Following Mr George W. Bush's victory in the United States presidential election, the world is rapidly coming to terms with the new political priorities and personal style he will bring to the office. This necessary process has been artificially delayed by the five- week wait for this result. It is clear that Mr Bush will change the course of US domestic and foreign policy substantially from that laid down in the Clinton years. There will be less federal state intervention at home and more unilateralism abroad. Mr Bush's preference is to set broad policy goals and delegate authority to able cabinet members and officials. How he does this will be constrained by the bitterness of the campaign and its aftermath, as well as by the need to co-operate with a divided Congress.
Leaders from all over the world were congratulating Mr Bush yesterday, including some who will now have a different relationship with the US as a result of his victory. These include Mr Vladimir Putin, who is currently on a visit to Cuba - which will tend to confirm the view of Mr Bush and his advisers that a more distant approach will be necessary towards Russia; and the Chinese leadership, who may expect similar treatment. Neither power will be reassured by Mr Bush's commitment to build an anti-missile system.
Nor will US allies in Europe. Yesterday in Brussels, a fractious meeting of NATO ministers discussed the sensitive question of how the European Union's new Rapid Reaction Force will interact with the alliance, as the French hinted they want more operational and planning autonomy for it. Mr Bush's security policy plays down peacekeeping commitments in favour of a strengthened US military, with obvious implications for US participation in the Kosovo force - and for the United Nations.
It is too early to say how US economic policy will be affected. Special interest groups such as the oil, energy, health care and tobacco sectors were delighted with the outcome, as were large companies targeted by the Clinton anti-monopoly activism. This may give markets a boost in the short term; in a longer perspective, Mr Bush's business-friendly approach could sustain a softer landing than might have been expected as the economy adjusts after the long boom of the last decade. His promises of substantially reduced taxation will have to be modified because of the close result. This could prove a stabilising - but hardly a determining - influence on the US business cycle. Energy conservation and environmental protection will be much less onerous than under the outgoing administration. That too will have major international consequences.
In his other domestic policies, Mr Bush will be equally constrained by the close result. That may encourage him to seek a consensual approach with the Democrats on education and some social policies, where there is an overlap. He may even be tempted to appoint some Democrats to his administration, building on his reputation as governor of Texas for working in a bipartisan spirit. His brand of right-wing politics is to be distinguished from the harder-edged variety characteristic of the Republican congressional leadership during the 1990s. It will be interesting indeed to see how it translates into a presidential programme in office. After President Clinton's visit, Irish people are all the more aware of how deeply US policies affect this country. While Mr Bush is not expected to take the same level of interest in Ireland, his policies will certainly affect our economic and political well-being.