European-American Relations in Light of Recent Developments and Future Scenarios

The European-American relations are currently experiencing a state of confusion largely due to Trump’s administration’s stance on numerous issues, primarily regarding the Russia-Ukraine war and trade tariffs. Any vision for the future of European-American relations cannot be realized without addressing the fundamentals of that relationship. The connections between the two parties can be divided into three categories: trade, security, and shared values. Trade relations constitute 60% of the total gross product, 33% of global trade in goods, and 42% of global trade in services. Thus, the United States represents a vital strategic partner in trade relations with Europe.

On the security front, the complexities of the relationship include NATO, founded in 1949 in the aftermath of World War II. NATO has remained a cornerstone of international relations and a primary guarantor of European security, as well as vital for U.S. national security interests. Despite the collapse of the Soviet Union and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact in the 1990s, NATO continued to play an influential role in the global situation.

Following the Soviet Union’s collapse, the rise of China in East Asia, and subsequent coordination between Russia and China with various regional powers, the U.S. as the leading nation in a unipolar international system engaged with its allies to secure Northeast Asia against the risks of Chinese influence, especially in the South China Sea and the Pacific Ocean. China has begun to showcase monumental projects spanning Asia and extending toward other continents, such as the Belt and Road Initiative, and has built effective regional systems like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Central Asian security structure. Furthermore, China has sought strategic cooperation with Russia that extends beyond the Shanghai framework, leading to the formation of BRICS, which initially included India, South Africa, and Brazil, and later expanded to incorporate other significant economic and geopolitical countries, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Collectively, these countries represent about 26% of the global economy and encompass areas home to 40% of the world’s population, working within the framework of the New Development Bank and striving to establish a new global currency to compete with the dollar.

Such international organization forms a fundamental pillar in reshaping the global system toward a multipolar world— a process the United States seeks to disrupt in order to maintain its dominance as a unilateral power. Consequently, the U.S. has established the AUKUS alliance with the UK, Australia, and New Zealand, as well as the Quad alliance, which also includes Japan and India.

Meanwhile, the Middle East retains its geopolitical significance despite the U.S.-NATO focus shifting eastward. The U.S. has explicitly expressed its opposition to any attempts to divide influence in the Middle East, an area historically significant for global energy and strategic international routes, as highlighted since the 19th century and affirmed during the Campbell Conference of Western nations (1905-1907) that led to the Sykes-Picot Agreements and the Balfour Declaration, which divided the Arab world and established the Israeli state.

Given this context, Europe and the U.S. share substantial doctrinal and strategic visions that make the belief in a potential severing of ties between them illogical, despite existing areas of economic and even political competition. The Ukraine conflict with Russia has created a strategic convergence for the U.S. and NATO countries, leading them to engage in a proxy war with Russia across all relevant fields— a fundamental condition without which Ukraine could not withstand Russian actions.

Recent developments in the U.S. administration following Trump’s election, along with his calls to end this war and reassess relations with Russia, have raised questions about the likelihood of the U.S. abandoning its European allies and the Ukrainian government, especially after the public spat between Trump and Ukrainian President Zelensky.

This situation prompted NATO Europeans to convene a meeting dubbed the “Alliance of the Willing” in London, aiming to support President Zelensky and affirm their commitment to Ukraine despite the American stance. Interestingly, the UK, as America’s strongest European ally, expressed its readiness to lead Europe in ensuring sustained support for Ukraine in its fight against Russia.

In this regard, a call has emerged for Europe to reaffirm its security independence from the U.S. and to establish independent military defense capabilities. An agreement was announced to develop European military capabilities over five years at an estimated cost of $800 billion—a serious challenge given the economic difficulties facing European countries due to the Ukraine war and escalating spending in conflicts, in addition to the economic issues stemming from the energy crisis and rising tariffs.

This situation has raised numerous questions regarding Europe’s ability to achieve independent defense without American security guarantees and its association with NATO, particularly as European countries grapple with the consequences and high costs of the Ukraine war, which have cast a shadow over their economies. Many governments in Europe remain concerned about public opinion, especially as they face actual repercussions from the Russian gas export crisis linked to the halt of exports through Nord Stream 1 and 2. It’s evident that alternative sources of gas and oil have not resolved the issue of Russian gas shortages in Europe.

Based on the aforementioned, future scenarios can be delineated as follows: Trump’s presidency has generated proposals that have significantly impacted international relations, particularly concerning Ukraine, NATO, tariffs, the metal trade war with China, and ongoing American demands for access to minerals in several African countries and Greenland, all framed within the broader context of competition and conflicts surrounding the utilization of electronic chips and precision electronics amid the rise of artificial intelligence and anticipated metal wars. This creates multiple scenarios for the future of international relations. Regarding European-American relations and the implications of these mentioned variables, we see the following:

Scenario One: The U.S. withdraws from NATO as part of efforts to disengage from other functional international organizations, leading Europe to establish its regional deterrent capabilities independently of U.S. guarantees. This scenario aligns with possibilities for a multipolar international system where Europe could stand as a leading power within the international hierarchy.

This scenario inherently carries two implications: First, a conservative Trump administration could achieve a cessation of hostilities in Ukraine that aligns with Russian ambitions to retain strategic areas in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, isolating Russia from China in an effort to weaken the latter in the ongoing struggle for influence that China seeks to assert through its soft and gradual policies.

Second, Europe might shift to enhance cooperation with China in response to Trump’s administration’s rapprochement with Russia at the expense of Europe and its national security, resulting in European-Chinese collaboration in geopolitical conflict regions such as Ukraine, the Middle East, East Asia, and the Pacific.

Scenario Two: European-American relations may transition from a strategic alliance to a more traditional model of relationships among the entities of the international system (governments and organizations), characterized by an interplay of conflict and cooperation depending on national interests.

Scenario Three: Prioritizing strategies over immediate differences or interests between Europe and the United States. The nature of international crises reflects a clash of civilizations between East and West and shared value systems as strategic problems confront Europe in securing its national security. Moreover, the shared American-European interests in critical global issues, including the energy crisis (oil and gas), international currency value in trade, and securing international trade routes between East and West, all these critical equations suggest a resolution to American-European disagreements and support the ongoing strategic alliance between them.

I believe it is essential to recognize that most European countries find themselves propelled beyond their desires and national interests, following Biden administration policies concerning the proxy war in Ukraine, which exposed them to significant economic crises, particularly in the energy sector due to total or partial cuts of Russian gas to Europe and the dangerous ramifications on domestic security and stability. This scenario appears quite likely to me, as all these interactions will confirm a trend in the international system towards a plurality of polar centers, signaling a definitive decline of American unilateral hegemony— a situation that the affected global populations should consider while preparing for their countries’ future.