With President Donald Trump’s second term in office in sight, Europe faces a new reality concerning its relationship with the United States. Europe’s dependence on the U.S. for military support and strategic decisions will decrease, as Trump has repeatedly signaled his intention to shift the primary focus of American foreign policy away from the continent. For Europe, this potential shift raises difficult questions about its security strategy, its place within NATO, and its relationship with other global players such as Russia and China.
Trump’s first term as president was marked by a new approach to NATO and international security, and his rhetoric during the election campaign cycle suggested that if he returns to power, his stance will remain unchanged. Trump has stated explicitly that NATO allies in Europe must increase their military spending and contribute more to collective defence efforts. During his first term, he even threatened to withdraw from NATO unless European countries met his demands for higher defence budgets. He made it clear that Washington would not come to the aid of European nations if they did not invest enough in their own defence.
This shift could have profound implications for European security and defence strategies. With Trump’s second mandate, it seems increasingly likely that Europe will be compelled to take more responsibility for its own defence. This could include joint defence spending, strategic military initiatives, and a greater focus on European-led defence projects. Trump believes that European nations have been free-riding on American military expenditures for too long. His administration’s message would be clear: either European countries step up their military budgets, or they will have to fend for themselves.
Another area where Trump’s presidency is set to have significant implications is, of course, the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine. Since the beginning of the war in February 2022, the U.S. has been a crucial ally of Ukraine, providing military, economic, and humanitarian support to the war-torn country. Under the Biden regime, U.S. support for Ukraine has been extensive, with Washington sending tens of billions of dollars in aid to Kyiv. Trump’s approach toward the Russia-Ukraine war, however, is likely to be very different—if we take his campaign rhetoric seriously.
Throughout his first term, Trump repeatedly expressed admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin, and frequently criticised U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts, including military aid to Ukraine. During his campaign, Trump stated that he would work to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of taking office. In light of his history of pro-Russian rhetoric, many Ukrainians are understandably sceptical of Trump’s intentions. Some fear that a second Trump term could lead to a dramatic shift in U.S. policy, potentially putting pressure on Ukraine to negotiate a peace deal with Russia, even if the terms are favourable to Moscow.
Such a shift could have far-reaching consequences for both Ukraine and Europe. If Trump were to pull back U.S. military aid to Ukraine, it would leave the country more vulnerable to Russian influence. This would also complicate Europe’s efforts to maintain a united front against Russia. For Europe, Trump’s stance on Ukraine would be a source of significant concern.
Trump’s White House will ask Europe to take on a more significant financial burden in supporting Ukraine’s defence. While the EU has already provided substantial aid to Ukraine, including military assistance worth tens of billions of euros, this figure could increase dramatically if the U.S. reduces its contributions. The EU, almost certainly, will be expected to pick up a larger share of the financial burden, and will inevitably lead to difficult political discussions within the bloc and pave the way for preexisting fissures to widen. Some EU nations, particularly those with more limited resources, may struggle to increase their contributions, while others could push for greater coordination and a more unified approach to supporting Ukraine.
Trump’s administration is set not only to challenge Europe’s military and security but also to shake up its energy policy. His stance on energy is centred around increasing U.S. fossil fuel production, especially oil, and gas. During his previous administration, Trump’s White House consistently prioritised the extraction and export of fossil fuels, including pushing for an end to restrictions on new liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects. This shift in U.S. energy policy has raised concerns in Europe, particularly given the continent’s growing reliance on American LNG exports in the wake of the Russo-Ukrainian war and its subsequent disruptions to European energy supplies. If Trump were to reverse Biden-era energy policies, Europe could face increased uncertainty in its energy markets, potentially leading to higher prices and a greater dependence on U.S. fossil fuels.
Furthermore, Trump’s environmental policies, including his scepticism towards climate change and his commitment to expanding fossil fuel production, could place the EU in a difficult position. Europe has long been a leader in the global push for climate action, and it has worked tirelessly to reduce emissions and transition to renewable energy sources. Trump’s rejection of international climate agreements, including the Paris Agreement, and his push to expand the fossil fuel industry will, of course, be at odds with and undermine EU efforts to tackle climate change. The EU’s commitment to its Green Deal and net-zero emissions by 2050 would clash with Trump’s pro-fossil fuel agenda, leading to tensions in global climate diplomacy.
