Make America Great Again version 2.0 is upon us.
If Trump is to be believed, he intends to “end the war in Ukraine in a few days” (i.e. abandon Kiev to its Russian aggressors). It intends to weaken America’s security guarantee towards NATO countries (which implies the end of the Atlantic Alliance).
It intends to impose tariffs of at least 10% on all European exports (and impose even higher duties on Chinese exports that could then flow into the EU market).
Trumpworld is a world without international rules or commitments. It’s the diplomacy of gangsterism
Announcement
In Trumpworld the United States should have the right to pollute the planet as it pleases; suck up international capital to finance its monstrous debt; and harm and insult his friends while playing softball with evil dictators.
Before MAGA version 1.0, Europeans could tell themselves that Trump’s rhetoric would not survive contact with reality. There would be adult conservatives within his administration to watch over him. He was a businessman. He would do some business.
Up to a point, this is what happened. But nearly all of the “adult conservatives” who worked with Trump in 2017-2020 now refuse to work with him. One of them, his former chief of staff John Kelly, says Trump can accurately be described as a “fascist” and that he intends to rule, a second time, as a dictator.
The US Senate and most likely the House of Representatives will be under Republican control. The Republican Party has sold its soul for power and will be under Trump’s control. Ditto, the United States Supreme Court.
Checks and balances? The United States Constitution and its democracy are about to undergo the greatest crash test since the American Civil War 160 years ago.
But so is NATO. And the same goes for the European Union.
There has never been a good time for Trump’s return. But seen from the European side of the Atlantic, his victory in Tuesday’s presidential election could not have come at a worse time.
The EU is divided over its future. Both the largest and most influential countries, Germany and France, are struggling economically and weakened politically. Their “alliance” has become a place of chatter that fails to resolve its differences, let alone impose a direction on the EU-27.
European public opinion remains substantially pro-Ukrainian but is bored by the war.
Announcement
The far right is growing in almost every EU country and will be emboldened by Trump’s victory, built partly on lies about immigrants. Trumponomics could plunge the world, and Europe, into a recession before it has adequately recovered from the double shock of Covid and the war in Ukraine.
The EU could face trade wars with both China and the United States over the next two years as what remains of global trade rules fall apart.
It is possible, therefore, to argue that Donald Trump could, paradoxically, be the savior of the EU. Almost all of Europe’s greatest achievements were forged during the crisis.
For seven years, French President Emmanuel Macron has been asking other EU countries to accept that they have to take their own destiny into their own hands. They can no longer rely on Washington for their security. They will not survive as an industrial power unless they work together to invest in new technologies and defend against Chinese, and yes American, trade aggression.
The second coming of Trump means that Macron has, in effect, “won” this argument. But it is now a spent force in France and has lost much of its political capital in Europe. The approaching crisis may or may not reinvigorate it.
Germany is also in political and economic crisis. Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s left-green-liberal coalition is falling apart. The far-right AFD is on the rise.
Announcement
Three of the four components of the “German model” have failed. There is no more cheap gas from Russia. China no longer buys German hardware. The United States’ security guarantee to Europe may soon end.
Only the fourth element remains: the EU and the European single market. But Scholz’s Germany – and perhaps all of Germany – rejects much of Macron’s vision of a “sovereign” Europe.
Hundreds of billions of euros of EU-backed debt to rebuild Europe’s industry and defense capacity? No thanks, that’s the French way, not the German way. Look where the French ended up.
Create a European defense force within NATO and perhaps replace NATO? Germany and Eastern European countries hate the idea. They want to cling to the nurse out of fear of something worse, even now that the nurse is wearing a red MAGA baseball cap.
React as a single EU to American and Chinese trade protectionism? Or try to make separate agreements?.
Trump will force Europeans to address all these issues over the next two years. Crisis can bring creativity and compromise. It has been in the past.
But the EU needs its Franco-German “engine” or alliance to lead the way. And France and Germany are both weakened and pulling in opposite directions.
