Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Is Europe in trouble as the US pulls away?
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: I want to talk about the transatlantic relationship. The US relationship with Europe. Because of all of the geopolitics in the world, this is the one that I think has been impacted in a permanent and structural way in the first two months of the Trump administration. I wouldn't say that, for example, look at the Middle East and US relations with Israel, the Saudis, the Emiratis, the rest of the Gulf States, frankly, all very comfortable with Trump. If there's a significant change, I would say it's incrementally more engaged, and in terms of worldview than under the Biden administration. Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, you look at Asia relations and certainly Trump and the US on trade worrying them, making them sort of react in a more defensive posture. Seeing how much, how more quickly, they can get something to the US that will lead to trying to diffuse potential conflict there. But not radically different from the way they thought about the United States in 2017 in the first Trump term.
Mexico, Canada, Panama, here you've got countries that are facing very significant challenges from the United States, but also ultimately understand that they have no other options. Now, in Canada, that's a bigger fight because there are elections coming up at the end of April. But after those elections are over, I certainly expect that they will move quickly to try to ensure that ongoing relations are functional and stable. That's already true for the Mexican government with a president who has 85% approval, can do pretty much everything necessary to ensure that US-Mexico relations aren't dramatically impacted by everything Trump is demanding. So that's everywhere else.
But in Europe, that's just not the case. Three different reasons why the Europeans are facing a much more permanent impact. The first is on the trade side, like everybody else, and trade is well within the European Union's competency. They understand that they have leverage. If the Americans are going to hit them with significant tariffs, they're going to hit back with the same numbers. But that doesn't mean it's going to be relatively difficult and take a long time to resolve it, as opposed to places that are much weaker where they just fold quickly to the United States. Okay, fair enough. But still, that's not all that dramatically different from first term. Second point is there's a war going on in Ukraine, and the United States has made it very clear that they want to engage, to re-engage with Putin, who is Europe's principal enemy. And they're going to do that irrespective of how much the Europeans oppose it, and they're not going to take any European input in those conversations.
Trump would like a rapprochement with Russia to include a Ukrainian ceasefire. But if that doesn't happen, he is oriented towards blaming the Ukrainians for it, towards taking Kremlin talking points on Ukraine not really being a country, and then on moving to ensure that US-Russia relations are functional again. All of that is deeply concerning, is existentially concerning, particularly for a bunch of European countries that are on the front lines spending a lot more in defense, not because the Americans are telling them to, but because they're worried about Russia themselves, feel like they have to be more independent. Then finally, because Europe is the supranational political experiment that relies most on common values and rule of law, and the United States under Trump is undoing that component of the US-led order specifically.
I wouldn't necessarily say that about collective security or existing alliances and willingness to provide some sort of defense umbrella, but I would certainly say that in terms of rule of law and territorial integrity. And here, the fact that the United States no longer really cares about territorial integrity, is prepared to tell Denmark, "Hey, you're not a good ally. You're not defending Greenland. We're interested in moving forward ourselves, and we don't care how you've treated us historically. We're going to send our leaders and we're going to cut our own deal inside your territory." That's exactly the way the Germans felt when JD Vance said that he wanted to engage directly with the Alternatives für Deutschland, who the Germans consider to be a neo-Nazi party.
Everything that's core to the Europeans in their statehood and in the EU, the United States under Trump is on the other side of that, and it's increasingly conflictual. It's directly adversarial. And so I would say number one, the Europeans are aware of these problems. Number two, they're taking them late, but nonetheless finally very seriously. And so they understand that the Europeans are going to have to create an independent strategy for their own self-defense, for their national security, for their political stability, for their democracies, and they have to do that outside of the United States. In fact, they have to do that and defend themselves against the United States.
Now that reality doesn't mean they're going to be successful. And indeed, the more summits I see on Ukraine, frankly the less I have been convinced that the Europeans will be able to do enough, quick enough to really help Ukraine dramatically cut a better deal with the Russian Federation that is very uninterested in doing anything that is sustainable for the Ukrainians long term. It makes me worry that the EU longer term is not fit for purpose in an environment where the principle, the most powerful actors don't care about rule of law. The United States, China, and for Europe, Russia right on their borders. So for all of those reasons, I mean, the European markets have gone up recently. European growth expectations have gone up because the Germans and others are planning on spending a lot more, that's short-term. Long-term here. I worry that the Europeans are in an awful lot of trouble. So something we'll be focusing on very closely going forward over the coming weeks and months. I hope you all are well, and I'll talk to you all real soon.
