In Britain, a languishing prime minister is suddenly a statesman, while his up-and-coming populist rival has been thrown on his heels. In Canada, the incumbent Liberal Party has a chance to win an election long thought out of reach. In Germany, the incoming center-right chancellor is dominating the agenda after an election many feared would be a breakthrough for the hard right.

As President Trump’s “shock and awe” policies radiate around the world, they are reshaping global politics in unforeseen ways.

Mr. Trump’s sweeping tariffs and threats to the trans-Atlantic alliance have breathed life into centrist leaders, who are regaining popularity for their willingness to stand up to the American president. His clash with Ukraine and tilt toward Russia have thrown right-wing populists from Britain to Germany off balance, blunting, for the moment, their efforts to capitalize on Mr. Trump’s restoration to the White House.

“One of the great ironies of Trump is that he turns out to be the great unifier of Europe,” said Constanze Stelzenmüller, an expert in trans-Atlantic relations at the Brookings Institution in Washington. “It is impossible to overstate how shocked Europeans are by what’s happening.”

The “Trump bump” goes beyond Europe. In Mexico, President Claudia Sheinbaum has won praise, and stratospheric poll numbers, for her coolheaded handling of Mr. Trump’s tariffs. Mark Carney, a former central banker, was catapulted to the leadership of Canada’s Liberal Party with 86 percent of the vote on the belief that he can manage a trade war with the United States.

Mr. Carney’s party, which lagged the Conservatives by double digits under the premiership of Justin Trudeau, has recently closed the gap, putting the Liberals within striking distance of a victory in an election that Mr. Carney is expected to call soon. The Conservative leader, Pierre Poilievre, has struggled to regain momentum, and Liberals have been quick to paint him as a Canadian Trump.

In Europe, which has appeared vulnerable to the same populist tide that swept Mr. Trump back into power, the president’s policies have steadied mainstream leaders who were struggling with stagnant economies and restless electorates. Facing down American tariffs and drawing together to confront an ally that is behaving more like an adversary has proved to be good politics.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s whirlwind of diplomacy — trying to marshal a European peacekeeping force for Ukraine while also working to salvage the alliance with Washington — has won praise across the political spectrum in Britain. Mr. Starmer’s poll numbers have bounced back from what was a dismal first six months in government, though he is still underwater in net approval ratings.

“He desperately needed something, and this appears to be it,” said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary University of London. “It’s not nothing if a prime minister performs well on the world stage.”

Equally significant, Nigel Farage, the populist leader of the insurgent, anti-immigration party Reform U.K, has stumbled for the first time since he won election to the British Parliament last July.

Mr. Farage, a longtime Trump ally, has struggled to fend off accusations that he sympathizes with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia. He criticized President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine for not wearing a suit to his meeting with Mr. Trump at the White House, even amid signs that the British public overwhelmingly sided with Mr. Zelensky in his clash with the American president.

Mr. Farage’s party was thrown into turmoil last Friday after it reported one its own lawmakers, Rupert Lowe, to the police for threatening a senior colleague — an allegation that Mr. Lowe denies.

Mr. Farage, analysts said, might feel threatened because Elon Musk, the billionaire who is Mr. Trump’s close ally, praised Mr. Lowe in January while withdrawing his endorsement of Mr. Farage, saying he “does not have what it takes.” Mr. Lowe complained in a recent newspaper interview that under Mr. Farage’s leadership, Reform has become a “protest party led by the Messiah.”

“To some extent, Farage has made himself quite vulnerable,” Professor Bale said.

In Parliament last week, Mr. Starmer won raucous whoops and cheers from Labour and Conservative backbenchers alike when he scolded Mr. Farage for his history of friendly statements about Mr. Putin and reaffirmed Britain’s steadfast support for Ukraine.

“Zelensky is a war leader whose country has been invaded,” Mr. Starmer said, as a chastened-looking Mr. Farage nodded in agreement. “We should all be supporting him and not fawning over Putin.”

Tying Mr. Farage to Mr. Putin, analysts said, is more effective than going after him as an enemy of the political system, since like other populist politicians, he thrives on being vilified by the establishment.

“The strategy that has not worked is to point at the populists and say they are the enemy,” said Ben Ansell, a professor of comparative democratic institutions at the University of Oxford. “What works much better is to point at an external enemy and try to lash them to that enemy.”

