How to avoid global chaos in the next 10 weeks | World News

Trump’s early appointments suggest that his foreign policy will indeed be radical. His picks for secretary of state and national security adviser, Marco Rubio and Mike Walz, may sound like old-school conservatives who are hawkish on China and Iran. But they are in their current positions because they have adopted pro-Trump positions, including vocal loyalty to their leader and impatience with NATO and the Ukraine war. The new trade czar could be Robert Lighthizer, a protectionist itching to start another tariff war. The Pentagon will be run by novices bent on blowing up the deep state. Trump seems hungry to close deals and accept unconventional advice. His staff has not yet signed rules on the use of secure communications and is flouting norms to refrain from doing business with foreign countries until the next administration takes office. On November 8, he and Elon Musk called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

In the face of this, countries have an incentive to quickly develop facts on the ground to gain an advantage in January. Some of these facts are welcome. For example, America’s allies suddenly increase their defense spending. Others can be destructive. President Vladimir Putin could escalate his attacks to seize more Ukrainian territory before peace talks begin. Israel may attack places like Gaza and Lebanon in the hope that the new regime will “finish the job” in Iran and agree to a lopsided cease-fire. China may investigate how far it can bully Taiwan or the Philippines without provoking a serious reaction. Tensions in the South China Sea are rising.

Although the Biden and Trump administrations loathe each other, they have a common interest in deterring such events. It may be a thankless task, but Mr. Biden’s team has an obligation to use its remaining influence, largely derived from military aid to allies, to prevent a lame-duck situation. If Trump thinks the disastrous end of the Biden presidency will help him shine in comparison, he should think again. His job will become even more difficult if he arrives in the Oval Office with a rout in Ukraine, hell in the Middle East, and a runaway Chinese ship.

Therefore, both teams need to agree and clarify a common framework for the lame duck period. To keep Mr. Putin’s greed at bay, the United States should send more weapons to Ukraine and ease restrictions on the use of long-range missiles. In the Middle East, both sides should make it clear to Israel that a unilateral attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming weeks will not receive U.S. military support, and that a successful military support will be required. In the South China Sea, China needs to hear that the United States’ position on maritime rights and interests remains unwavering. Future historians may paint the next 10 weeks as the moment when America moved from its post-1945 internationalism to a new, more isolationist foreign policy. But if Team Biden and Team Trump act wisely, a lame-duck period need not result in global chaos.

Economist subscribers can sign up for our new opinion newsletter, bringing together the best leaders, columns, guest essays and reader communications.