National security experts are looking toward the United States’ chief adversaries as Kamala Harris enters the race for the White House after President Biden announced on Sunday that he would not seek re-election.

The sudden change of the Democrat front-runner for the top job has sparked concern that authoritarian leaders from nations like Russia, China and Iran will utilize the “chaos” to their benefit as the Democratic Party scrambles to build a platform against Republican candidate Donald Trump.

Outwardly, nations like Russia and China have revealed little about their reaction to the certain end of a Biden White House and the changes this could bring to U.S. force posture abroad.

TRUMP SHOOTING PLAYS INTO RUSSIA, CHINA PLANS TO DIVIDE US AHEAD OF ELECTIONS

“The elections are still four months away, and that is a long period of time in which a lot can change. We need to be patient and carefully monitor what happens. The priority for us is the special military operation,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said Sunday in reference to Russia’s war in Ukraine. 

He also told reporters in a conference call that Moscow was “not very surprised” by Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential ticket.

“In recent years, what has been happening in the United States has taught us not to be surprised by anything,” Peskov said, according to Reuters. 

Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Mao Ning was even more tight-lipped and said, “The presidential elections are the United States’ own affairs.

“We have no comment on that,” she added in a press conference on Monday.

Over the past 24 hours, questions have mounted over Harris’ qualifications when it comes to U.S. national security as global tensions continue to escalate to levels not seen since the Cold War.

Chinese President Xi Jinping (Getty Images/File)

“The Russians are watching very closely whether Kamala Harris will actually end up becoming the Democratic Party’s nominee now that President Biden has dropped out of the race,” Rebekah Koffler, former DIA intelligence officer and author of “Putin’s Playbook,” told Fox News Digital.

REPUBLICANS DIVIDED ON RUSSIA’S SECURITY THREAT AS VANCE JOINS TRUMP PRESIDENTIAL TICKET

Some reports citing U.S. intelligence officials have suggested in recent weeks that Russian President Vladimir Putin would favor a Trump presidency, but international security officials have voiced skepticism that Moscow truly favors one candidate over the other when asked about it by Fox News Digital.

“Putin and the Kremlin have no preference as far as who would become U.S. president because U.S. policy has been consistent for the past 40 years, regardless [of whether] a Republican or Democrat occupied the White House,” she said. 

Experts are already looking to see how the sudden changes to the 2024 presidential election will be used by top adversaries, and Koffler said “the Russian press is erupting with coverage of Vice President Kamala Harris, whom the Russians portray as incompetent, vapid and unintelligent.”

Heino Klinck, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for East Asia and military attaché to China, similarly pointed to how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will also likely utilize the abrupt change to enhance domestic anti-democratic arguments. 

“Harris’ sudden quasi-coronation will only serve CCP talking points about the chaos of American democracy,” he said. “Her lack of national security and defense experience will not engender confidence with our partners and allies.”

Some reporting has suggested that Harris’ relatively minimal foreign policy experience could mean she will rely heavily on her advisers and, therefore, is unlikely to take starkly different approaches to that of Biden when it comes to major international issues, like the war in Ukraine.

FOX NEWS POWER RANKINGS: IS KAMALA HARRIS UNBURDENED BY WHAT HAS BEEN?

Where Harris might differ from the current president is when it comes to the U.S. relationship with Israel.

Harris’ position on the Middle East and how it will affect U.S. policy should she win remains unclear. The current vice president has taken a tougher approach than Biden on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s war against Hamas in Gaza, though coming out highly critical of Israel will also be unpopular among moderate Democrat voters.

“It’s unclear what on the major issues of the region, ranging from Iran to Israel, may change under a potential Harris government,” Behnam Ben Taleblu, Iran expert and senior fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital. “Yet the thinking about the region, from national security officials around her and around the Democratic Party, seems to be less is more when it comes to the region. But such thinking is what has cleared the way for the emboldenment of the Islamic Republic [of Iran].

Taleblu said “transitions can be turbulent periods, even for democracies” and that Iran could use Biden’s withdrawal from the ticket to its advantage. 

Iranian pro-government supporters wave a Palestinian flag in Tehran on April 14, 2024, in a celebration of Iran’s early morning attack on Israel. (Hossein Beris/Middle East Images/Middle East Images via AFP)

“My concern is that while the swap at the top of the Democratic presidential ticket may have been done to placate domestic audiences, there are real questions pertaining to how the chaos looks and sounds abroad,” he added. 

The expert on Iranian security pointed to Tehran’s expanding nuclear program, its increased reliance on militant groups to fight its proxy wars in the Middle East, and its burgeoning relationships with nations like Russia as examples of Iran’s expanding security threat.

“This could all easily intensify if the administration appears chaotic and distracted,” he said.

Though Harris hasn’t led the charge on major international security threats in her role as vice president, she has been privy to White House policy strategy as well as top-level intelligence when she sat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence during her time in the upper chamber.