Mr. Farage’s alliance with Mr. Trump is also becoming a burden, Professor Ansell said, not just because the president is unpopular in Britain but also because his chaotic approach to governing deprives his allies abroad of conspicuous successes — on immigration, say, or economic policy — to which they can point.

Despite hard-right election gains in Germany, the Netherlands, Poland, and Austria, Professor Ansell said, there is a chance that Europe may have passed its moment of “peak populism.” In Austria, the far-right Freedom Party was locked out of government despite winning the most votes, after three mainstream parties stitched together an alternative coalition.

In Germany, the hard-right Alternative for Germany, or AfD, emerged as second-largest party in elections last month, trailing only the Christian Democrats, which are led by Friedrich Merz, the presumptive chancellor. But some analysts had expected the party to perform even better than it did, given that Mr. Musk and Vice President JD Vance endorsed it.

“It’s still bad enough that 20 percent of the people voted for an anti-system, pro-Russia party,” said Ms. Stelzenmüller of the Brookings Institution, “but it’s clear the AfD didn’t gain from Musk’s and Vance’s efforts to campaign on its behalf.”

Nor has the AfD been a central player since the election, as Mr. Merz tries to engineer a landmark relaxation of Germany’s debt laws to enable it to fund a mammoth increase in military spending. Mr. Merz has staked a claim to leadership with his call for Europe to take charge of its own security because of the threat posed by Russia and the unreliability of the United States.

To be sure, Mr. Merz is scrambling to act now because he would have more trouble getting such an increase through the next Parliament, in which the AfD, which opposes the spending, would have enough votes to block it.

It is not clear that Mr. Merz has the votes to pass the measures, which will also need significant support from the Green Party to clear a two-thirds hurdle in Parliament. Privately, Mr. Merz’s aides contend that Mr. Trump has given the would-be chancellor the only argument he needs to prevail. He is the first American president to so explicitly threaten to pull American support.

In Britain as in Germany, analysts said the political landscape could shift again. Mr. Starmer’s pledge to increase military spending, they said, will force the Labour Party into painful trade-offs on taxes and spending that are already exposing rifts within the party. And Mr. Starmer’s recent success on the world stage could prove fleeting if he cannot turn around the economy and rebuild public services.

In that sense, Mr. Starmer’s up-and-down government has something in common with Mr. Trump’s, even if the president’s chaotic debut has so far played to the advantage of the prime minister and other centrists.

“The shine, such as it was, of Trump’s first few weeks has emphatically worn off, and in both foreign policy and economic outcomes, the picture has turned very dark,” Professor Ansell said.

Jim Tankersley contributed reporting from Berlin

The arrest warrant was delivered to President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. of the Philippines in Manila at 3 a.m. Monday. The person named on it: his predecessor, Rodrigo Duterte, the firebrand whose war on drugs left thousands of people dead.

But acting on the warrant from the International Criminal Court was not straightforward, since the Philippines is not a member of the court. So at 6:30 a.m., Mr. Marcos’s government received another warrant for Mr. Duterte, this time from Interpol, which was acting on the court’s behalf and of which the Philippines is a member.

Mr. Marcos recalled his next step in an address to the nation on Tuesday. “OK, we’ll put all our plans into place, and let’s proceed as we had discussed,” he relayed having told the head of his justice department.

Just over 24 hours later, Mr. Duterte — who long seemed above the law — was arrested in Manila. By the end of Tuesday, he had been put on a plane bound for The Hague to face charges of crimes against humanity.

It was a swift coda to a long chapter of impunity in the Philippines. Only a handful of people have been convicted in connection with the killings in Mr. Duterte’s drug war, in which as many as 30,000 are estimated to have died. Now, the man who publicly took credit for the carnage was being sent to a court of law to face justice, in part because of a shift in political winds.

Mr. Marcos, the son of the dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos, rose to power after forming an alliance with Sara Duterte, a daughter of Mr. Duterte’s. Running on a platform of national unity, they won the presidency and vice presidency in 2022. But their marriage of convenience started unraveling quickly, driven by mistrust.

