Just hours after Donald Trump claimed victory in Tuesday’s U.S. presidential election, world leaders quickly lined up to congratulate him on his stunning return to the White House following his resounding defeat of his Democratic rival, Vice President Kamala Harris.
The effusive praise for the at times unpredictable once-and-future president, some of which came even before Harris had formally conceded Wednesday afternoon, highlighted the concern that is permeating the capitals of allies and partners, including Japan.
Namely, Trump’s penchant for transactionalism — in this case, demands of hefty payments in return for maintaining U.S. defense commitments — is widely expected to again rear its head.
“Trump has left us with no room for guessing,” said Leslie Vinjamuri, director of the U.S. and Americas program at the Chatham House think tank.
“He will put U.S. interests first, and those interests will be defined by him," she noted, indicating that allies should mostly expect commitment in areas “where they can offer something tangible” that serves U.S. strategic interests.
At the same time, Trump will be looking to raise his demands "at every turn," she noted, with tariffs and reciprocity being at the top of his agenda.
“And if the response is slow, uncertain or less than what he wishes for — the prospect of a tougher ask will be a real one,” Vinjamuri said.
Such a scenario could very well play out with Japan in the ensuing months, especially if Tokyo remains mired in political turmoil following the ruling bloc’s decisive loss of its majority in a general election last month under new Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba.
Compounding matters is Trump’s long history of denigrating the U.S.-Japan alliance.
In his 2016 campaign and first stint in office, he blasted it as an unfair partnership, allegedly demanding that Japan pay $8 billion per year for hosting American troops — or risk their withdrawal.
That threat, however, may have merely been an attempt to gain leverage in trade negotiations, a tactic that Trump could rehash during his second go-round in order to persuade Japan to go along with his policy goals.
But while these concerns may be warranted, there is a precedent for Tokyo successfully navigating these tricky waters.
Indeed, one of late former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s greatest foreign policy accomplishments was arguably his ability to leverage his personal relationship with Trump to uphold Japanese interests while averting a deterioration of bilateral ties.
“Japan managed the first transition to Trump adeptly by emphasizing its reliability as an ally,” said Nicholas Szechenyi, vice president of the geopolitics and foreign policy department at the Washington-based Center for International and Strategic Studies.
The question is whether Tokyo can pull this off again.
Experts have mixed views.
Szechenyi argues that all Japan has to do is “dust off that playbook and call the same plays” such as investing in defense, the bilateral alliance and the U.S. economy.
Tokyo has already banked a number of significant achievements in the years since Trump left office that it can highlight. From a historic hike in its defense spending to record levels to shifts in security policy once unimaginable in pacifist Japan, these may help mitigate some of Trump’s more alarming impulses.
“In contrast to European partners, Trump viewed Japan in a positive light (during his first term), so the Japanese government should double down on the positive message it developed back in 2017 to generate momentum under Trump 2.0,” Szechenyi said.
Zack Cooper, an Asian security analyst at the American Enterprise Institute think tank agrees, saying that Trump will first and foremost be looking for U.S. allies and partners to step up.
“Japan has been doing that, so Ishiba (or his successor) will need to demonstrate that to Trump,” he said.
Others, however, point to challenges posed not only by the different geopolitical circumstances this time around but also the very different leadership styles.
“I don’t think we should expect that Japan can do this again as Ishiba is a different type of leader than Abe with a much different base of political support,” said Jeffrey Hornung, a senior political scientist and Japan expert at the Rand Corp.
Ishiba has been adamant about his intention to put bilateral ties on a more equal footing, including by revising the Status of Forces Agreement governing the U.S. military presence in Japan.
“Whether or not Trump is open to changes is unknown, but I don’t think the complaints about inequality in the alliance are the same between Trump and Ishiba,” Hornung said.
Despite the challenges ahead, there are still plenty of areas where the two leaders can find common ground, especially in their views of China.
“There is consensus that China is a security challenge, so I would expect a second Trump administration to push Beijing just as hard, if not harder, as he did the first time," Hornung noted.
While this may make Tokyo feel relieved, it is unclear how Trump will approach U.S. relations with Moscow and Pyongyang amid speculation that he might want to improve ties with both.
The main concern among allies and partners is that the president-elect will continue his tendency to make key foreign policy decisions without consulting them, potentially undermining collective security efforts that have intensified under U.S. President Joe Biden.
More specifically, the worries revolve around a potential push to undo or restructure agreements with Biden’s name on them.
Trump’s tendency to act off the cuff could also prompt a dangerous escalation in tensions with China, especially considering his apparent willingness to use democratic Taiwan as a bargaining chip.
A resumption of his erratic approach toward nuclear-armed North Korea — including two rounds of failed denuclearization talks with leader Kim Jong Un — might unnerve both Tokyo and Seoul, which have doubled down together with the U.S. on deterrence.
“Feeling more empowered, especially with what could be control of both houses of Congress, Trump may push again for talks with Pyongyang to solidify his status as a problem solver,” Hornung said.
Allies are also expected to grow concerned about potential efforts to restructure trade agreements to make them more favorable to the U.S., and there are fears Washington could again retreat from international pacts or organizations in favor of great power politics that undermine the agency of middle or smaller powers.
A return to such actions would not only mark a radical departure from Washington’s current more collaborative approach but also fuel anxiety over the future level of U.S. security commitment at a time when predictability is needed more than ever as rivals such as China, North Korea, Russia and Iran increasingly align their strategic interests.
Trump will “absolutely threaten to withdraw U.S. alliance commitments if there is nothing in it for Washington,” Chatham House’s Vinjamuri said.
This realization is not only setting off alarm bells in Asia but also in Europe, where Trump has pledged to end the Ukraine war — a move that could potentially also usher in an era of rapprochement with Moscow.
If undertaken, such a step would likely divide Europeans who would have to decide on whether to participate in peace negotiations and agree on what would be an acceptable outcome.
Vice President-elect JD Vance has already floated concepts of neutrality for Ukraine and of recognizing Russia's territorial gains, ideas that not every European agrees with.
The devil will indeed be in the details as some fear that a cease-fire agreement with no viable security guarantees for Kyiv could lead to another Russian attack on Ukraine and renewed threats to other European countries.
Under these circumstances, Europe has “no other choice but to prepare a united and powerful response collectively,” said Celia Belin, head of the European Council on Foreign Relations’ Paris office, stressing that Europeans “must avoid the temptation of transactionalism and bilateralization, which would dilute individual states’ power.”
While there is still hope that Trump will operate within a constraining ecosystem, the president-elect's foreign policy approach is expected to remain instinctive and sometimes erratic.
“In all this, I do not expect to see a guiding foreign policy strategy, or even a guiding regional strategy, that will frame all these interactions,” said Rand’s Hornung.
“Given how little he has talked about his foreign policy approach and the role of the United States in the world, it seems more likely that we will see him return to his ad-hoc and sometimes unilateral approach to dealing with international issues.”
With your current subscription plan you can comment on stories. However, before writing your first comment, please create a display name in the Profile section of your subscriber account page.