Even before Donald Trump's first presidency, the United States had begun distancing itself politically from European affairs, but, more broadly, there were signs of American world leadership waning. Biden's multilateralist presidency was a mere interlude, before the second Trump term returned with a vengeance to signal the end of the close relationship of yesteryears. The EU can no longer postpone its re-set of the future relationship with Washington, notably in terms of trade and security.
The US president keeps catching Europe with its pants down. He has made clear his dislike for NATO and questioned the American security commitment to Europe. He has negotiated directly with Russia and Ukraine to end the war, and the limited European participation has always been an after-thought. He is attacking the Union and finding willing collaborators among some member states in undermining key pieces of its policy and legislation. His will has prevailed on the questions of tariffs and trade. He recently threatened the EU's territorial integrity with his attempt to take over Greenland, if necessary by the use of force. Only an unusual closing of ranks by most of the EU dissuaded him from this path.
The explanation may be fairly simple. Trump sees world power politics as a zero-sum game, where what counts are wins for the US vis-à-vis all other countries, including allies and friends, even though these wins may in the end make the US poorer; the key is to beat the other guy. His policies are self-serving, dictated by personal whims and political gain rather than by strategy or vision. In the process, the US is alienating the very countries whose help it needs if, with a GDP that is now down to about 80 percent that of China's, it wants to prevail.
President Trump has been the ultimate disruptor, making allies uncertain and emboldening adversaries. Each impulsive remark, executive order, and disengagement from international commitments has shattered the traditional norms of US foreign policy.
Within a year from his inauguration, Trump has trashed decades of American foreign policy achievements, treating them as obsolete relics. Treaties, alliances, and institutions built over generations were discarded for short-term political victories and personal hubris. The long-term consequences are impossible to predict, but one thing is clear: the erosion of US influence is indisputable.
It appears that the US has reverted to a worldview ascribed to the realist school of international relations which stresses competition and conflicts. This worldview contrasts with idealism or liberalism, which tend to emphasise cooperation. Realists consider the principal actors in the international arena to be states concerned with their own security, acting in pursuit of their own national interests, and struggling for power.
The realists' emphasis on power and self-interest reveals their scepticism regarding the weight of ethical norms in relations between states. In this scenario, national politics are the realm of authority and law, whereas international politics are a sphere without justice, characterised by active or potential conflict among states, where ethical standards do not apply.
Trump's erratic leadership has ruined the equation that, in return for security, America's allies would align with Washington's strategic vision. With Trump's return, Europe must confront a new reality: a future without America as its anchor. Can the EU's global role be re-shaped without U.S. leadership? Must it? Now, it is urgent to consider these questions. European nations can no longer afford to rely on an unpredictable America. Instead, they must take their fate into their own hands.
Europe has regrettably been passive in the face of these developments. It needs to be pro-active in preparing for a future where it will have to defend itself without American support. Currently, Russia is a clear and immediate threat. In Ukraine, a peace engineered by the US would not end the conflict but merely temporarily freeze it. After re-arming, Moscow would pivot towards conquering the rest of Ukraine and potentially other neighbouring countries, such as the Baltics.
To check Russian expansion in an age of US indifference, Europe must take decisive action to strengthen its military preparedness, including a credible nuclear deterrent. France has already offered to extend its nuclear protection to Germany and, ideally, the rest of Europe. Germany would stand to benefit most from an extended French nuclear umbrella and therefore it would be reasonable for it to pay the lion's share. Germany could easily mobilise the money, given its low public debt.
In addition to military security, Europe must also urgently address its vulnerability in energy security. The current predominant reliance on external energy sources exposes it to potential blackmail and destabilisation, not least because Europe cannot prote
The US president keeps catching Europe with its pants down. He has made clear his dislike for NATO and questioned the American security commitment to Europe. He has negotiated directly with Russia and Ukraine to end the war, and the limited European participation has always been an after-thought. He is attacking the Union and finding willing collaborators among some member states in undermining key pieces of its policy and legislation. His will has prevailed on the questions of tariffs and trade. He recently threatened the EU's territorial integrity with his attempt to take over Greenland, if necessary by the use of force. Only an unusual closing of ranks by most of the EU dissuaded him from this path.
The explanation may be fairly simple. Trump sees world power politics as a zero-sum game, where what counts are wins for the US vis-à-vis all other countries, including allies and friends, even though these wins may in the end make the US poorer; the key is to beat the other guy. His policies are self-serving, dictated by personal whims and political gain rather than by strategy or vision. In the process, the US is alienating the very countries whose help it needs if, with a GDP that is now down to about 80 percent that of China's, it wants to prevail.
President Trump has been the ultimate disruptor, making allies uncertain and emboldening adversaries. Each impulsive remark, executive order, and disengagement from international commitments has shattered the traditional norms of US foreign policy.
Within a year from his inauguration, Trump has trashed decades of American foreign policy achievements, treating them as obsolete relics. Treaties, alliances, and institutions built over generations were discarded for short-term political victories and personal hubris. The long-term consequences are impossible to predict, but one thing is clear: the erosion of US influence is indisputable.
It appears that the US has reverted to a worldview ascribed to the realist school of international relations which stresses competition and conflicts. This worldview contrasts with idealism or liberalism, which tend to emphasise cooperation. Realists consider the principal actors in the international arena to be states concerned with their own security, acting in pursuit of their own national interests, and struggling for power.
The realists' emphasis on power and self-interest reveals their scepticism regarding the weight of ethical norms in relations between states. In this scenario, national politics are the realm of authority and law, whereas international politics are a sphere without justice, characterised by active or potential conflict among states, where ethical standards do not apply.
Trump's erratic leadership has ruined the equation that, in return for security, America's allies would align with Washington's strategic vision. With Trump's return, Europe must confront a new reality: a future without America as its anchor. Can the EU's global role be re-shaped without U.S. leadership? Must it? Now, it is urgent to consider these questions. European nations can no longer afford to rely on an unpredictable America. Instead, they must take their fate into their own hands.
Europe has regrettably been passive in the face of these developments. It needs to be pro-active in preparing for a future where it will have to defend itself without American support. Currently, Russia is a clear and immediate threat. In Ukraine, a peace engineered by the US would not end the conflict but merely temporarily freeze it. After re-arming, Moscow would pivot towards conquering the rest of Ukraine and potentially other neighbouring countries, such as the Baltics.
To check Russian expansion in an age of US indifference, Europe must take decisive action to strengthen its military preparedness, including a credible nuclear deterrent. France has already offered to extend its nuclear protection to Germany and, ideally, the rest of Europe. Germany would stand to benefit most from an extended French nuclear umbrella and therefore it would be reasonable for it to pay the lion's share. Germany could easily mobilise the money, given its low public debt.
In addition to military security, Europe must also urgently address its vulnerability in energy security. The current predominant reliance on external energy sources exposes it to potential blackmail and destabilisation, not least because Europe cannot prote