Ms. Duterte, who is leading in the polls to succeed Mr. Marcos, has railed against him, saying that she wanted to cut his head off and threatening to dig up his father’s body and throw it into the ocean. Her own father called the younger Mr. Marcos a “drug addict” and a “weak leader.”

Mr. Marcos mostly brushed off the comments and said little in public. But his allies impeached Ms. Duterte last month, imperiling her political career.

Then came the arrest of her father, which she and her allies denounced as political oppression, although Mr. Marcos said he had simply been following international convention in complying with the Interpol warrant.

“This was justice, regardless of how we got here,” said Maria Ressa, the Nobel Prize-winning journalist who has long been a target of Mr. Duterte because her news website, Rappler, has investigated the drug war.

“Now, is there politics involved? There is always politics involved,” she added. “But it’s a reminder to the rest of the world that accountability comes for you sooner or later and that impunity doesn’t last forever.”

It was still hard for some Filipinos to believe that such a moment had arrived.

Florecita Perez and Joemarie Claverio’s son, Jenel Claverio, 27, was killed by masked men in Navotas in December 2019. This week, Ms. Perez said in an interview, she pumped her first in the air when she heard about Mr. Duterte’s arrest, but waited until nighttime to tell her partner, because she thought the news would make him cry.

As they were about to sleep, she hugged him from behind. “I said, ‘Hon, Duterte has been arrested.’ He turned to me and said, ‘Oh? Won’t he be able to get away?’”

Mr. Duterte was expected to land in the Netherlands on Wednesday evening and be taken to The Hague, where both the I.C.C. and its detention facilities are based. A court official said that Mr. Duterte would not be expected to appear in court on Wednesday, but he would likely be arraigned before a three-judge panel in the next few days.

The I.C.C. typically has lengthy pretrial proceedings, and a planned trial is not expected to start for months.

Ms. Duterte was also on her way to The Hague, to help organize her father’s legal team. Another daughter of the former leader’s, Veronica Duterte, posted screen grabs of video calls with their father while he was on the plane. In one Instagram post, she wrote: “A flight lasting more than eight hours but left with just a sandwich to eat???”

But thousands of people rejoiced when the chartered flight carrying Mr. Duterte took off from an air base in Manila. To some, it was reminiscent of when Mr. Marcos’s father was ousted nearly four decades ago and fled to the United States.

“It’s not quite what it must have been like for my parents on Feb. 25 with those headlines in the newspaper, saying: ‘It’s all over, Marcos leaves,’ but it felt pretty close,” said Sol Iglesias, an assistant professor of political science at the University of the Philippines. (Critics accuse the younger Mr. Marcos of trying to whitewash history by not properly recognizing the significance of that day in 1986.)

Ms. Iglesias said it was clear that the current president had given clearance for the broad campaign to curtail the Dutertes’ power in recent months.

“None of these would have been possible without his assent,” she said.

Despite having once pledged not to cooperate with the I.C.C., Mr. Marcos told reporters in November that he would not block the court and that it had obligations with Interpol.

Mr. Duterte left office with one of the highest approval ratings in Philippine history, and Ms. Duterte is still leading polls for the presidency in 2028, but the arrest now leaves her in an highly vulnerable position. And in recent months, the Dutertes have not been able to galvanize large crowds for their protests.

In approving Mr. Duterte’s arrest, Mr. Marcos is gambling that he can eliminate the Dutertes as a political force without any major backlash. The issue is now likely to be front and center during the midterm elections, seen as a proxy battle between the Marcoses and the Dutertes, in May.

Two Duterte allies — his former aide, Christopher “Bong” Go; and a former police chief, Ronald “Bato” Dela Rosa, the architect of Mr. Duterte’s drug war — are seeking re-election to the Senate. Later this year, Philippine senators will decide whether to convict Ms. Duterte over her impeachment. A ruling against her would all but put her out of the running for the top job.

So far, public sentiment seems to be behind Mr. Marcos. A March 2024 survey of more than 1,700 Filipinos showed that nearly three in five approved of the I.C.C. investigation.

On Wednesday night, in the city of Cotobato, a stronghold of Mr. Duterte, residents held banners and lit-up cellphones in protest of his arrest. A few hundred people turned up, but the demonstration soon petered out.

Marlise Simons contributed reporting from Paris, and Aie Balagtas See and Camille Elemia from Manila.

