Whiplash: Sudden Shift in American Policy in Europe Rattles Allies

Since his inauguration, President Donald Trump’s administration has abruptly changed course on the United States’ relationship with Europe, most visibly on NATO and Ukraine.  

What do you think is driving Trump’s shift in policy?

Trump signaled this change already in the first term, but it is more drastic right now. I think it is driven by three factors: 

• Trump has a transactional approach to international relations. He tries to protect the bottom line of the United States in a very crude way. I think you see this in the administration's demand for rare-earth minerals. We are demanding access to Ukraine's resources as remuneration for the support we've given since 2022.
  
  That just doesn't sound right. Especially to a country that gave up its nuclear weapons in the Budapest Memorandum signed in 1994. We made a commitment to defend Ukraine's security and sovereignty if they surrendered their nuclear weapons. Russia likely would not have invaded if Ukraine still had a nuclear deterrent. 
   
• Trump has personal animosity toward Zelenskyy. Zelenskyy was part of the reason Trump got impeached the first time around. I don't think that's been forgotten, and that is part of the reason Trump is putting maximum pressure on him.
   
• There is a convergence of Russian right wing ideology and the MAGA movement in the United States.
  
  Russia was ahead of the curve in this regard. Putin's regime strategically engaged in a conservative cultural mobilization centered on laws restricting LGBTQ rights and diverse lifestyles. This tactical pivot helped solidify Putin's authority in the wake of the 2011-2012 mass protests, with one Russian politics scholar characterizing it as a "propaganda goldmine."
  
  You heard something very similar to it in Vice President Vance's speech in the Munich Security Council Security Conference a few weeks ago. He basically tore into Europe about its lack of tolerance of far right ideologies and far right ideas. There's a lot more ideological congruence between Trump supporters and Russia right now.

We’re seeing far right leaders emerge all over Europe as well. Is that a coincidence?

The more far right leaders are in power, the easier it is for Russia to undermine Europe because far right parties are, almost without exception, anti-European, anti-EU.

 Many European far right parties have been financed in the past by Russia itself. For example, the National Rally of France (formerly National Front), under Marine Le Pen's leadership, got a nine million euro loan from a Russian bank in 2014. Why? Because they are some of the strongest underminers of the European Union. 

It’s hard to ignore the widening rift between the U.S. and Europe. Does this signal the beginning of the end of NATO?

This is not the first time the United States has criticized its fellow NATO members. Remember, President Obama’s administration did the same. In fact, I went back and found evidence of this happening already in the 1950s and 1960s. The U.S. has criticized Europeans for not sharing an equal burden of defending Europe for a long time. This administration is just more vocal about it in a cruder way. 

What's unclear is, what happens if Russia tries to test that Article 5 commitment that specifies an attack on one is an attack on all, and each country responds as it sees fit?

How quickly would Europe be able to replace the U.S. if it did not maintain its commitment?

Without the U.S., Europe and NATO would be significantly weakened but it still has significant nuclear deterrents from France and Great Britain.

And it has a significant military presence and strong militaries that really have not been tested. But could Europe sustain a long conflict with Russia? 

This is where it gets tricky because European nations need ammunition and they would need a military-industrial complex that is currently underdeveloped, or would be insufficient to wage a war for a long period of time. 

So Europeans will probably need to invest in building their own domestic military production. And that's going to be challenging because not only does it take time, the decision-making process is more onerous because you're dealing with 27 countries in the European Union.