It is ironic that the final outcome of the US Presidential election may depend on the votes from overseas. American foreign policy is likely to be very different depending on the ultimate winner. This uncertainty of future US policy may be compounded by any prolonged wrangle over the legality of the electoral result. International relations abhors a power vacuum. The Israel/Palestine conflict worsens by the day, and the US administration no longer has the power to do anything to help. Over the coming month, the European Union will be formulating its new defence posture. Already there are signs of strain between members over coordinating arrangements with NATO. A leaderless United States will be an opportunity for those who wish to widen the Atlantic divide.
If George W. Bush is finally elected as President, Europe can expect a rather more chill wind to blow from the West. Bush advisors have been warning for much of the Summer that they do not intend to keep American forces in the Balkans. They suggest that there will be an early announcement of a phased withdrawal over at most a 3 year period. Since only 20% of troops in the Balkans are from the US, Europe should be able to fill the gap. However, the signal is clear: the US may engage in the key warfighting engagements, but it will not be prepared to use it forces for the more difficult post-conflict peace building tasks. Despite the US spending nearly twice as much as the EU on defence, Republican defence advisors see the need for considerable increases to fund such projects as National Missile Defence (NMD) and new high technology weapon systems. Their proposals for NMD will bring them into confrontation with European governments at an early stage. Nor would a Bush administration be likely to show any great enthusiasm for the United Nations. Indeed with both the House and the Senate also Republican there is a much reduced prospect of the use of force for humanitarian reasons. Arms control proponents worry about the direction that may be taken. The United States has already declined to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, and Bush supporters talk about abrogating the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty if that is what needed to make NMD work. However, some offer the hope of a significant reduction in nuclear weapons if NMD is deployed.
If Al Gore manages to snatch victory from defeat, foreign policy will not just be a continuation of the Clinton years. Relationships with Europe may be easier than some of the potential problems of a future Bush Administration. Nevertheless, he will face opposition in both Houses of Congress, and that will have been made worse by the fight over electoral legitimacy. Gore does not appear to have the political skills of Clinton, and this may make it more difficult for him to establish himself with the rest of the international community. The major foreign policy challenge for the new President will be over Israel and Palestine. Here his choice of Joseph Lieberman as Vice-Presidential candidate will make the honest broker role more difficult than ever.
In sum, Europe may find itself having to take more of a lead in international issues however the US Presidency is resolved. The power vacuum may continue for some time. The divide between between Democrat and Republican will be great whatever the ultimate outcome. The confirming process for senior officials may be even more unpleasant and lengthy than usual. While the US economic boom seems impervious to political turmoil, even it may be tested. It will be "interesting times" for us all.