President Donald Trump, undeniably, has a soft spot for strong leaders. Oftentimes, one gets the impression this is the sole yardstick he applies to foreign heads of state when evaluating their political status and their usefulness to America’s key international goals, regardless of actual clout or diplomatic skills of a particular interlocutor.
Thus, Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, and El Salvador’s Nayib Bukele get special treatment from the White House. The US president gets along well with Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin. Likewise, Benjamin Netanyahu and Viktor Orbán can also bank on Donald Trump’s sympathy and understanding. Ahmed al-Shara, the new Syrian ruler and a former terrorist, was received in the White House a few weeks ago, heaped with praise and characterized as a “tough guy.” Even Kim Jong-un, the North Korean tyrant, was rewarded with some warm comments from Trump himself: “I had a very good relationship with Kim.”
Let’s move the spotlight to Europe now: any strongmen, tough leaders, apart from the above-mentioned prime minister of Hungary? Ursula von der Leyen and Kaja Kallas certainly do not meet the criteria. Does France’s Emmanuel Macron? Well, he is just a “nice guy.” Does chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany? Not necessarily. The Italian premier Giorgia Meloni is closest to this perception, however, probably not authoritarian enough for Trump’s taste. The Finnish president Alexander Stubb has been in the headlines lately as the only European politician who has the command of the US president’s psyche. Still, he is just “another nice guy,” and, additionally, a fine golfer.
Paradoxically, this is one of the reasons the transatlantic relationship has deteriorated in such a dramatic manner during the second Trump presidency. The current US administration generally views Europe as feeble and paralyzed. Declining both economically and socially, and failing to address the most pressing structural problems. Europe is fatally losing the war against illegal migration (unlike America), and lagging in the technological race (unlike America). Europe is incapable of defending itself militarily, let alone defending Ukraine. Europe is literally dying, due to its inability to tackle adverse demographic trends.
All these concerning phenomena render the Old Continent much less attractive with regard to the United States’ global interests. Europe has completed a journey from indispensable ally to disposable weakling.
The chapter dedicated to Europe in the Trump administration’s recently unveiled National Security Strategy does not leave much room for doubt: “American officials have become used to thinking about European problems in terms of insufficient military spending and economic stagnation. There is truth to this, but Europe’s real problems are even deeper…But this economic decline is eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of civilizational erasure. The larger issues facing Europe include activities of the European Union and other transnational bodies that undermine political liberty and sovereignty, migration policies that are transforming the continent and creating strife, censorship of free speech and suppression of political opposition, cratering birthrates, and loss of national identities and self-confidence.”
This stark image is greatly exaggerated. However, it is not entirely untrue. Europe is immersed in a series of crises, lacks vision, and is being consumed by the craze for political correctness. The contrast between Europe’s grandstanding and its real influence in the international arena is staggering. No wonder European leaders are now playing a marginal role in peace negotiations regarding Ukraine’s future. Unsurprisingly, it’s the “tough guys,” not the “nice guys,” who have President Trump’s ear and enjoy his trust.
There are several areas in which the ideological gap between the United States and Europe has become even more palpable. The US president and his supporters depict today’s America as a saviour of Christianity, in an apparently biblical struggle against wokeness and globalism. In this confrontation, American conservatives view liberal Europe as an adversary rather than a partner. If not an explicit threat to Western civilization. In this respect, even Russia appears to be more aligned with the so-called MAGA values. In the eyes of many radical Republicans, the only salvation for Europe lies in the ascent of right-wing parties in France, Germany, or Spain: National Rally, Alternative for Germany, and Vox, respectively.
Climate change has become another thorny issue. Several senior US officials have recently questioned the veracity or at least the accuracy of scientific data in this respect. What most European decision-makers regard as an inevitable path towards cleaner energy is anathema to their peers across the pond. “Green deal” meets “Drill, baby, drill,” in a consequential showdown.
Similarly, the American approach to international law differs from the European one. Asked last month about US military operations against drug traffickers in the Caribbean, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said: “I don’t think that the European Union gets to determine what international law is, and what they certainly don’t get to determine is how the United States defends its national security.”
In this context, it’s telling how the US administration is distancing itself from the UN, how harshly it sanctions the judges of the International Criminal Court in the Hague, and how conveniently it turns a blind eye to the brutality of the Israeli army in the Gaza Strip. The “defense of national security,” as Marco Rubio concisely implied, trumps all legal misgivings and could be used as a handy argument in any circumstances.
Last but not least, the respective attitudes of America and Europe towards the ever-expanding influence of artificial intelligence are another divisive factor. For US businesses, it’s an opportunity and another frontier to surpass. In contrast, for most European societies, it’s a menace.“Perhaps we’ll lose some jobs, but we’ll create many more,” assert the Americans. The Europeans are not so sure: “Perhaps we’ll create some jobs, but we will lose plenty of them.”
So, in a nutshell, this is how the current US administration perceives Europe: as weak, intoxicated by political correctness, equivocating on crucial issues, and technologically backward. Now, does it also see Central Europe as weak and disposable?
Intriguingly, even today, a vast majority of Americans equate Europe with its Western part. It’s not even Western Europe versus Eastern Europe. It’s Europe versus an amalgam of post-Soviet countries and peoples. The Iron Curtain collapsed 35 years ago, but it is still enshrined in the mentality of many Westerners, be it the Americans, the French, the Britons, or the Germans.
However, as depressing as it sounds, it is a curse and a blessing at the same time. And a chance to circle back to the famous distinction between “Old Europe” and “New Europe,” so repeatedly and eagerly used by Donald Rumsfeld and other American neocons two decades ago. Maybe with a little tweak, “Old Europe” versus “Young Europe” would be a more suitable description.
This is arguably the most excruciating dilemma Central European governments face at this moment. To what extent should we communicate with Trump’s America as “Europeans,” mindful that this definition does not elicit positive emotions at the White House? To what extent should we play the “tough guys” from the East, rather than the “nice guys” from Paris or Helsinki, while also acutely aware that such a perspective could potentially poison our relations with major European capitals?
There are few countries and even fewer leaders in Europe who can bridge this gap, consistently and simultaneously nurturing excellent ties with Washington, Berlin, and Brussels. Poland is one of them, having a staunchly pro-American president and an ardently pro-European prime minister.
Regrettably, the profoundly partisan nature of internal politics doesn’t allow for Polish politicians to be equally pro-European and pro-American, a familiar pattern in the nineties across the political spectrum. On the contrary, the pro-Trump and anti-Trump tribes are now dominating the public discourse in Warsaw. Seemingly, and evoking a Middle East parallel, it is a rule of thumb: we never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
(national interest)