How will Europe respond?

Without any doubt, this time Europe really has arrived at the proverbial crossroad. Moments of “epochal change” and great “turning points” are often declared in public discourse when some big event happens. In retrospect, when the histories are written, few live up to these expectations of paradigm-shift. But this time it’s different. This time, the US National Security Strategy 2025 really is a pivotal event – one of those markers that split the timeline into Before and After. This is it.

And like all such moments, it hasn’t come out of the blue. The signs of a structural reorientation of US strategy and of a redefinition of America’s relationship with Europe have been accumulating for some time. This column has tracked them over the past year – see, for instance, Europe’s choice: win with Trump or die alone, from November 2024, Would Trump defend Taiwan?, or the turn towards a “hemispheric” strategy for the US, foreseen in these pages months ago. So there should be no surprise today.

Like the causes of the First World War, the roots of this landmark Strategy stretch back even further, to the original 2012 Pivot to Asia under the Obama Administration (with Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State) which provided the first real shock to the transatlantic strategic framework. Of course, that in itself was caused by structural developments in the world power balance driven by the rise of China.

Of course none of what is happening now was inevitable. A more assertive, intelligent and clear-eyed America could have snuffed out China’s growth, or at least seriously contained it, at an early stage in the 2000s or even 2010s, instead of assisting and celebrating it (“millions out of poverty!”). Only the arrival of Donald Trump at the White House in 2017 put a stop to this madness and began to firm up US policy against Beijing. But with better leadership than what had gone before, especially during the utterly disastrous Obama years, US dominance in the international system could have been maintained and perhaps sustained for decades longer. It was not to be – so here we are: A world which America is unable to dominate militarily as before, and in which it must work out a modus vivendi with the other major powers, i.e. principally China and Russia.

Europe has no place in the first tier of global power rankings. This is exclusively the result of its own choices under the guidance of its own arrogant and completely deluded political class. Blinded by their self-righteousness and self-declared moral superiority, the Europeans forgot that power means, first of all, military not “soft”, power – let alone “regulatory” or “normative” power. And they forgot their vital dependence on American protection, even while they started shrieking louder than ever about the Russia threat and to tie themselves to Ukraine’s fate. High on “values”, but low on strength, the Europeans behaved towards Trump’s America – from the time of his first presidency – like a bunch of recalcitrant brats. 

This continued and worsening attitude, more than anything else, convinced Trump and his team that Europe’s Ancien Regime – the institutional embodiment of Davos Man – is not only hopeless but an active political threat to America First and its principles. In thinking it can placate and fool Trump by paying lip-service to his demands – e.g. the 5 per cent for defence – or playing to his ego – see the shameless Rutte’s self-abasing “Daddy” comment – while spewing bile against him and MAGA at every turn, Europe has dug its own geopolitical grave. 

What to do now? To begin with, take a breath. It is clear that the deep “allied” logic between Europe and America has now been at best severed, at worst inverted. The idea that the United States would enter a war to defend Europe under Article 5 is no longer conceivable, at least not under this administration. But NATO still stands, Congress still matters, and Ukraine still fights. There are still too many variables and too few incentives – let alone imperatives – for Russia to directly attack a NATO country anytime soon. So there is no sword of Damocles hanging over Europe right now. There is no actual, immediate, security crisis. Nor can the US conduct serious political warfare within Europe, as some seem to fear. This gives Europe time to consider its options more carefully. Essentially, there only two paths ahead.

The first is the path of defiance and delusion, i.e. Europe’s standard operating mode. It seems to be what is already happening. Double down on “European autonomy” and “integration” – by extorting more money and wresting more sovereign powers from EU members – and crank up the repression against dissenting voices. Stick to the current failed policies – from “green” energy to “inclusion” – and indeed accelerate them. On defence, go for some kind of “EU army” and a hugely expensive, gold-plated and wasteful rearmament policy that is in fact not about military build-up but industrial revival and private interests. Reject any kind of political reform, safeguard the Euro-elites who have brought Europe to its knees, use the crisis, as always, to advance the European project, and try to parade as a “global power” that sticks to its moralistic ideology and stands up to everyone: To the US, to Russia and to China. Good luck.

The second path is that of retrenchment and compromise, which requires a significant political – though not structural – reform within the EU and the clear-out of most of the current “power-players” in the institutions and at the top of the key member states – so, realistically, it’s nigh-on impossible. But, in theory, this path would involve Europe recognising the failure of its policies and the limits of its power, and shifting to a pragmatic approach to managing this pivotal moment. 

It would mean an immediate détente with the United States and bending to Trump’s will, at least for now. Defuse the situation and reset the political relationship so that America continues to see Europe as a partner and ally, even if the US military pull-out will continue. Until Europe manages to truly get its act together on defence – perhaps in the early 2030s – deterring Russia will have to be based more on politics than guns. In other words: The US must “care” about Europe enough so that Putin would think twice about any possible armed mischief west of Ukraine – not because he would fear Europe’s military response but because he wouldn’t want to spoil the US-Russia political-economic relationship that is now being lined up for after the war, and that will likely be very significant.

How to go about this détente? First, Europe would recognise that it cannot have its way on Ukraine, and accept America’s lead on the peace process. Absorb the immediate hit to European prestige and amour-propre, and accept a higher security risk regarding Russia. But an appeased America that sees Europe, again, as a real asset rather than an irritant and hostile actor, is Europe’s best chance to deter Russia politically while continental military capabilities are built up. Otherwise, with Ukraine likely neutralised, there’s nothing to stop the Russians unleashing political warfare on Eastern Europe – at the very least – and establishing a de facto sphere of influence even without invading. 

On the economic front, again, give way to Trump: Dial down the regulatory harassment of US tech companies, reduce protectionism, and let US money, technology and business flow into Europe with as little restriction as possible, to stimulate economic revival. All this is anathema to the Eurocrat establishment but desperate times call for desperate measures. Besides, all this can and should be a process, and a negotiation, not an overnight switch: But even beginning serious, ambitious talks with the US on a grand new European-American Economic Deal would change the mood music and is the one sure way of turning even Trump around. 

Regarding rights and liberties, introduce new guarantees for freedom of speech across Europe and begin dismantling the repressive apparatus of EU – and national-level laws and organisations – including EU-funded NGOs – dedicated to hunting down so-called “extremists”, i.e. anyone who criticizes the EU orthodoxy, and which only serves to fuel radicalisation. Instead, return to real democracy: Start by launching an EU investigation, with US support, into the abusive cancellation of the Romanian presidential election last year. 

On immigration, turn the script: Declare an EU-wide “emergency” allowing for the necessary derogations from the European Convention on Human Rights and other international legislation being abused by so-called “refugees” and “asylum seekers”, seal the EU’s borders against all illegal immigration, and begin mass deportations. For a nice and helpful touch, reach out to ICE for advice. All this should happen anyway, regardless of the situation with the US, so it should not be a hard sell with the public at home – only with the elites.

This second path, with all these components (and more), would allow Europe to dodge the lethal geopolitical bullet heading its way. It would gain it time to reform and refit for the new post-liberal world order. The price will include a significant measure of subordination to US economic influence, at least in the short to medium term; and an end to the growth and expansion of the European project – together with a changing of the guard at the top – i.e. a win for the continent’s Eurosceptics. On the upside, the “EU” would get a new lease of life; a good – the best available – chance surviving the Russian threat and the consequences of its own policy on Ukraine; and a shot at becoming a real first rank power in the global system within 10 to 15 years. It’s all possible, and up to Europe’s politicians to choose the right path. But of course they won’t – they never do.