- Trump, Musk sow election interference controversy in India - and Europe ›
- Putin trolls Europe about "the master" Trump ›
- Will Europe step up as America turns its back on Ukraine? - GZERO ... ›
- What Trump's return means for Europe, with Finnish President Alexander Stubb ›
- Trump's dealmaking with Putin leaves Ukraine and Europe with nowhere to turn ›
Is the US-Europe alliance permanently damaged?
Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden and co-chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations, shares his perspective on European politics from Stockholm, Sweden.
Is the transatlantic relationship permanently damaged by what we have seen during the last 10 days or so?
Well, there is no question that the last 10 days or so have been the worst by far for the transatlantic relationship in, well, modern recorded history. You can go through all of the details if you want. It started with the shameful vote in the UN General Assembly on the same day that was three years after the war of aggression that Russia started, where the United States turned around, lined up with Russia, and with primarily a bunch of countries that you would not normally like to be seen in the company of, in order to try to defeat the Europeans, and defeat the Ukrainians, and defeat the Japanese, and defeat the Australians, defeat all of the friends who have criticized the Russians.
It was truly shameful. It was defeated, needless to say, but it left deep marks there. And then it was downhill from there, with that particular week ending with the ambush in the Oval Office, with all of the details associated with that, with sort of a childish dispute about dress codes, and respect for whatever, and total disregard for the important issues that are at stake at the moment. And to that was added, the vice president seriously insulting the allies, primarily the British and the French, and then cutting of aid to Ukraine, including intelligence cooperation, which is unheard of, unheard of when it comes to these particular issues.
So, is damage permanent? Well, one would hope that... well, hope springs eternal, that there would be a way back. But this will be remembered for a long time to come. And the reaction in Europe, well, you have to keep a straight face if you are a political leader. And they do, they hope for the best, but they're increasingly preparing for the worst. What we might be heading into is Mr. Trump, President Trump lining up with President Putin in a deal that is essentially on Russia's term over Ukraine, then trying to force Ukraine into that particular deal, a repetition of Munich 1938.
Will that work? I think it's unlikely to work because the Ukrainians are determined to stand up for their country. And they have the support of the Europeans. Czechoslovakia in 1938 didn't have much support. So, whether it will work or not is debatable, but that is the direction in which things are heading at the moment. Can this be stopped or can the trajectory of things be changed? Let's hope. There's a flurry of meetings in Europe. There will be a lot of contacts across the Atlantic. There is a strong support for Ukraine in Europe, but then deep apprehensions of where we are heading. Further four years with President Trump. After that, (possibly) four to eight years with JD Vance. Well, well, there's a lot of thinking that needs to be done on this side of the Atlantic.
U.S. President Donald Trump makes an announcement from White House March 3, 2025.
Will Trump make a deal that leaves Europe behind?
Despite European leaders declaring that they will lead a “coalition of the willing” to reach an end to the Ukraine war, the Trump administration seems focused on striking a deal with Russia – regardless of whether it actually ends the conflict, or whether the EU and Ukraine agree to it.
“From [Donald] Trump’s perspective, the more important deal is the Russia deal. I think the question is what role, if any, Ukraine peace is going to have in the US-Russia agreement,” says GZERO President Ian Bremmer.
Meanwhile, the US has announced that it’s pausing its cyber offensive efforts against Russia as the two countries rekindle their relationship. That directive came before Trump’s explosive Friday meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, but it is a further signal of Trump’s proclivity for Putin and his weakening support for Ukraine.
The two countries also are reportedly discussing a deal for American investors to restore Nord Stream 2, the natural gas pipeline that runs from Russia to Germany, in exchange for a stake in the company. The pipeline was central to Europe’s energy reliance on Moscow before it was destroyed in 2022, and could be another sweetener to push Trump to make a Ukraine deal on Russia’s terms by enabling the US to profit from the flow of gas if Western sanctions are lifted. But Germany has not expressed interest in revitalizing the pipeline – or in giving Russia and the US more leverage over its energy supply. The conversation — like the initial Ukraine discussions between the US and Russia — again sidelines Europe as it tries to ramp up defense spending (its defense stocks surged on Monday) and signals its support for Ukraine.
The rub. Europe and Ukraine are being denied seats at the table because, when it comes to dealing with the transactional US president, they have less to offer Trump than Russia. “There are clearly some economic sweeteners at play here between the broader Putin and Trump circles,” Bremmer said. “The cash register’s open in this environment.”
In contrast, experts say Trump sees Ukraine as being out of cards and the EU as freeloaders, and he prefers negotiating bilaterally with Putin than trying to get a bunch of European allies to fall in line.
The next few months are critical: Trump seems set on making a deal with Russia – but he’s also said he’s not ready to abandon NATO altogether, reaffirming his commitment to Article 5 in talks with British PM Keir Starmer and to keeping US troops in Poland.
