Trump vs. Europe: The Doctrine of Contempt

Brussels / Barcelona"A group of countries in decline," with "weak" leaders who only want to be "politically correct" and "don't know what they're doing." That's how Donald Trump sees the European Union. In an interview with Political At the White House this week, the US president launched the harshest frontal attack against the United States' main ally since World War II. This aggression deepens the wounds of the already strained transatlantic relationship and adds to the controversy already stirred up by the publication of the US National Security StrategyThe Trump administration is reviving the language of the culture war and has put in writing Washington's willingness to promote far-right and "Eurosceptic" forces within the European Union.

Trump's inflammatory words come at a critical moment for the negotiation of a possible end to the Russian war against UkraineAlthough the EU suffers the most direct consequences and has allocated the most money to Kyiv, it finds itself being dragged along by Washington and excluded from the negotiating table. In fact, European allies are paralyzed by the United States' distancing itself from EU interests. EU leaders repeat like a mantra that they yearn for autonomy and to break free from their dependence on the American power. This week, they escalated their rhetoric against Trump. "No one but European citizens should interfere in European politics, without a doubt," Ursula von der Leyen responded this Thursday. But beyond words, Europe is yielding and bowing its head on almost every front, especially military and trade. One of the few areas where it is holding firm is regarding digital regulation and its stance against major American tech companies. Amid the controversy, Brussels has opened an investigation into WhatsApp and Google, and has imposed a multimillion-dollar fine on X

Unilateralism: earning more by doing less

The Trump administration's foreign policy no longer places competition with Russia and China at its core and breaks with the idea of a shared heritage between the United States and Europe. As Melanie W. Sisson, a fellow at Brookings, explains, "in foreign policy, America First This translates into the conviction that the international order that emerged after World War II—in which the United States made great efforts to maintain a close transatlantic relationship and compete militarily with rival powers—has been detrimental to Americans.” A retreat based on the idea that “Washington has done too much for too long and in too many places.” Trump’s vision of international relations, he concludes, centers on the idea that “defending American interests means turning the helm inward: freeing ourselves from trade conditions considered unfair imposed by multilateral institutions; protecting and defending ourselves; and demonstrate military sophistication without committing to long-term objectives." In short: the United States has convinced itself that it can achieve more by doing less.

Ultimately, what distinguishes Trump from his predecessors is not that he wants to put America first, but a more restrictive notion of what constitutes his idea of national interest. And abandoning international law, which, with Trump, is no longer even mentioned on paper.

Europe has earned Trump's accusations of weakness, warns Amanda Paul, an analyst at the European Policy Center. "Europe has spent almost a year trying to appease Trump in the hope that he will 'see the light' regarding Putin's aggression against Ukraine and has tried to get Washington to keep its troops deployed on NATO's eastern flank to ensure he remains committed to European security. This approach reeks of weakness." The new US National Security Strategy, after all, makes plain what everyone already knew: that Trump is not an admirer of the EU or its allies. "He prefers to talk to Putin, a war criminal, hoping to strike lucrative deals for himself and his entourage, rather than help Ukraine defeat an aggressor that threatens European security and the sovereignty of its neighbors," Paul asserts.

On this side of the Atlantic, it seems, the message has finally sunk in. "Europeans are finally waking up. They are taking more responsibility for their own security and defense, and also for that of Ukraine," says the analyst. And he cites as an example the Commission's decision to mobilize the frozen Russian assets in European banks to finance Ukraine's defense, which he considers "a courageous gamble." Paul has no doubts: "Europeans must lead their own continent, shape their future," and stop following the United States' lead. They have to make decisions, present their own ideas to end the war in Ukraine, and provide the necessary resources to achieve it. They must say to Trump: "Thank you for everything, but from now on we are taking the lead and starting to act from a position of strength."

The "patriotic" alliance with the far right

According to the new US National Security Strategy, the Trump administration's mission is to "promote European greatness" and prevent the Old Continent from becoming "unrecognizable" due to migrations that are weakening national identities. Furthermore, US diplomacy "must defend genuine democracy, freedom of expression, and the unapologetic celebration of the individual character and history of European nations." These two sentences resonate with several ideas that perfectly align with the rhetoric of European populist far-right groups; "patriotic" parties whose rise Trump celebrates. Migration, national sovereignty, rhetoric against European institutions, and a culture war against "European culture." woke"These are the issues that align most closely with MAGA ideology and the European far right," summarizes Mireia Faro of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR). "A MAGA White House combined with radical right-wing governments creates a scenario in which Washington would have allies capable of blocking European policies, digital regulation, or the development of an autonomous European defense."

Rebecca Lissner, analyst at think tank The US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) notes in an article published this week that the MAGA movement has been building a broad network of relationships with far-right parties in Europe for years, but warns that this is the first time the White House has "the mandate to interfere." "Trump is developing a toolkit to help his illiberal political allies around the world," it says, citing the example of the recent elections in Argentina and HondurasA warning of a future in which the US "reverses its Cold War mission to spread democracy" and instead uses its power "to make the world safer for illiberalism."

A good tariff deal… for Trump

The price the European Union must pay to end the tariff war initiated by Trump is onea trade agreement that applies a 15% tariff to European products entering the U.S. And yet, no tariffs on US imports into the EU. To make matters worse, member states have committed to buying €700 billion worth of energy products in just the next three years. "It's an unbalanced agreement," summarizes Ignacio García Bercero, former European Commission trade negotiator with the White House, in the ARA. However, the expert recalls that the situation in which the EU and the US finalized the agreement was "very difficult" for Brussels. Aside from Trump's constant threats, García Bercero also points to Washington's power over the European bloc due to the EU's dependence on security and the war in Ukraine on the Pentagon. For this reason, the former high-ranking European Commission official considers it "the least bad possible agreement," especially when compared to the other trade pacts the White House has made with other powers.

Now, however, the European Union wants to improve the trade agreement and is trying to get the United States to accept some exceptions for certain products that European industry exports most to the US, such as pasta and wine. However, Washington is currently completely opposed and, far from opening the door to accepting improvements to the pact, has further hardened its tone against Brussels in recent days, demanding regulatory reforms in the digital sector that the European Union currently considers unacceptable.

The power struggle big-tech

The EU has yielded in almost every area to the threats and pressure from the Trump administration. However, there is one sector where Brussels is standing firm and sees it as a red line it refuses to cross: digital regulation. The European Commission continues to enforce the Digital Services Act with a firm hand and its fight to ensure that Big Tech, especially American companies, comply with this legislation. In fact, the European Commission fined Google €120 million (5% of its global revenue) at a time when tensions with the US were already rising. This penalty sparked outrage from Elon Musk, the owner of the social network and former collaborator of the Trump administration, and the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, called it an "attack on the entire American people." Instead of backing down, however, the Commission hastily announced, early Monday morning, the opening of an investigation into Google. Furthermore, the previous week it had already opened another investigation against WhatsApp regarding its artificial intelligence services. Although the European Commission denied that this was a response to Washington, it was a clear statement of intent. "The EU will not allow its regulatory sovereignty to be called into question," states García Bercero, who also points out that, in this area, the EU does "resist" the "obvious threats and pressures" from Trump and Big Tech.