Trump and the transatlantic link
The President of the United States, Donald Trump, is hobbling around like the elephant in the china shop. Every move he makes stirs up commotion. This time he shocks even his most faithful followers with his statements about Ukraine and its war with Russia. As an outsider, how should the latest tours be viewed?
Columnist Marcus Barre
2025-02-18
Following the recent developments surrounding President Trump and his administration this week:
– The American-Russian summit held in Saudi Arabia
– The claim that Ukraine started the war
– The words about Zelensky being a dictator
– Demands for new elections in Ukraine
– Extensive demands on Ukrainian mineral resources on behalf of the United States
… it is uncertain whether Trump and the United States will broker peace in Ukraine in a manner acceptable to either Ukraine or Europe. Trump is resolute in his ”America First” approach—perhaps more so than European leaders have realized. Then again, the thing with Trump is that he says things and it is not always easy to know what really goes on in his mind. Trump is a business man who once wrote a book titled ”The Art of the Deal”. When a man from the Manhattan real estate business goes into world politics the usual technics for analysis and interpretation is no longer adequate.
Can Europe count on the US in a crisis?
The situation at hand is seriously changing dynamics in international affairs. With his statements, because so far it is mostly about statements, from his first term as president and now during his second term, Trump has created great uncertainty and nervousness in Europe. Among other things, Trump has demanded that all NATO countries achieve, but preferably exceed, the goal of 2% of GDP for defense spending. He has also said that the US may not support countries that miss the 2% target in the event of a crisis. It has created uncertainty regarding NATO’s corner stone Article 5, which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all. No American president since World War II has spoken like Trump. Everyone is surprised, puzzled, shocked. The last few weeks have certainly been an awakening for the European political establishment. Can Europe count on the US in a crisis? Nobody knows. Probably yes, but nobody knows. Not as long as Trump and the MAGA movement is in power.
The outcome of the now ongoing process could very well result in the United States reducing or winding down its support for Ukraine. Europe is not currently in a position to replace the American aid provided to Ukraine. This will put Ukraine, yet also the Baltic states and Moldova in danger. The uncertainty and uneasiness is tangible in Helsinki, Tallinn, Riga, Vilnius, Warsaw and Chisinau. All agree Russia must not be allowed to use military force to move its borders west ward. Europeans do not want Russia any closer. Europe is now in the most serious security policy situation since the Second World War. One summit follows the other right now as European leaders try to figure out what to do. All agree it is at this point crucial for Europe’s security to move swiftly and with determination.
Trump is the rule – not the exception
The European security framework established after the Second World War heavily relied on American involvement. Today, that framework no longer holds. During the Cold War, the United States played a pivotal role in safeguarding Europe’s security. Despite widespread opposition to nuclear weapons in many Western European nations, the U.S., as a nuclear power, was indispensable. Successive American administrations consistently urged European countries to boost defense spending and take on a larger role in ensuring their own security. Simultaneously, the U.S. embraced its position as a global power, which not only solidified its commitment to Europe’s defense but also granted significant influence over European politics and development.
It was economically advantageous for the countries of Europe to let the US foot the bill for Europe’s defense. Now it’s clear that Trump wants to end this. It is probably not a desire to be remembered as a prince of peace or to win the Nobel Peace Prize that makes Trump committed to peace in Ukraine. More likely, it is about economics and, by extension, about political power. During the Cold War, the struggle for world supremacy was a battle between the United States and the Soviet Union. In the future, it will stand between the United States and China. Against this back drop, we can argue that Trump wants to normalize the relationship with Russia, and at the same time use the American resources that go to Ukraine in other ways, for other purposes. It is also the impending showdown between the US and China that explains Trump’s interest in Ukraine’s large mineral resources as well as in the case of Greenland, where Trump has put Denmark under pressure.
It is from a historical point of view, the case that Trump is the rule, not the exception. From its founding days, the United States have been more non-interventionist than internationally engaged. From George Washington’s Neutrality Proclamation 1793 and Thomas Jeffersons ”commerce with all nations, alliance with none” to the 20th century, non-interventionism was practiced to stay away from external conflicts but also to cherish the internal peace. Since many European nations were represented in the comparatively young republic it was necessary with a policy of neutrality. World War II changed this. When the war ended the enormous Soviet war machine, that broke down the German army, were located in central Europe and could easily have continued captured the whole of Western Europe. The US military presence was imperative to European security at that time. The cold war accentuated the battle for world dominance between the West and what Ronald Reagan named the Evil Empire.
Trump’s shock therapy
After World War II, French President Charles de Gaulle cautioned Europe against relying on the United States for security. By many he was considered anti-american for his views. Now, Europe confronts the repercussions, sidelined and excluded from pivotal discussions regarding Ukraine’s peace process. The U.S. administration has further emphasized Europe’s diminished role, underscoring the continent’s declining influence on the global stage.
While political shifts in Washington are inevitable, alternating between Republican and Democratic administrations, Europe must seize this moment to establish its independence from the U.S. Bold and decisive actions are needed from European leaders to build a future on the ground of self-reliance and strategic autonomy. Over reaction is not due—it remains unlikely that the U.S. will abandon Ukraine or Europe in the near future, and there is nothing we have seen on the ground. Yet, we are witnessing a pivotal moment in the evolution of European security strategy.
History shows that the global order undergoes significant shifts every few decades. The 1990s witnessed the collapse of the Iron Curtain, followed by the profound impacts of the 9/11 attacks. Today, the Russian invasion of Ukraine signals yet another pivotal moment. Periods of disorder often pave the way for the rise of a new order. Looking back, perhaps a conventional, yet unconventional U.S. president like Donald Trump played a key role in jolting Europe out of its complacency, urging it to take greater responsibility for its own security. His ”shock therapy” certainly has the potential to finally close the lingering chapter of World War II and usher in a new era of European autonomy.