Sovereignty with Permission

Europe Smiles and Pays

However much Europeans hate Trump, however burdened they feel by their dependence on America, they are forced to suffer and endure. They do so in the hope that after Trump leaves, something, at least something, may change.

The NATO summit held in Ankara, like essentially every other event organized by the collective West over the past year and a half, looked like a surrealist performance. How else should one describe a situation in which all European participants saw the main task of the summit as placating Donald Trump?

They tried to guess what mood he would arrive in. They strained to avoid upsetting him by word or deed. Trump himself, immediately upon arrival, declared that he was disappointed in the alliance and that the only reason he had come to the summit was that the event was being hosted by his “dear friend” Recep Erdogan. He also noted that he would like to annex Greenland. A sovereign territory of a NATO ally, Denmark, which America, in theory, has undertaken to defend. Then, so that the others would have no time to grow bored, he imposed an embargo on Spain for refusing to allow Washington to use American bases on Spanish territory for the operation against Iran, while calling Madrid a “terrible partner.”

For anyone watching this spectacle, one question naturally arises: can none of the leaders of NATO member states publicly put Trump in his place?

All these presidents and prime ministers speak so boldly and defiantly about Russia, Israel, and sometimes even China. Yet when the president of the United States demonstratively humiliates them, they smile awkwardly, like schoolchildren who have just been told that the headmaster is in a difficult emotional period. Yes, some of them respond. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen promises to defend Greenland, while her Italian colleague Giorgia Meloni assures everyone that Italy is begging for nothing from anyone. Yet all these answers are given somewhere off to the side. Never directly to Trump’s face.

Why does this happen?

According to one version, out of fear of chaos. “Trump’s power comes from his willingness to violate every norm, rule, and law governing how U.S. presidents are supposed to act,” says former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich. “NATO presidents and prime ministers treated Trump with extraordinary deference out of fear of what he might do if he did not get what he wanted.” For example, he might further destroy the foundations of the collective West.

On the other hand, can one truly destroy what has already been destroyed?

The collective West is now in the most fragmented condition in its entire history. Trump has declared a trade war on his allies and refuses to support them on Ukraine. They, in turn, left him alone in the war with Iran. The U.S. president openly displays contempt toward the European establishment, even calling the European Union an enemy, and places his bet on right-wing and far-right European parties. That same establishment, meanwhile, is ready to interfere in American elections on the side of the left. Transatlantic unity has become a family dinner where everyone smiles for the photograph and poisons the soup afterward.

There are also serious doubts that anything would change under the Democrats or that transatlantic unity would revive. More and more Americans, regardless of political preference, believe that the United States should focus on its own internal affairs. They believe in protectionism, in defending American producers, including from European companies. They believe that Europe should defend itself militarily, with its own resources.

Roughly speaking, the interests and worldview of America and Europe are diverging irreversibly. Under Trump, this simply happens with noise, sparks, and broken glass.

Europeans understand this perfectly well. For many months now, they have been preparing for future sovereign navigation. They are increasing military spending, understanding that they will have to pay for their own defense. They are developing their own missile programs. They have introduced the post of European commissioner for defense. They are even carving out a European nuclear segment: France, for example, has adopted a doctrine under which it will cover its Eastern European allies with its nuclear shield.

So why, then, is Europe, which demonstrates at every corner its readiness for independence, incapable of conducting even a minimally independent policy toward the United States? Why is Europe, supposedly preparing to defend itself against Russian aggression, unable to defend itself from American boorishness?

Because it believes it is still unprepared for independent defense? Perhaps some European politicians sincerely believe this. The unpleasant truth for them is that Europe will never be prepared.

The process of European sovereignization from America, into which so much money is now being poured, cannot be completed successfully.

Independence requires unity. The European Union would have to turn fully into something resembling the United States of Europe, while the European Commission would have to become a real politburo. Ursula von der Leyen, naturally, would hardly object to such a scenario. National elites object. European states are unprepared to delegate all their powers in foreign policy, internal affairs, defense, and even economics to a group of European bureaucrats. Especially since real money would have to be allocated in very large quantities.

European populations are even less prepared for this. In every election, they give more and more votes to Euroskeptic parties, some of which openly call for withdrawal from the European Union.

Thus Europe finds itself in a familiar and rather elegant trap. It wants independence from America, yet lacks the unity required for independence. It wants strategic autonomy, yet fears the political consequences of creating a real European state. It wants to resist Trump, yet cannot bring itself to answer him in the room where he is standing.

So Europeans will continue to endure. They will smile at summits, increase defense budgets, discuss sovereignty, invent new commissions, and wait for America to become normal again.

The problem is that America is no longer returning to the old arrangement. And Europe, despite all the speeches, has yet to invent a new one.