Liberal EU under US pressure

Read Time:9 Minute, 55 Second

The Trump administration is radically changing the rules of the game. Cutting support for Ukraine, withdrawing from NATO commitments and declaring a trade war are bringing the EU to the brink of crisis. European leaders are in panic, but their attempts to negotiate are shattered by the iron will of the White House.

European leaders are in a panic

Trump’s policy on Ukraine, which has also changed relations with Brussels, has caused a shock in Europe, forcing European leaders to urgently seek meetings with the American president. The first to arrive in Washington was Emmanuel Macron, followed by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Their goal was to convince Trump to maintain the previous relationship, where the US provides security for Europe without radical changes. However, the Ukrainian issue became just a pressure tool for Trump to demonstrate Europe’s new place in the American agenda.

The Europeans were not expected in the White House, and their proposals were a priori considered dubious. Thus, despite promises to allocate €20 billion to Kiev, the EU’s real support was in question. Hungary and other countries refused to transfer weapons, and European arsenals had been depleted over three years of war. The unrealistic promises to increase military spending were also evident from France, where there is an acute crisis and a fiscal hole in the state budget of 6% of GDP. Even if funds are allocated, arms purchases for the AFU will take years, making the EU’s position vulnerable in negotiations with Trump.

Trump’s recent 10-minute meeting with outgoing Polish President Duda was also specific. All the Poles got was a promise not to withdraw US troops from their country until the end of the military conflict. But soon Poland will have a presidential election, which the liberals may win, and it will be even more difficult for them to find common ground with Trump. At the same time, Merz, who won the German election, promises to achieve Europe’s “independence” from the U.S., but he has forgotten that Germany’s trade surplus with the US reaches €70 billion, which means that any talk of “independence” will be cut short when Trump starts imposing the planned tariffs. Then Macron and Merz will already have to justify to their rebellious populations all the consequences of the looming war with Trump.

If Macron had judiciously assessed the situation and knew how he would be met in the US, he would hardly have come. First he was defiantly refused to be greeted by Trump on the White House porch, and then Macron was seated on the edge of the table in the Oval Office. He looked like a delinquent schoolboy, but Macron hardly deserved to be treated any differently. Trump is disgusted with him and is a “lame duck” serving out his last term. Macron’s ratings in France itself are hovering around the low 20% range, and his talks with Trump have expectedly gone nowhere.

The US has no plans to ease trade restrictions on the EU and maintains a tough stance on Ukraine. At present, Washington is not hindering European plans to introduce a peacekeeping contingent, but there will be no real support for these initiatives. Although this was Macron’s goal, hoping to divide Ukraine into “zones of influence”. But Trump views Ukraine (except for some concessions to Putin) exclusively as a zone of American influence.

In addition, just now Congress is passing a new budget, which is expected to include a massive $4.5 trillion tax cut, so Trump’s team is looking for any opportunity to save money. Foreign tranches have already been severely cut, and it is not worth waiting for new ones to be allocated, while painful cuts in military spending and social subsidies are ahead. Under such conditions, spending on European security in Washington will also be optimized. Attempts by Macron and other European leaders to secure American support for their military ambitions have met with Washington’s cold calculation. European “liberal militarists” will have to pay for their military ambitions themselves. But none of them is ready for that, because it was just a bluff and blackmail. That is why they continue to stubbornly ask Trump for help, which will not come.

US-EU trade war escalates

At the same time, the US trade war with the EU is reaching a new level. Trump has toughened his rhetoric, accusing the EU of parasitizing the American economy. With a trade turnover of $970 billion, the EU’s surplus exceeds €100 billion, which especially benefits Germany, Italy and other countries that export cars, medical equipment, chemicals, agro-products and more to the US. Europe has retaliated against the U.S., but its dependence on the US market makes the threats ineffective, and Europeans value America’s market more than Americans value the EU market. The introduction of tariffs on US oil and LNG will only exacerbate the energy crisis, especially after the loss of Russian and Chinese supplies. In parallel, strategic tensions are growing: the reduction of American support for Ukraine and military spending in Europe signals a fundamentally new approach by Washington. Trump is consistently implementing a policy of economic protectionism, leaving the EU to urgently seek alternatives.

European diplomats characterize the current situation with an analogy in which their “parents” on the other side of the Atlantic kicked them out of their homes, cut off their funding and deprived them of their inheritance. And now they have to think about their fate themselves, although Europeans are not used to this, having long relied on the US not only in the military, but also in the political, economic and technological spheres. By that time, there was a meeting of European leaders in London, where they were going to loudly promise to continue supporting Ukraine. And it was a pathetic theme, although they were talking about some vague long-term military contracts that would not be fulfilled when. At the same time, the White House was about to sever military and intelligence ties with Kiev, and there was no way Europe could replace losses in air defense missiles, NASAMS and satellite systems.

