LONDON, March 17 (UPI) -- Donald Trump becoming president of the United States is one of the top 10 risks facing the planet, a new economic analysis revealed.
The Economist Intelligence Unit, an analysis firm and sibling company of The Economist, released its latest analysis of the top threats to the global economy and rated a Trump presidency the same level of risk as "the rising threat of jihadi terrorism."
The top risk is still seen as an economic downturn in China or a new cold war with Russia, but the billionaire's ascendancy to the White House would pose a greater threat to the global economy than Britain leaving the European Union or armed conflict in the South China Sea.
EIU's ranking is based on a scale of one to 25. The greater the number, the greater the likelihood and the greater the effect on the global economy and geopolitical stability. A Trump presidency is rated at 12, meaning "moderate possibility, high impact."
However, the firm sees former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- his most likely Democratic challenger in the general election -- as a current favorite to defeat Trump in November unless there is a terrorist attack on U.S. soil or sudden economic downturn.
"In the event of a Trump victory, his hostile attitude to free trade, and alienation of Mexico and China in particular, could escalate rapidly into a trade war -- and at the least scupper the Trans-Pacific Partnership between the U.S. and 11 other American and Asian states," the analysis noted.
"His militaristic tendencies towards the Middle East (and ban on all Muslim travel to the U.S.) would be a potent recruitment tool for jihadi groups, increasing their threat both within the region and beyond."
But forces within the government would also add to potential chaos in a Trump administration.
"Innate hostility within the Republican hierarchy towards Mr. Trump, combined with the inevitable virulent Democratic opposition, will see many of his more radical policies blocked in Congress," the analysis noted. "Internal bickering will also undermine the coherence of domestic and foreign policymaking."