On trade, Trump’s economic nationalist “America First” policy is expected to remain a cornerstone of his second term. He has promised to bring jobs back to the U.S. by imposing tariffs on foreign goods, including European products. This protectionist approach could very well lead to a trade war with Europe. The potential for higher tariffs and reduced market access could hurt European businesses, leading to job losses and economic instability. Additionally, Trump’s trade policies could have far-reaching implications for global supply chains and international trade relationships, making severe disruptions to Europe’s already shaky economy a real possibility.
A significant factor contributing to Donald Trump’s electoral success has been the widespread frustration among American voters over mass migration, particularly under the Biden administration. With Trump’s re-election, the tone in Washington is expected to shift dramatically, especially concerning immigration. The Trump administration is likely to take a much firmer stance on immigration, focusing on tighter border controls and stricter policies to prevent the inflow of migrants.
This hardline approach to immigration could reverberate across the Atlantic, as Trump may seek to persuade and even pressure European leaders to adopt similar policies to curb migration on the continent. With the EU struggling to find consensus on immigration policies, a Trump administration could provide vocal support for anti-immigration factions within Europe. This would give national-conservative parties in European countries more leverage, as their anti-migration platforms could gain traction with the backing of the U.S. President. For once, the push for more robust border security and national control over migration could be seen as legitimate rather than being dismissed as extreme or xenophobic.
Trump’s rhetoric and actions on immigration will likely exacerbate political polarisation within European countries. This could further entrench divisions within European societies on the issue of migration, as voters are drawn into a deeper ideological battle over the future of immigration and border security.
In the realm of technology and digital regulation, a Trump win could widen the growing divide between the EU’s regulatory framework and the U.S.’s more laissez-faire approach. The European Union has long prided itself on its stringent data privacy laws, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which aims to protect personal data and set high standards for businesses handling this sensitive information. Additionally, the EU has been actively working to establish rules that regulate the tech sector, including measures aimed at curbing monopolistic practices among big tech companies and promoting fair competition.
By contrast, Trump’s policies during his first term leaned heavily toward deregulation, particularly in the tech sector. Thus, the stage is set for significant clashes with the EU’s more cautious approach to tech regulation. The difference in philosophy could lead to a deeper regulatory divide, with the EU possibly struggling to align with U.S. policies in areas such as data protection, tech monopolies, and competition law.
Another potential flashpoint could be Trump’s increasingly close relationship with Elon Musk, the owner of X (formerly Twitter). Musk has become a vocal Trump supporter, and his companies have grown closer to Trump’s political agenda. This connection could create tensions between the European Commission and the Trump administration, particularly if X faces fines for breaching the EU’s content-moderation rules. Europe’s regulatory framework has increasingly focused on holding big tech companies accountable for their role in spreading misinformation and harmful content. If the EU takes action against X, Trump could perceive it as an attack on American businesses, further souring relations with Brussels. Such a scenario could feed into a wider narrative that Europe is hostile toward U.S. tech giants, complicating the EU’s ability to cooperate with the U.S. on digital matters.
And lastly, the EU has positioned itself as a global leader in pushing for ethical guidelines in areas like artificial intelligence, data protection, and digital sovereignty. A lack of alignment with the U.S. could hinder Europe’s ability to lead on these fronts, particularly if Trump takes a more confrontational stance towards the EU on tech policy.
In conclusion, Trump’s victory in the 2024 U.S. election will have far-reaching implications for Europe. From trade and immigration to defence, technology and climate policy, the dynamics between the U.S. and the EU are likely to shift significantly. Europe is poised to face a more transactional and less predictable relationship with Washington, one in which it would have to navigate new pressures and alignments. The impact on key issues, such as immigration, tech regulation, and military spending, may very well alter the trajectory of European politics for years to come, pushing some countries closer to Trump’s policies, while others may resist. The challenges posed by a Trump presidency are immense, but they also present an opportunity for Europe to forge a more independent path, especially in areas where its interests diverge from those of the U.S.