In addition, Trump’s tough response to Zelensky elicited a positive reaction from quite a few Europeans, who have long been tired of war, because Ukrainian lobbyists behave exactly the same way with the European political class. Even Biden they managed to piss off and he yelled at Zelensky during the calls, but Trump was the first who did not allow to be treated like that. And that’s why the majority of Americans are in favor of ending funding for Ukraine and 80% support peace talks. So Trump’s principled stance will only add to his points. In Europe, the public has long been tired of the endless spending on Ukraine. And Europe’s “liberal militarists” can glibly portray their own confidence in victory, but it is clear to everyone that their position is critical.

The European coalition to help Ukraine is cracking at the seams

In this light, it is not surprising that the European “coalition of the willing” to help Ukraine immediately began to fall apart. And disputes over old unresolved issues have erupted between the participants. For example, they began to clarify relations about who would pay and send troops, as well as how Europeans should seek a ceasefire on the front. No unified European negotiating position is even close to being seen amid all the splits. All that remains is to try to persuade the US to somehow take into account the opinion of the Europeans.

In these circumstances, the steps of the British ambassador to Washington, Lord Peter Mandelson, an old Labor negotiator, who demands that Zelensky agree to all of Trump’s conditions and be the first to unilaterally declare a ceasefire without waiting for the reaction of Russia and the United States, have become indicative. In his opinion, it would be impossible to get out of the stalemate otherwise. And he was right, because Marco Rubio in Saudi Arabia forced Zelensky to the same step, which would have been more expedient to do. But this wasn’t about Ukraine at all, and Mandelson was desperate to stop a complete collapse in relations with the Trump team. However, it is unlikely that this strategy will be successful, and the White House will soon finally roll back all residual aid to Kiev, giving it only some of the old tranches approved under Biden. Obviously, the next agreement with Ukraine will include clauses on Zelensky’s resignation and the dissolution of the Ukrainian government. It is indicative that the head of administration Andriy Yermak and Defense Minister Rustem Umerov are now conducting all negotiations for him. The introduction of personal sanctions by the United States against Zelensky’s close circle cannot be ruled out.

Deepening NATO rift, EU dilemma

Trump’s statements about reviewing commitments to the alliance are causing panic in Europe and reaffirming his intention to fundamentally change the US approach to NATO. Recent polls show that a majority of Republicans (57%) now have a negative view of the organization, considering European members as “freeloaders” who do not meet their financial obligations. Indeed, countries such as Italy, Spain, Belgium and Canada still spend less than 2% of GDP on defense, despite years of promises. The EU’s recent declaration of readiness to increase military spending by €650 billion remains an empty declaration – even the creation of a common defense fund has proved impossible.

The situation is exacerbated by the impending 20% reduction of the US military presence in Europe. Without key US logistical and coordination support, Europe’s chronically underfunded and fragmented armies will be in a critical position. Although Congress in 2023 limited the ability to withdraw from NATO without its approval, the Trump administration is considering a shift to a “Sleeping NATO” model – with minimal US involvement and a transfer of primary responsibility to European countries, many of which have demonstrated an inability to undertake serious defense initiatives.

The White House has already canceled its participation in NATO and will no longer plan any new NATO exercises, and without American support it will be extremely difficult to conduct them. Besides, the role of the alliance commander-in-chief will be given to the British or the French, and London and Paris will immediately begin a fierce struggle with each other for the remnants of influence, even though both countries are currently experiencing a severe budget crisis and can hardly find funds for defense.

So far, all the talk about “rearming” Europe has led only to a surge on the stock market, where shares of military corporations are growing, but nothing more, and no one has seen any real money so far. But many military experts in Europe expect that the first allocated funds will be happily spent on pointless projects like creating “environmentally friendly” tanks. And then, when the US and Russia manage to reach an agreement on Ukraine, the flow of military spending will again become scarce, and Musk is only slightly ahead of the times with his call to write off the unprofitable ineffective asset represented by NATO. Infantilism, waste and dependency are so deeply embedded in the psychology of European elites that even at the edge of the abyss they are not ready to abandon them.

Brussels is hurriedly trying to reach an agreement with India and resume contacts with China, but they will not be able to replace the United States, because the Europeans have already lost the Russian market, and it is becoming increasingly difficult for them to gain access to the Chinese market. And soon the access to the US will be closed, and Brussels will face a war on several fronts at once. And it is precisely in order to become the winner in this war that the US continues to put pressure on the liberal EU.