The European political establishment has been left in shock as the United States, long regarded as the indispensable pillar of Western security, appears to be shifting its alliances in a way that threatens the very foundation of European stability.
This shift, signalled by President Donald Trump’s rhetoric and actions, strongly suggests a potential realignment in U.S. foreign policy that favours closer ties with Russia at the expense of Europe. The implications of such a shift are profound, raising existential questions about Europe’s ability to defend itself and maintain geopolitical influence in a world increasingly defined by great-power competition.
Since the end of World War II, the United States has been the linchpin of European security, acting as a bulwark against Soviet aggression during the Cold War and later against a resurgent Russia under Vladimir Putin. The transatlantic alliance, enshrined in NATO, has long served as a deterrent against external threats. American leadership ensured stability, allowing Europe to focus on economic development and political integration rather than military spending.
However, under the Trump administration, the traditional U.S. commitment to NATO and European security was questioned. Trump frequently criticised European nations for failing to contribute their fair share to defence spending, accusing them of “free-riding” on American military power. His open skepticism about NATO’s utility and his apparent admiration for authoritarian leaders, including Putin, alarmed European policymakers.
Trump and the “New Epoch”
Valérie Hayer, president of the centrist Renew Europe group in the European Parliament, encapsulated the fears of many when she remarked, “The United States was the pillar around which peace was managed, but it has changed alliance. Trump mouths the propaganda of Putin. We have entered a new epoch.”
Her words highlight a fundamental shift in how Europe perceives its relationship with the United States. If America is no longer committed to European security, or worse, if it actively seeks to dismantle the structures that have underpinned it, Europe faces an unprecedented crisis.
Trump’s rhetoric and actions suggest that his administration—should he return to the White House—could take a more isolationist stance, possibly even undermining NATO.
His previous term saw him openly questioning the alliance’s relevance and suggesting that the U.S. might not come to the aid of NATO allies that fail to meet their defence spending obligations. His alignment with Putin’s talking points, particularly regarding Ukraine and NATO expansion, has only deepened European anxieties.
Europe’s Defence Void
The immediate consequence of this shift is that Europe must confront the reality of its own defence. For decades, European countries have relied on the U.S. nuclear umbrella and military might to deter aggression. With America’s commitment now in question, Europe is being forced to consider an uncomfortable truth: it must take responsibility for its own security.
Yet, the prospect of a militarily independent Europe is fraught with challenges. The European Union’s ability to mount a unified defence effort is hamstrung by its dependence on consensus-based decision-making.
The presence of pro-Russian leaders such as Hungary’s Viktor Orbán and Slovakia’s Robert Fico further complicates efforts to form a cohesive European military policy. Both leaders, widely assumed to have “close ties” with the Kremlin, have repeatedly vetoed EU actions aimed at countering Russian aggression. This paralysis has left the EU incapable of forming a decisive response to security threats.
URSULA VON DER LEYEN Laurie DIEFFEMBACQ Copyright: © European Union 2025 – Source : EP
The European Commission, under President Ursula von der Leyen, has made bold statements about strengthening Europe’s military capabilities.
However, critics argue that these pronouncements amount to little more than rhetorical posturing. Concrete progress has been slow, and the absence of a central European military command structure has rendered real action difficult.
Unlike the U.S., which can unilaterally mobilise its forces, Europe remains constrained by bureaucratic inertia and political divisions.
The Cost of Free-Riding
For years, European nations have underinvested in their militaries, confident that American protection would always be available. The result is a defence apparatus that is ill-prepared for the challenges of modern warfare.
While some European countries, such as Poland and the Baltic states, have significantly increased their defence budgets in response to the Russian threat, others remain hesitant. Germany, Europe’s largest economy, has been slow to meet its NATO spending commitments, despite pledges to ramp up military investment.
This hesitancy reflects a deeper reluctance within Europe to acknowledge the full implications of America’s changing stance. For many European leaders, the idea of true strategic autonomy—militarily independent of the United States—is politically and economically daunting. Yet, with the growing unreliability of U.S. commitments, Europe may have no other choice but to take drastic steps toward self-sufficiency in defence.
Russia’s ongoing aggression in Ukraine has exposed the vulnerabilities in Europe’s security architecture. While European nations have provided substantial aid to Ukraine, their collective military capabilities remain inadequate to deter a direct Russian attack. Without the U.S. security guarantee, Europe would face severe difficulties in countering Russian military advances on its own.
The Kremlin has long sought to exploit divisions within Europe, using economic leverage and political influence to weaken the continent’s unity. The presence of pro-Russian leaders within the EU provides Moscow with an effective means of obstructing any unified European response. If America further distances itself from European security affairs, Russia may feel emboldened to expand its influence in Eastern Europe and beyond.
The Path Forward: A United European Front?
Despite these challenges, Europe still has options. To counter the growing uncertainty in transatlantic relations, European nations must take decisive steps to strengthen their own defence capabilities. This means increasing military spending, investing in advanced defence technologies, and fostering deeper military cooperation among EU member states.
One possible avenue is the expansion of existing European defence initiatives, such as the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) framework, which aims to enhance military coordination among EU nations.
However, PESCO’s effectiveness remains limited by political disagreements and logistical hurdles. A more radical solution would involve creating a centralised European military command capable of acting independently of NATO. Yet, such a move would require unprecedented levels of political will and financial commitment.
Furthermore, Europe must work to counter Russian influence within its own ranks. This means taking a firm stance against leaders who undermine collective security efforts and exploring mechanisms to bypass national vetoes on critical defence decisions.
The shifting dynamics of U.S. foreign policy have forced Europe into a moment of reckoning.
The comfortable era of American-led security is ending, and Europe must decide whether it will rise to the challenge or continue to falter in the face of mounting threats. While the road to strategic autonomy is fraught with difficulties, the alternative—continued dependence on an increasingly unreliable America—may prove even more dangerous.
This article first appeared on EU Global News and is re-published here with their kind permission.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Slovak Opposition Moves to Challenge PM Robert Fico with No-Confidence Vote
READ ALSO: SLOVAK PRIME MINISTER ROBERT FICO SUGGESTS MISSILE STRIKE ON BRUSSELS.
Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico has sparked outrage with remarks in which he suggested a missile strike on Brussels, in response to growing European support for Ukraine’s use of long-range weapons against Russian territory.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
