Election fallout: What the US election means for Pax Americana

For better or worse, the future of the “Free World” will be determined in the coming days and week as Americans head to the polls to determine the next Leader of the Free World.

Regardless of whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump is elected, the future of the American-led world order hangs in the balance as America itself confronts the distraction of the double-edged sword of domestic challenges and mounting geopolitical competition and tension.

Few concepts have been as influential in modern history quite like the idea of the “American Peace”, the belief that the United States, through a combination of its economic, political and military pre-eminence, has been the linchpin of peace, prosperity and security since the end of the Second World War.

Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, Western Europe, and parts of Asia were the major beneficiaries of this new “globalised world” and the radical new approach to global power relations which would be ironed out at the Bretton Woods Conference and the formation of multilateral organisations like the United Nations, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund.

The formalisation of this new American-led world order would also give way to more drastic implementation through policies like the Marshall Plan to reconstruct Europe following the devastation of the Second World War, providing both a carrot and stick to help preserve peace in the post-war years.

Following the end of the Cold War and the struggle between liberal capitalist democracy and Marxist–Leninist socialism and the rise of the “End of History”, it would be safe to assume that the efforts to “secure” the post-war global order would give way to a far more “hands off” approach to global affairs by the world’s sole remaining superpower.

We now know that was wishful thinking, with the post-Cold War world enjoying a period of relative stability to become an increasingly contested and multipolar world, dominated by a constellation of growing great powers across the world, serving to fundamentally reshape the geopolitical geography of the 21st century.

VIEW ALL

All of this comes before the upcoming US election and its impacts. Highlighting the potential fallout ahead of the election is former secretary of the Department of Home Affairs Michael Pezzullo in a piece for ASPI Strategist, titled The 2024 US Elections and the Pax Americana, in which he posed a series of important questions.

What does it all mean? Important questions worth asking

Without sounding like a broken record, regardless of who wins, the outcome of this election will fundamentally reshape the course of the 21st century.

In recognising this Pezzullo asked, “Under a new US president, will the United States stand by Ukraine, potentially risking war with Russia? Will it stand by its NATO treaty obligations? Will it support Israel to properly defend itself, potentially risking war with Iran? Will it prevent Iran acquiring nuclear weapons, including by using force, if necessary?

“Will it defend Taiwan, should China seek to use force to annex that democratic society? Will it defend the Philippines, or Japan, or other Indo-Pacific treaty allies in the event of their being attacked by China? Will it defend South Korea were it to be attacked? Will it continue to shield its non-nuclear allies under the protection of extended nuclear deterrence? Will it continue to protect the world’s sea lanes?” Pezzullo asked.

As it stands, Vice President Kamala Harris has largely positioned herself as a “continuity candidate” with little in the way of deviation from President Joe Biden’s approach to foreign policy, or simply put, Vice President Harris, as president, would be run as a status quo administration.

Indeed, in her campaign website, Harris articulated, “Vice President Harris is ready to be Commander-in-Chief on day one. She has helped restore American leadership on the world stage, strengthened our national security through her travels to 21 countries and meetings with more than 150 world leaders, defended American values and democracy, and advanced America’s interests.”

In contrast, former president Donald Trump has promised a form of continuity of his own, that being continuity of his record during his four years as president, which saw greater emphasis on the US alliance network that no longer would the US taxpayer solely pick up the tab of “blood and treasure”.

Pezzullo detailed this predicament, saying, “These and other similar questions will be on the agenda over the course of the coming presidential term, irrespective of who wins on 5 November. While these questions are vitally important in their own right, what is of greater interest is how the result of the election might affect the future shape and structure of world order which, since the end of the Second World War, has been underpinned by the ‘Pax Americana’ – the ‘American peace’ which links and frames all of these issues, and more besides.”

Only by looking towards the end of this next presidential term and its implications for global and, importantly for Australia, regional affairs, Pezzullo focused in on this, asking, “By the end of the coming presidential term in 2028, the future world order will be clearer in three crucial respects – namely, will the United States have the wherewithal, whether on its own or in partnership with others, to continue to counter the rise of such a power; will it have the interest and inclination to do so; and will the Pax Americana hold?”

Importantly, given the geopolitical mess that currently characterises the global affairs, can American retain its position as the sole global superpower and “Leader of the Free World”, particularly amid mounting great power competition?

No longer the preponderant power

This is an important question worth further consideration, particularly in the Australian context, given the potential for risk of conflagration at worst or confrontation at best over Taiwan with the potential to bring great powers into conflict in our region for the first time since the Second World War.

Pezzullo recognised this in part, stating, “The United States is unlikely to ever again play the role of preponderant power, as it did in the period 1948–62. For analytical purposes, there are interesting questions to examine, such as the nature, dimensions, and actuality or otherwise of ‘US primacy’; the relative power balance between the United States and China; and the lessons of historical patterns of how ‘rising’ and ‘declining’ powers compete with, and confront, one another.”

Unpacking these thoughts further, Pezzullo added, “For policy, the more relevant question is this: will the United States leverage its own power (however measured in absolute and relative terms), and that of allies and partners, to ensure that no globally powerful, hegemonic power can establish itself in Eurasia, while at the same time ensuring that the Pax Americana endures.”

This only becomes more relevant when one considers the growing economic, political and strategic heft of the pseudo-alliance bloc that is BRICS, and growing economic, political and military cooperation between Russia, China, Iran and North Korea in particular continue to consolidate their strength and reach.

For Pezzullo, the risks of a divided and exhausted United States in the face of this are significant, with Pezzullo explaining, “Preferably, we will see continued US leadership, with greater contributions from its allies and partners. However, a weary and divided United States, which was concerned with its strategic solvency – where it was spending more on the cost of servicing its federal debt than on defence – might well recalculate its interests, taking a dim view of those who consume US security without contributing meaningfully.”

Pezzullo leaves us with a final question: “Could one blame the United States for pursuing such a course if those whom it seeks to protect refuse to make greater sacrifices in order to better defend themselves, having grown accustomed to the protection of the Pax Americana?”

Final thoughts

It is reasonable to say that the idea of American Peace, in some, was a selective and idealised interpretation of history that overlooks the numerous conflicts, wars, and interventions that have characterised the post-Second World War era.

From the Korean War to the Vietnam War, from the Middle East to the numerous proxy wars during the Cold War, the evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the American Peace is more myth than reality.

The world has not experienced a true era of peace since 1945, and the role of the United States in global conflicts challenges the very notion that it has acted as a benign and stabilising force in international affairs; however, we have avoided direct confrontation between the world’s nuclear armed powers and that is a good thing.

However, it is important to acknowledge and understand that these actions didn’t occur in a vacuum, with the Soviet Union, People’s Republic of China, radical Islamic movements and others all actively seeking to expand their influence, their ideology and national interests to their benefit.

If both Australian policymakers and the Australian public don’t snap out of the comforting security blanket that is the belief in the “End of History”, the nation will continue to rapidly face an uncomfortable and increasingly dangerous new reality, where we truly are no longer the masters of our own destiny.

All of this combines to form a rather confronting and disconcerting outcome for our long-term national security and one that requires remedying immediately if Australia is to be positioned to capitalise on the truly epoch-defining industrial, economic, political, and strategic shifts currently underway across the globe.

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia’s political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..