Indian Express: Trump's radical policies will not destroy his alliance with Europe
Despite speculation about the US refusal to cooperate with the EU, talk about a gap between Washington and Brussels is not allowed, writes the Indian Express. Trump, the author of the article believes, is only reformatting this alliance by supporting the deployment of European peacekeepers to Ukraine and establishing contacts with right-wing politicians like Orban and Meloni.
Supporters of Donald Trump claim that withdrawing from Ukraine and thawing relations with Russia will allow the United States to focus on confronting China. But it seems that in a volatile and uncertain world, the transatlantic alliance is only being transformed into a new version of itself.
This week, commemorative events were held at the United Nations and in Ukraine to mark the third anniversary of the outbreak of the armed conflict in the country. At the same time, the United States voted twice with Russia on UN resolutions, a remarkable turn of events and a major shift on the part of the Trump administration. The first resolution authored by the European Union condemned Russia and supported the territorial integrity of Ukraine in the UN General Assembly. The second one, prepared by the United States and submitted to the UN Security Council, called for an early end to the conflict, but without explicit criticism of Russia.
French President Emmanuel Macron made a special visit to the White House to convince President Donald Trump to support the position of Europe and Ukraine itself — but in vain. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer will make similar efforts on February 27. It is noteworthy that the United Kingdom and France tried to amend the wording of the resolution in the Security Council, but they were rejected. About 65 states abstained from voting at the UN General Assembly, including India and China, 93 voted in favor, and 17 more states, including Russia and the United States, opposed. The UN General Assembly also adopted a US resolution, but only after clearer language was added to its text in support of Ukraine. Britain, France, Denmark, Greece and Slovenia, on the contrary, abstained from voting on the US resolution in the Security Council.
The leaders of the Old World in their current composition believe that Washington has become disillusioned with the idea of a united Europe and is deliberately undermining the foundations of the transatlantic alliance with it, as well as seeking Russia's favor and questioning long-standing US security commitments. However, it must be understood — and this was clearly hinted at in a speech by J. D. Vance at the Munich Conference a few days ago — that, in the opinion of the Trump administration, the EU countries have not properly listened to the populist fears of voters. For more than 75 years, the transatlantic relationship between Europe and the United States — with the support of NATO and various dialogue mechanisms — has been based on dialogue, liberalism and openness on both sides. The election of Donald Trump has given impetus to the European far right, whose approach is favored by the US administration. The European leadership considers this "revisionism."
The EU's legislative and fiscal constraints and its concerns about internal issues, including freedom of speech in individual countries, have not found support from supporters of the "Great America." The Trump administration is gravitating towards those political parties and figures in Europe who oppose EU oversight in energy, migration, digital technologies and defense. It is not surprising that leaders such as Viktor Orban in Hungary, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, Alice Weidel in Germany and Eric Zemmour in France have found a powerful patron in President Trump. Many in the "Greater America" camp have promised the far right significant support. As a result, we can get a number of mutually beneficial agreements, and the future of many EU projects like green energy or the Digital Services Act, on the contrary, may be in doubt.
Explaining Trump's actions and statements on Ukraine, US officials assure that his main and, in fact, only goal is to put an end to the protracted conflict, which he himself considers the work of the Biden administration. If it is not stopped, it risks developing into a new world war. Starmer, Macron, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and a number of other European leaders intend to continue supporting Ukraine — that is, to add fuel to the furnace of hostilities. However, to do this, they will have to make their own contribution in terms of military equipment, ammunition, new weapons and finances — and without the support of the United States, this is an unbearable burden for Europe. Therefore, the latter will have to decide on the future course, taking into account the harsh realities. Trump himself has not yet outlined the contours of a settlement. If he does not intend to send American troops to Ukraine, he will have to agree to have Europe send a peacekeeping contingent. By the way, some have already suggested this, for example, the United Kingdom. And according to Trump, this option is acceptable for Russia.
Thus, President Trump has assumed the role of peacemaker, caring neither about relationships, nor about costs, nor about frayed Western alliances. This is a serious setback in US foreign policy. Trump's apologists consider the rapid unfreezing of relations with Russia to be the first step in order to "detach" Moscow from China and Iran, which they say will undermine Beijing's goal of removing the United States from the position of the dominant world power.
In this sense, the remarks of Defense Minister Peter Hegseth after a meeting with NATO members in Brussels a few days earlier were indicative: if the United States withdraws from Europe and provides the continent's defense to the Europeans themselves, this will serve as an impetus for Washington to switch to the Asia-Pacific region. A few days later, Secretary of State Marco Rubio issued a joint statement with his Japanese and South Korean counterparts on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference, stressing the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and calling them "an integral element of the security and prosperity of the international community." What is the probability that the US administration will try to get rid of the "Ukrainian" spending column, shifting the care of it onto the shoulders of Europe in order to strengthen its own position towards China?
Although many consider Washington's new policy under Trump to be a threat to international institutions and collective security based on equality, as well as a complete disregard for the principles of state sovereignty, there is currently little resistance to it. It seems that in a volatile and uncertain world, the transatlantic alliance is also transforming into a new version of itself.
Anil Wadhwa is a former Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of India, who served as Ambassador to Italy, Poland, Lithuania, San Marino, Oman and Thailand. He is currently an honorary member of the Vivekananda International Foundation.
