged continued US support for Ukraine’s defense. She emphasized that any negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin must involve Ukraine as a key participant. However, despite the substantial military aid that the US has given Ukraine, many critics argue that Biden is only offering enough support for Ukraine to survive but not to win. A clear example is the continuous refusal of Biden to allow Ukraine to use US-made missiles to strike targets inside of Russia. Harris could be as cautious as Biden in helping Ukraine: her current national security adviser, Philip Gordon, shares many of the concerns of the current security advisor of Biden, Jake Sullivan, to avoid escalation between NATO and Russia at all costs.  

Nonetheless, Washington would continue encouraging European nations to increase their defense spending and contributions to NATO's new deterrence strategies. This pressure would be applied more diplomatically than under Trump, as President Biden told NATO allies “the 2 percent goal to be a floor not a ceiling”. 

Industry and commerce

Before becoming vice president, Harris described herself as “not a protectionist Democrat” and opposed widespread tariffs, arguing they contribute to inflation. However, her stance on international trade has since shifted towards a more protectionist approach, certainly influenced by post-Trump economics. This shift is evident in the Biden-Harris administration’s decision not to remove tariffs on Chinese goods imposed by Trump. 

The Biden-Harris administration has adopted a “strategic autonomy” plan aimed at reducing US economic dependence on China. This involves imposing additional tariffs to compete with Beijing, providing subsidies to domestic industries, and restricting the trade of key technologies with China. 

Harris is open to listening to the EU through the EU-US Trade and Technology Council

Harris’s departure from traditional free-trade policies, such as those championed by President Obama, is clear. As a senator, she opposed the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a trade deal negotiated by Obama but abandoned by Trump, citing concerns that it would harm American workers and the environment. Instead of reviving TPP, the Biden-Harris administration has sought a successor agreement focused on supply chain cooperation, without eliminating tariffs on China. They have coordinated these efforts with the EU, through the creation of the EU-US Trade and Technology Council in 2021, intending to develop a common policy to combat their “shared concerns about the challenges posed by economic coercion and non-market practices employed by third countries”. 

Harris also supported Biden’s decision to rejoin the 2015 Paris Agreement and cast the tiebreaking vote on two major industrial subsidy bills in 2022: the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the CHIPS and Science Act. 

For Europe, these policies present some challenges. Unilateral US tariffs on Chinese goods and US subsidies could force the EU to implement similar tariffs and subsidies to protect its market. Yet, even if the disagreements between Washington and Brussels persist, Harris is open to listening to the EU through the EU-US Trade and Technology Council, preferring to cooperate on a common strategy, even if Europe is not always on board. 

Bilateral relations and ideology

The far-right in the West has drawn a simple story about the inevitability of their victory. They claim that the liberal regimes of Barack Obama and EU bureaucrats failed, leading to the victory of Brexit and the election of Donald Trump in 2016, and despite some setbacks, Trumpism and European right-wing populism will ultimately come on top. 

However, the victory of the first female president in the US would flip the script. As the Polish General Elections 2023 or the Legislative French Elections 2024 demonstrate, the majority of European citizens do not desire an “illiberal democracy” like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban proposes, yet they want politicians to hear their actual concerns. 

It is undeniable that Mr. Trump has changed politics around the world. He has come to symbolize public rejection of the current political direction, claiming to give voice to those left behind by globalization. The first sentence of the Republican Party Platform 2024 is a dedication “to the forgotten men and women of America”, which demonstrates that Trump understands how his base feels.  

On both sides of the Atlantic, people are concerned by mass immigration, rising costs of living, the loss of manufacturing jobs, and rising inequality. And Trump was one of the first relevant voices to point out people's dissatisfaction on these issues. Since the Reagan era, every US president has pushed a neoliberal and free-trade policy. But Trump attempted to change this trend. He tried to impose a ban of migration from Muslim countries, applied tariffs to protect US companies and signed a COVID relief payment bill. His influence on the new perspective on politics is so significant that both parties recognize these issues as legitimate, although each uses different approaches to solve them. During the Biden-Harris administration they not only maintained Trump’s tariffs, but some were also increased along with. Additionally, they approved bills to subsidize key industries and Harris promises to increase the minimum wage and strengthen the border. 

If a moderate president like Kamala Harris manages to defeat Trump, it could showcase to European politicians how to beat the far-right. When European politicians demonstrate to voters that their concerns are being addressed, they will respond favorably, because the majority wants to maintain their living standards but are not particularly enthusiastic about “illiberal democracy” or mass deportations. 

Regarding Harris's relationship with Europe, she has taken a conventional stance, with her commitment to a rules-based international order being music to Europeans’ ears. Having the trans-Atlanticist Philip Gordon as Harris’s national security adviser has made European officials optimistic. “He is exactly what every European would have wanted.”, said an official. In addition, right-wing populists like Viktor Orban could find themselves politically marginalized by both Washington and Brussels. 

Conclusion

The outcome of the 2024 US elections will have far-reaching consequences for Europe, impacting security, trade, and political dynamics. A Harris victory would maintain US commitment to NATO and Ukraine while continuing a strategic, protectionist approach to trade with China. Her leadership could offer a path to counter far-right movements and reinforce transatlantic cooperation, though trade tensions with Europe may persist. 

In the first part of this series, we examined how a Donald Trump victory would be for the EU.