Europe is struggling to fully grasp the changing relationship between the US and Europe under the second Trump administration and the urgent need to rethink long-standing strategic assumptions. Continental leaders need to worry. First, their states have lagged behind technology, their economy, and now politics and foreign policy. To change this negative trend, Europe must ultimately realize its highly published dream of achieving strategic autonomy and more aggressive foreign policy.
Europe is trapped in an outdated model
Europe is deeply enclosed in a shared value-based approach to diplomacy and international relations, in which loyalty to allies plays a major role. It has long functioned within the framework of multilateralism, consensus building and institutional cooperation, relying on alliances such as NATO and the Transatlantic Partnership to shape global strategies. This is a liberal theory of international relations that is practiced.
However, this approach is completely foreign to President Trump, and he believes he is trading diplomacy. This is as a series of transactions in which power, leverage, and immediate national interests are far more important than long-term alliances and shared values.
The problem is that Europe doesn’t know how to function outside this liberal hermeneutic framework. Security guarantees are not recognized due to loyalty, but struggle to engage in pure Realpolitik negotiated like goods. Unlike Trump, who thrives in a world of bilateral trade and in an unpredictable world, Europe remains a rule-based, trust-driven paradigm.
This puts the EU in a volatile position. While we expect stability and predictability from our partners, Trump is thriving in disarray and leverage. It calls for collective security, but he calls for a Quid Pro Quo arrangement. Without a fundamental change in strategic thinking, which encompasses stiff forces, self-sufficiency and strategic autonomy, Europe is facing future risks in a world where its traditional methods no longer prevent shaking.
Faced with a more brutal America
Trump’s “America First” policy is nothing but disruptive. NATO is facing unprecedented scrutiny, as Europe was nuded (someone might say it was pushed in), but it has taken a greater responsibility for its defense. This shift is Though it was long behind in several quarters, Trump’s militant tone leaves a lasting scar. This second term is especially true of the open threat of seizing the Ukrainian war and Greenland. In light of this, Europe is increasing the need to unify its security strategy.
Europe is deeply connected to an alliance-based way of doing business and diplomacy. Still, it must urgently face a new reality. Traditional allies like Trump’s US are no longer reliable partners. At the same time, so-called enemies like China and Russia could become strategic allies, at least economically.
The harsh truth is that Trump’s zero-sum transactional approach treats Europe more like a competitor than a partner. Instead of prioritizing long-standing relationships, he demands economic concessions, increased defense spending, and deals that will disproportionately benefit the United States. In contrast, cheap Russian gas, oil, coal and key minerals, along with Chinese investment and access to its vast consumer markets, provide a much-needed boost to Europe’s struggling economy It may be.
Political and security concerns cannot be ignored, but economic survival comes first. If Washington continues its path of economic nationalism and strategic negligence, Europe may have no choice but to redefine its alliance based on practical interests rather than outdated loyalty.
A new geopolitical landscape
Trump’s unpredictable foreign policy is to remake modern geopolitics. His praise of strong men’s leaders and skepticism about traditional allies have questioned Europe’s changing world order and, in turn, its place in its long-term security.
Whether it’s defense, trade, climate or diplomacy, Europe faces a monumental challenge. How to position yourself as a resilient, autonomous actor in the Global Arena. The lessons learned from the first Trump presidency are clear. Reactive strategies will not reduce it. Europe must actively prepare for a world where it cannot make the obvious adjustments.
Under Trump, Climate Action took the backseat to US policy, and the Paris Agreement was abandoned. For Europe, which has placed climate change at the heart of its agenda, Trump’s decision to withdraw the US from the Paris Climate Agreement complicates global efforts to tackle a climate emergency. Will Europe be able to lead the fees on its own, or will it find a new alliance without US cooperation and funding? Here, Xi Jinping’s latest declaration sees the Chinese side’s attempts to fill this space and position itself as a trusted ally to Europe.
European Struggle for Strategic Independence
At its heart, the European challenge in response to this second Trump presidency lies in the enduring lack of strategic autonomy. Although the rhetoric of independence has grown loudly in Brussels and in the capitals of the nation, translating words into meaningful actions has proven elusive. Despite its economic strength and political influence, the EU relies heavily on the US for security, economic stability and global diplomatic leverage.
Consider, for example, Trump’s previous European commodities, his previous willingness to impose tariffs from steel to agriculture, and the paralysis it caused in the European capital. The EU’s fragmented decision-making process (which 27 member states must match the response) is slow to counter such a move. This illustrates the need for new governance in the EU decision-making process.
Meanwhile, the lack of unified military power means that Europe relies on NATO, with United’s statistics playing an oversized role. Trump’s skepticism about NATO funding and his accidental statement that he would not defend his member states further exposed the vulnerability.
At the heart of Europe’s difficulties is fundamental tension. It is an ambition to act as a global force compared to its deep interdependence with the United States. Despite the EU seeking greater independence in areas like defense and technology, it has struggled to overcome internal sectors, and has had a large presence like Germany and France with other countries such as Poland and the Baltic states. They struggle to balance the profits of a large state.
Trump’s Greenland threat highlights this imbalance. His point is more than just a diplomatic test. It is a provocation highlighted by Europe, which cannot be decisively countered by such a threat. Until the EU develops a stronger common defence strategy and diversifies its economic and energy partnerships, it will remain vulnerable to unilateral moves by Washington.
Conclusion? Europe must overcome its internal fragmentation and take bold steps towards strategic autonomy. However, it must be translated into operational capabilities, specific policies and coordinated actions between member states. Without concrete advancements in defense, energy independence and economic resilience, the EU risks remaining a global audience, increasingly shaped by power struggles and unilateral decisions. .
But is Europe ready to rise to the Trump 2.0 challenge? Political, economically and military, the answer is no. The EU is too divided, overly dependent on the US, and overly committed to an outdated diplomatic paradigm to effectively offset “America First.” Unless European leaders adapt quickly, strengthen their economic competitiveness and unique defense capabilities, and embrace a more practical and independent approach, Europe will be on the sidelines in a world that is increasingly dominated by power politics. Masu.
The views expressed in this article belong to the authors only and do not necessarily reflect the views of geopoliticalmonitor.com.
