Almost eight decades after the signing of the Marshall Plan and the subsequent establishment of NATO, little seems to remain to remind us of the close post-war alliance between the United States and Europe.
In just the first month of the Trump 2.0 era, the rift in the Euro-Atlantic model seems to be growing dangerously deeper, even if it does not ultimately result in a complete rupture.
Under the heavy “shadow” of mutual distrust, it seems that there is not much – from interests to values - that could keep the strategic and partnership relationship alive to this day.
More and more people are speaking with certainty about the end of a significant, long period of history since World War II.
Although French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer were not rudely ousted from the White House in their meetings with Donald Trump in Washington this week, as happened with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Friday, a fundamental question about the security architecture of the Old Continent is becoming increasingly pressing for European leaders.
While American protectionism and hegemony are not a new phenomenon, they are now combined with the unrestrained revisionism and expansionism of Trump’s second term in the White House.
With revisionism, the 47th US president is turning Russia from a pariah into a partner in negotiations to end its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, now in its fourth year.
He is demanding that war-torn Kiev share its mineral wealth and infrastructure, and that the Europeans provide post-war – and costly – security guarantees.
He says he “supports” NATO’s Article 5 on collective defense, but believes it will not need to be activated if a “deal” is struck with – another major revisionist – Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Because “I have known him for a long time,” he argued, and “I believe he will keep his word” on a peace agreement for Ukraine…
For Kiev – under his current or no leadership – the price will be the co-exploitation with the US of Ukrainian rare earth minerals, energy resources and infrastructure projects, as well as the loss of territory.
For a Europe of multiple crises, which is undergoing a violent “awakening” after decades of “rest” in the – no longer given – certainty of the US allied “umbrella”, the difficult days seem to have not yet come.
Its much-discussed, much-postponed, but now belatedly accelerated – against time, resources and European defense capabilities – strategic autonomy is only part of a difficult new geopolitical “equation” in relations with the US.
Trump’s announcement of a 25% tariff on the EU “created to f@ck America”, as well as the blunt political interventions in favor of the European Far Right by techno-oligarch Elon Musk (now widely described as the “shadow” US president) and US Vice President JD Vance, put Europe in a new “frame”.
According to the view of the new “tenant” of the White House – who sees international relations as business and international law as an unnecessary… obstacle to the imposition of the “law of the strong” – Europe should be content with the role of obedient vassal, if it does not want to find itself in the position of a weak opponent.
After Volodymyr Zelensky’s unprecedentedly eventful meeting with Donald Trump at the White House and the wave of solidarity from European leaders towards the Ukrainian president, the Estonian head of European diplomacy, Kaja Kallas, declared that “the free world needs a new leader.”
“It is up to us, the Europeans, to rise to this challenge,” she added.
However, she did not specify how, with whom at the “helm” of the divided EU – which is now deliberating in… mini-summits – or by what means.
A first test of realism and determination is probably not long in coming. It will come with the new Trump-Putin summit.
The irony is that, by marginalizing Europe, America accelerated and deepened the process of marginalization of the West on a global scale.