NEW YORK (AP) — Fresh off victories in other legal cases, Donald Trump on Monday pressed a New York appeals court to overturn the nearly $500 million New York civil fraud judgment that threatens to drain his personal cash reserves as he campaigns to retake the White House.

In paperwork filed with the state’s mid-level appeals court, the former president’s lawyers said Manhattan Judge Arthur Engoron’s Feb. 16 finding that Trump lied to banks, insurers and others about his wealth was “erroneous” and “egregious.”

Trump’s appeal arguments echoed many of the gripes he delivered during his trial to TV cameras outside the courtroom.

His lawyers argued that New York Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit should have been promptly dismissed, the statute of limitations barred some allegations, that no one was harmed by Trump’s alleged fraud and that James’ involvement in private business transactions threatens to drive business out of the state.

Trump’s lawyers contend that Engoron’s decision, if upheld, would bestow James, a Democrat, with “limitless power to target anyone she desires, including her self-described political opponents,” Trump’s lawyers wrote in a 116-page filing with the Appellate Division of the state’s trial court.

Engoron rejected many of the same objections as the case proceeded to trial last year, at one point equating them to the plot of the film “Groundhog Day” and fining some of Trump’s lawyers $7,500 each for “repetitive, frivolous” argument.

Trump posted a $175 million bond in April to halt collection of the judgment and prevent James’ office from seizing his assets while he appeals. If he wins, he won’t have to pay the state anything and will get back the money he has put up now.

“Such an outrageous miscarriage of justice is profoundly un-American, and a complete reversal is the only means available to restore public confidence in the integrity of the New York judicial system,” Trump lawyer Christopher Kise said in a statement. He called Engoron’s decisions “legally bereft” and “untethered to the law or to commercial reality,” and described the staggering judgment as “draconian, unlawful, and unconstitutional.”

The Appellate Division has said it will hear oral arguments in late September. Trump’s lawyers initiated the appeal days after Engoron’s ruling and had until Monday to file written arguments.

James’ office said Trump and his lawyers are raising unfounded arguments.

“We won this case based on the facts and the law, and we are confident we will prevail on appeal,” James’ office said in a statement.

Monday’s appeal filing is the latest development in a momentous legal and political stretch for Trump, who last week accepted the Republican party’s presidential nomination just days after he was hurt in a shooting at a campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. An attendee was killed and two others were hurt.

On July 1, the Supreme Court sided with Trump in ruling that ex-presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts performed while in office, further delaying his Washington, D.C., election interference case and causing his sentencing in his New York hush money criminal case to be delayed until Sept. 18 while his lawyers fight to have that conviction thrown out.

On July 15, a federal judge in Florida dismissed Trump’s classified documents case, ruling that Special Counsel Jack Smith, who filed the charges, was illegally appointed by the Justice Department. Smith is appealing.

In the civil fraud case, Engoron found that Trump, his company and top executives — including his sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr. — schemed for years to inflate his wealth on financial statements used to secure loans and make deals.

In addition to the hefty monetary penalty, the judge put strict limitations on the ability of Trump’s company to do business. Among other consequences, Engoron put the Trump Organization under the supervision of a court-appointed monitor for at least three years.

Trump’s appeal ensures that the legal fight over Trump’s business practices will persist into the fall and beyond.

If upheld, Engoron’s ruling will force Trump to give up a sizable chunk of his fortune. The judge ordered Trump to pay $355 million in penalties, but with interest the total has grown to more than $470 million — including $16.8 million that has accrued since the verdict. The sum will increase by nearly $112,000 per day until he pays, unless the verdict is overturned.

Trump maintains that he is worth several billion dollars and testified last year that he had about $400 million in cash, in addition to properties and other investments. James, a Democrat, has said that if Trump is unable to pay, she will seek to seize some of his assets.

Trump and his lawyers laid groundwork for their appeal months by objecting frequently to Engoron’s handling of the trial. Trump called Engoron’s decision “election interference” and “weaponization against a political opponent.” He complained he was being punished for “having built a perfect company, great cash, great buildings, great everything.”

During the trial, Trump’s lawyers accused Engoron of “tangible and overwhelming” bias. They’ve also objected to the legal mechanics of James’ lawsuit. Trump contends the law she sued him under is a consumer-protection statute that’s normally used to rein in businesses that rip off customers.

Trump’s lawyers went to the Appellate Division at least 10 times to challenge Engoron’s prior rulings, including during the trial in an unsuccessful bid to reverse a gag order and $15,000 in fines for violations after Trump made a disparaging and false social media post about a key court staffer.

Trump’s lawyers have long argued that some of the allegations are barred by the statute of limitations, contending that Engoron failed to comply with an Appellate Division ruling last year that he narrow the scope of the trial to weed out outdated allegations.

The Appellate Division could either uphold Engoron’s verdict, reduce or modify the penalty or overturn the decision entirely. If Trump is unsuccessful at the Appellate Division, he can ask the state’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, to consider taking his case.