Today, when somebody from the White House says something negative towards Europe, nobody gets surprised anymore as it became such a regular thing that is the same as saying the sky is blue. The relations between the United States and Europe have been heading in an increasingly negative direction since Trump returned to office. I think the moment European countries realized the situation was serious was when the Greenland stuff began. That’s why I wonder: are we witnessing a ‘divorce’ between Europe and America today?
Usually, when states perceive a period of instability regarding security, both diplomacy and the military go through transformations precisely to strengthen their position in the case of a conflict, and it is through such methods that European leaders are trying to bolster their stance in case Russia decides to invade NATO territory. The problem today is that, diplomatically speaking, Europe and the United States are at a pretty low level and this is a reason that’s worrying because, due to all sorts of speeches and statements, as well as certain decisions, we have reached a point where we are no longer sure that Washington will come to our help if Article 5 is invoked soon.
Although these approaches go hand in hand, today we see that the diplomatic path to the White House is severely limited, so the military option takes an even greater significance than it might have been anticipated. We are already seeing NATO member countries that began the process of rearming and also raising their defence spending for the first time since the Cold War. More than that, there is a trend in Europe toward ensuring that the weapons we use here don’t come from abroad in order to promote strategic independence and this shows us that American political decisions have military consequences here.
Regarding the concept of a ‘divorce,’ I am referring to a moment when Donald Trump or another American leader would officially signal that they would abandon the defense of European allies, and that, at least so far, has not happened. The vast majority of the messages and actions coming out of Washington that we see indicate that the goal for now is to push other countries to take their defence seriously, so there is not any legally recognized measure announcing some sort of strategic abandonment of different countries. The problem is that we are now in a gray area where we don’t really know what to expect, and this causes many difficulties for states that want to defend themselves in the event of a Russian invasion. When the future is hard to predict, states take precautionary measures for all kinds of situations, especially those that are very unpleasant. We see that today we find ourselves in exactly such a situation, we don’t know exactly what will happen in the future precisely because we don’t know how to accurately assess the present, we don’t know for certain that NATO commitments will be honored, so the worst-case scenario is being considered. Which leads me to think that it is irrelevant whether we see a withdrawal of American commitments toward us as long as we take the most pessimistic scenario seriously. The reasoning is quite simple: if we are protected all the way through, then we haven’t lost anything; but if our fears come true, then we will end up regretting not taking this reality seriously.
We do not know what the United States will do because it has become an unpredictable player, and we certainly don’t need that right now. Some might say this is just a different phase, a deviation from the country’s usual course, but even so, I believe we must prepare for a world in which America simply will not return to the relationship it once had with us. If their political and social system has allowed such ideas to penetrate the upper echelons of this country’s elite not just once, but twice, then we have no reason to believe it couldn’t happen a third time or perhaps this will be the new normal in the future. What matters is what we do here for ourselves, and if we want a more self-assured continent, we should stop gambling away our strategic security every four years and instead ensure the stability we desire on our own. I believe the divisions among voters have become so great that we’ve reached a point where, if we want a positive perception of them, we must not commit to the state itself, but to the party that comes to power and that’s very worrying because whatever effort you make could backfire completely against you in a few years. If we have different views from the Republican Party, then we will suffer the consequences. If, however, the Democratic Party is in power, those of us who share their views will likely benefit, but other countries will certainly be cast in a negative light, and this whole situation is very unpleasant because we end up conducting diplomacy along party lines instead of having genuine and serious relations with the United States as a whole.
So, it must be noted that it is hard to determine whether our alliance with the United States of America will end because they have become an unpredictable actor and they could change their position at any time. That is precisely why we should act as if a ‘divorce’ has already happened.
It is unpleasant, but we should not let the symptoms of their democracy cause problems here, a view that appears to be increasingly shared by leaders across the continent.