Donald Trump wants a safe and prosperous United States. These are core interests for any country, and in this regard, the new U.S. president is no different from any of his predecessors or current European leaders. What sets him apart is how he seeks to pursue these interests. Trump shows little regard for values, and his political instincts lean toward isolationism over than international engagement, and protectionism over free trade. As for his approach, he favors deals and transactions over crafting rules, working through international organizations, or traditional diplomacy.
With Trump in the White House and his disruptive approach to global affairs, everything suggests that the U.S. may be undergoing its most significant foreign policy shift since 1945. His second term in office could fundamentally reshape how future generations of American politicians, military leaders, business executives, and citizens interpret the country’s strategic priorities—both domestically and internationally. These priorities increasingly focus on China and the Indo-Pacific region, a trend that has been brewing for years and has bipartisan support in Washington. However, for the first time, the future foundations of U.S.-Europe relations are under debate. For decades, the U.S. invested unprecedented resources and reputation in Europe, motivated by national interest, prosperity, and economic growth, and Europe remains grateful. Yet, the new administration seems willing to abandon that investment and break ties with its European allies.
Perhaps Europeans have taken for granted for too long that Atlanticism was the cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. Like a long-standing marriage, what once seemed obvious now needs to be clearly redefined—or risk falling apart.
The U.S. administration has begun to tighten the screws on trade. The European Union—one of the world’s most open regions to trade and investment and a staunch advocate of economic interdependence through rules—seems prepared to negotiate a mutually beneficial deal that Trump can present as a victory to his voters. However, the EU also wants to make it clear that pushing Europe too hard could backfire, potentially hurting U.S. interests. One strategy that seems to be gaining ground is to let the cost of U.S. tariffs fall on American businesses and households, hoping that domestic backlash will put pressure on Trump. Yet, what matters most to Trump 2.0 is power. Therefore, any European response must be rooted primarily in power rather than than economics, rules, or U.S. domestic politics. Trade is just one piece of the broader challenges he is throwing Europe’s way.
Donald Trump has also challenged Europe’s territorial sovereignty—by suggesting the annexation of Greenland; its digital model—by attacking European tech regulations; and its political party systems—by courting far-right European political forces. He is also pressuring Ukraine and its European supporters to agree to a peace deal favorable to Russia, while hinting at withdrawing significant parts of the U.S. security commitments on the continent.
Trump is determined to exploit Europe’s economic, technological, political, and security vulnerabilities for coercive purposes because he believes Europe neither holds “the cards” nor has the will to play them—a euphemism he uses to refer to power and influence. But Europe does have cards to play, and they should carefully consider how to strengthen its hand and use them effectively.
Europe possesses the economic strength of a collective GDP, a vast internal market, along with labor and technology resources that complement the U.S. While Europe may not be a primary exporter of raw materials like the U.S., it serves as an indispensable intermediary—meaning that a break with Europe could make it much harder for the U.S. to sell its resources globally. Thanks to European contributions, NATO achieves both American and European objectives at an acceptable cost, not to mention that Europe’s geography allows the U.S. to project power to several critical theaters. Moreover, European companies are integrated into the U.S. defense supply chain—one-quarter of the F-35 fighter jet’s components are manufactured in Europe.
Faced with the new administration, Europe’s goal should be to develop a clear and realistic strategy for the transatlantic game that Donald Trump has initiated. Europeans must determine in which areas they should continue to align with Washington, where the relationship needs to be rebalanced, and where they should distance themselves from the U.S. The answers, however, are not easy.
This content was translated from Spanish to English using artificial intelligence and was reviewed by a human editor before being published.