The question is whether his deal with Russia undermines European security. If Ukraine can revive its critical minerals offer and the Europeans can demonstrate meaningful leadership in defense spending and securing Ukraine, Trump could sign a more European-friendly deal and sell it as a victory to voters, claiming he succeeded in making Europe contribute its fair share where previous administrations have failed. If not, the EU could see a full US-Russia reconciliation that could leave them strategically adrift.
But Bremmer says Trump could make a deal that withdraws the US from the conflict without securing a cease-fire, which would leave the Europeans in the driver's seat when it comes to negotiating peace. Can Europe broker a cease-fire? Hear what Bremmer thinks in his latest Quick Take.
Trump's Ukraine peace plan confuses Europe leaders
What is the European reaction to what President Trump is trying to achieve in terms of peace?
Well, confusion. A lot of people, and there are quite a number of European leaders here, today, don't really understand what President Trump is up to. He wants peace, that's fine. But peace can be, well, that could be the complete capitulation of Ukraine, that is the Putin definition of peace. Or it can be the victory of Ukraine, that's another definition of peace. So exactly how President Trump intends to pursue this? And without Europe, obviously, neither Putin nor Trump wants Europe around the table.
But how do you do it without Ukraine on the table? Because a lot of the things that are going to be necessary to agree with are things that have to be agreed with Ukraine, with President Zelensky. So a lot of question marks. The desire for peace is clearly here, no question about that. This war has to come to end. But the peace has to be just, it has to be stable. It has to be something that is not just a pause for Russia to recalibrate and restart the war.
So a lot of things to discuss between the European leaders and between the European leaders and President Zelensky, is happening in Kyiv here today. But also eventually, across the Atlantic, President Macron is in Washington today, Prime Minister Starmer is heading into Washington on Thursday.
Will Trump & Musk punish Brazil over Bolsonaro indictment?
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
What is Trump's long-term play with apparently treating Putin like a friend rather than an adversary?
His play is to end the war in Ukraine. His play is to be seen as a great deal-maker and also a return to what we call the law of the jungle, where the most powerful countries are the ones that deserve to be at the table, and if you're not at the table you're being served for dinner. That is where I think we're going. I don't think that Secretary of State Marco Rubio wanted to be there, but he's much more... He's going to be loyal, and I think the Republican senators have pushed back hard on Gaza but not so much on this. We'll see. Certainly from Riyadh, from what we've heard from Elon, what we've heard from Trump, they are working very hard to get a full reconciliation between the United States and Russia, between Trump and Putin, irrespective of what the Europeans have to say about it. And the Ukrainians are going to be pressed very, very hard to accept the deal or be left all by themselves. We'll see how the Europeans and the Ukrainians play it, but that is what they're looking at.
How likely would the release of all remaining captives, as proposed by Hamas, actually lead to a permanent truce with Israel?
Well permanent truce with Israel implies you can agree on what governance in Gaza is going to look like. The Israelis, of course, refuse to accept a state for the Palestinians. The Israelis refuse not only for Hamas to participate in any government, not surprisingly. But, of course, also the Palestinian authority participate in government. That's very different from what the Gulf states, what the Egyptians, what the Jordanians, all America's allies, are planning to propose for Gaza. I think we can get an extended ceasefire. That ceasefire might last essentially permanently, but the Israelis would still have a buffer zone, you wouldn't be heading towards statehood, and the Israelis would reserve the right to continue to engage in selected strikes if they see targets of opportunity that they consider to be militants working with for Hamas. So that's where I think we are, but very unlikely at this point that I think you'll see a restart of the war that has been lasting for well over a year at this point. I think full-blown military incursion on the ground is now on the rear-view mirror.
Does Bolsonaro's indictment for an alleged coup plot signal tough times ahead for Brazil?
I think it does. It's very likely that Bolsonaro is going to end up imprisoned. That case is going to take a while to work through the courts. Probably won't be resolved until 2026 with all the appeals that will end up happening, but he won't be able to run again. Now you can still announce you're going to run and then pull out your candidacy at the last minute like Lula did, who served time in jail himself in the past, so this isn't completely new uncharted territory for the Brazilians. But keep in mind that if Bolsonaro is refused to be allowed to run, he is completely supported by Trump. He's completely supported by Elon Musk, and that will get stronger. The Supreme Court in Brazil is politicized and is also seen by Trump and Musk as root of all evil in Brazil, so they'll be going after that. And will that be tied to tougher tariffs on Brazil? I expect it will. So, I think Brazil is going to be in a lot of trouble here, and I think that their economy is probably going to take a hit on the back of what we're going to see politically inside Brazil and the nature of the relations with the United States. Okay, that's it for me, and I'll talk to you all real soon.