Europeans reacted with relief to the announcement on Tuesday that Ukraine had agreed with the United States on a 30-day cease-fire in its war with Russia and anxiously awaited Moscow’s response.

They were relieved because Washington announced simultaneously that it would immediately restore military and intelligence support for Ukraine. And there was expectation that Russia must now respond in kind, or presumably President Trump would put some kind of pressure on Moscow analogous at least to the blunt instruments he used against Ukraine.

“The ball is now in Russia’s court,” said the two European Union leaders, António Costa and Ursula von der Leyen, in coordinated messages on social media welcoming the deal and echoing the statement of Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

But in the same sentence the European leaders also welcomed the resumption of U.S. security support to Ukraine, giving it equal emphasis.

“We welcome today’s news from Jeddah on the U.S.-Ukraine talks, including the proposal for a cease-fire agreement and the resumption of U.S. intelligence sharing and security assistance,” the message said on Tuesday. “This is a positive development that can be a step toward a comprehensive, just and lasting peace for Ukraine.”

They also tried to remind Mr. Trump and his team that if Washington wants Europe to guarantee any peace deal in Ukraine, Europe wants to be at the negotiating table. “The European Union,” the message said (hint, hint), “is ready to play its full part, together with its partners, in the upcoming peace negotiations.”

In general, European leaders were shocked by the anger displayed against President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine in the now infamous Oval Office media gaggle on Feb. 28 and Mr. Trump’s apparent acceptance of the Russian narrative that Ukraine started the war.

They were also struck when Mr. Trump’s special envoy, Keith Kellogg, said that Ukraine had to be hit in the head, “sort of like hitting a mule with a two-by-four across the nose,” to get it to comply with Mr. Trump’s demands. The lumber turned out to be the denial of lifesaving American military and intelligence support to Ukraine, its missiles and its American-built fighter jets.

That prompted some in Europe, like Nathalie Tocci, director of Italy’s Institute of International Affairs, to wonder if Washington would do the same to them some day, and whether it was such a good idea to buy so much high-tech American weaponry, like F-35 fighter jets, that depends on American software and integration with American satellites.

European leaders gathered in Paris, London and Brussels last week and this one to promise Ukraine continued and even increased support. “Ukraine is a matter of our own security,” said Norbert Röttgen, a foreign policy expert and German member of Parliament for the Christian Democrats. “If Ukraine falls, it would be a clear threat to Europe.”

But the key point, emphasized by President Emmanuel Macron of France and Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain, was that Ukraine needed American backing. Europe, despite all its vows to continue providing Ukraine with money and weapons, cannot replace key American capabilities like intelligence and missile defense, at least not in the near future.

So European leaders were also relieved at Mr. Zelensky’s understanding of his quandary. After the Oval Office blowup, they worked hard to convince Mr. Zelensky to kowtow to the White House with repeated expressions of gratitude to assuage Mr. Trump. Mr. Zelensky did so, while promising that he continued to support another demand of Mr. Trump for providing the United States privileged access to Ukraine’s mineral wealth, and a share of it besides.

The Europeans have been urging Mr. Zelensky to go along for now to put pressure on Russia and help Mr. Trump see that its president, Vladimir V. Putin, is the problem.

The Europeans have also gathered to have preliminary discussions of what they might be prepared to do to guarantee a future longer-term deal between Ukraine and Russia. Much remains unknown, including the purpose of such a force, its size, financing and command structure. But the Europeans do know they will need American cooperation and air support to make such a mission credible.

Nor is it even clear that Moscow will relent on its current refusal to consider allowing European troops in Ukraine, given that one of the main aims of Russia’s invasion was to keep Ukraine from joining NATO and allowing NATO troops to base there.

But Mr. Macron in particular has gone further, seeing the American turnabout on Ukraine as yet another sign that Europe must do more for its own defense and not rely so much on a United States that appears indifferent to Europe, if not openly hostile to it, both economically and politically.

Now Europeans, like Ukrainians, wait for the response of Mr. Putin. So far, he and his officials have rejected the idea of a cease-fire before a final settlement of the conflict. And of course there are no guarantees that even if a 30-day cease-fire were put in place the war would not recommence, giving at least some the impression that Mr. Trump simply wanted a victory to show that he could stop the killing, even temporarily.