Title: Navigating a Tumultuous Future: An Interview with Geopolitical Expert Dr. Elena Vasquez
Interviewer: Good afternoon, Dr. Vasquez. Thank you for joining us today as we delve into the implications of the upcoming election and a potential return to the Trump era. Your insights will be invaluable in unpacking these complex issues.
Dr. Vasquez: Thank you for having me. It’s a critical time, and I’m eager to discuss the ramifications that could arise from this political shift.
Interviewer: To start, the article mentions that if Trump were to return, he aims to “end the war in Ukraine in a few days.” What does this signify for U.S. foreign policy and the geopolitical landscape?
Dr. Vasquez: That statement is quite alarming. Ending the war in such a short timeframe suggests a withdrawal from support for Ukraine, which could embolden Russia further. This approach undermines the principles of collective security that have been the bedrock of NATO for decades. It raises questions about America’s commitment to its allies and could lead to a significant realignment of power in Europe.
Interviewer: The article also suggests that Trump intends to weaken America’s security guarantees towards NATO. How would this affect the transatlantic alliance?
Dr. Vasquez: It could spell disaster for NATO. The alliance has relied heavily on the United States for support, both militarily and politically. A diminished U.S. commitment could lead to a fragmented Europe where countries might feel compelled to seek bilateral agreements or enhance their own military capabilities, potentially igniting an arms race.
Interviewer: Tariffs are another major point raised in the article, particularly a proposed 10% tariff on all European exports. What might be the economic repercussions of such actions?
Dr. Vasquez: Such tariffs would likely trigger retaliatory measures from Europe and could ignite trade wars. The global economy is still reeling from the impacts of COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine. Increased tariffs would stifle trade, hurting businesses on both sides of the Atlantic, potentially leading to a recession when recovery is already fragile.
Interviewer: There’s a sense in the article that Trump’s brand of diplomacy resembles a “diplomacy of gangsterism.” Can you elaborate on this perspective?
Dr. Vasquez: This portrayal speaks to a transactional and often adversarial approach to international relations, one that disregards established norms and agreements. If the U.S. operates under this model, it risks alienating allies and-driven international relations toward chaos. This could create an environment where power dynamics shift towards more authoritarian regimes, challenging democratic values globally.
Interviewer: Despite these concerns, the article hints that Trump’s return might paradoxically strengthen the EU. What do you think about that perspective?
Dr. Vasquez: It’s a complex argument, but there is some merit to it. If Europe perceives that they can no longer rely on U.S. leadership, it may galvanize them to take charge of their own security and economic futures. Macron’s call for greater European autonomy in defense and technology investment could gain traction, but the political will and unity within the EU will be crucial. The risk is that this could also lead to fragmentation and internal strife, as seen with the rise of far-right parties.
Interviewer: That brings us to the internal dynamics within Europe. With rising far-right sentiments and political crises in Germany and France, how might this landscape evolve?
Dr. Vasquez: Europe is at a crossroads. The rise of populism could complicate the EU’s response to challenges. If far-right parties gain more influence, they could push for isolationist policies that further divide the EU, making cohesive action more difficult. Conversely, these challenges might mobilize traditional parties to reinforce EU integration efforts. The future really depends on how national leaders and parties address these rising sentiments.
Interviewer: as we contemplate the ramifications of a Trump presidency 2.0, what is your overarching concern for both the U.S. and Europe?
Dr. Vasquez: My primary concern is for the stability of the international order. If the U.S. retreats from its alliances, we risk a world where might makes right, potentially increasing conflicts globally. Navigating this uncharted territory will require strong leadership and a commitment to multilateralism. For Europe, it’s about finding unity in diversity, harnessing their collective strength in the face of external pressures, and ensuring they remain resilient.
Interviewer: Thank you, Dr. Vasquez. Your insights illuminate the significant impacts that the upcoming election may have not just within the U.S., but across the world.
Dr. Vasquez: Thank you for having me. Let’s hope for a future where dialogue prevails over division.