Brussels may have hoped for a different outcome, but it was prepared for Donald Trump’s return to the U.S. presidency. Facing potential shifts in U.S. support for Ukraine, NATO dynamics, and trade, European leaders must now balance their reliance on America with a push for greater independence. Trump’s expected “America First” policies signal challenging times for Europe, especially in defense spending and green energy. For the EU, the path forward will require resilience and a strategic recalibration of its role on the global stage.
Unlike in 2020, the result of the US presidential election was clear not long after the last polling stations closed, as many of the major stations started projecting that Mr. Trump was the winner of many of the swing states. This is also the first time that the former president won the popular vote in an election. But what will this mean for Europe, the European Union, and the relationship with the US in the future?
We have already seen multiple European heads of state and governments congratulate the new US president-elect, but most of them were hoping for a different outcome, especially those for whom the continued support for Ukraine is lifeblood. But the swift outpour of congratulations and well wishes is a recognition of Europe’s dependency on the United States as an ally and trade partner. The European leaders know that even if they are disappointed by the election of Mr. Trump, they are going to be immensely dependent on how his administration is going to behave in the next four years. This, however, does not equate that Europe is going to keep its current course. The time is for more independence.
NATO is not going to be the same, but what will change?
It is no secret, and especially not to the many members of NATO, that the president-elect has been angry for long that the United States has had to protect European allies, who do not use the 2% of their GDP as agreed upon. Mr. Trump even went as far as encouraging Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to the countries that do not live up to the 2% goal. For Europe, this means uncertain times and times where defence spending will have to increase if the United States is no longer a security guarantee. This realisation, however, already dawned upon many of the European countries during the first Trump-term, also helped by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, spurring increased spending.
For the European members of NATO, the primary goal is now to achieve some form of strategic autonomy, but it will take quite some time before this can be reached. Several countries underprioritised military spending for too long, which in practice means that their military is run down. In Germany, basic equipment was simply not present, and in Denmark, military bases were immensely run-down (source in Danish) and to some extent unusable, and writing this in the past-tense may be misleading because these problems persist all across Europe. This was not combatted with increased spending going directly to Ukraine, although this is to be seen as an investment in preventing Russia’s war from moving further towards the west without having to put boots on the ground in Ukraine. As mentioned before, Ukraine is also a real concern for many leaders in Europe, as many of the MAGA-republicans have criticised the immense US spending in Ukraine when there are so many domestic issues to be resolved. A view which Mr. Vance, the vice president-elect, has been touting for quite some time. This is also to be seen in the light of the US ‘Pivot to Asia’, which is also a pivot away from Europe. For those who are full-hearted supporters of full Ukrainian independence, Mr. Trump’s former statements about being able to resolve the conflict in “24 hours” are really concerning, as some speculate this would include Ukraine giving up a large part of the Russian occupied territory. Quite an opposition to what the EU has been working for in cooperation with the Biden-Harris administration and the plans put forward in Scholz’ ‘Zeitenwende’-speech.
To think that a Harris administration would have reversed back to a course where Europe would not have to increase defence spending would be utopian. Even during President Obama’s terms, he made it clear to the European allies that they would have to increase their strategic autonomy. And some EU officials have even been arguing that it may be good for Europe that Trump is tougher on Europe. Just like my main point, the EU has prepared for this, which has been spelt out with the appointment of Kaja Kallas as ‘High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy’ (simplicity is not what the EU does best…). Ms. Kallas has been a fierce critic of Russia and supporter of Ukraine, and lobbying for increased NATO and EU support. Now time will tell if Europe can keep up the support for Ukraine without the US, but more importantly keep up the security of the European mainland.
It’s going to hit the economy, stupid
Mr. Trump has during his campaign raged against the European Union because the United States exports less to the EU compared to the imports. In general, the president-elect has vowed to impose a 10% import tax on all products and a 60% one on China. With a European economy dependent on its exports to the US, this could be catastrophic and pose a real challenge to the Union. This time, Europe is also aware that this is not just a bluff, as the former president did impose tariffs on European products like steel and aluminium in his last term. The question is, do the advisors of the president-elect see reason in these tariffs, or are they going to hurt the American economy too?
It is not looking like the ‘America-First’ policy of Mr. Trump’s last term is going to be put to rest, quite the opposite. The economy was one of the most deciding topics of the US election, especially driven by high inflation numbers being felt by the American middle class. This will be decisive for American economic policy in the coming four years and an intensification of the prioritising of American industry and favourable policies towards the industry. In other words, the American policy is most likely, if not certainly, going to be more protectionist. This, however, was not foreign to the Biden administration. The EU has criticised the outgoing president and his subsidising of American industries, especially the green and tech industries.
Green industries may just be a key word here, as this is one of the new key industries for the EU. With Mr. Trump’s plans to not prioritise the transition away from fossil fuels, even wanting to lift taxes on these, this could have an enormous impact on the European economy, especially for the countries that have a large green industry. Mr. Trump also pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement and generally lowered spending on green energy and initiatives. This is naturally not good for the European economy, but it could be somewhat alleviated by the fact that the US is a federation and that some of the states can increase their green spendings regardless of the policy coming from the White House, but it will not be nearly enough to outweigh the massive spendings of the Biden administration.
Cars is also a subject, which we cannot omit from the discussion of how the European economy will look under a President Trump. It is no secret that he is unhappy with how Europe exports more cars to the US than they import, and that he would like to turn that around. With the automotive industry being one of the most important in the EU, especially for a country like Germany, even the 10% import tax, like mentioned before, would be disastrous and even more so if the president-elect chooses to impose additional tariffs on the automotive industry, which is already challenged by the shift to electric cars.
What exactly the new US economic policy towards the EU will look like is still relatively unknown, but I can say with confidence that we will not see a free trade agreement being enacted during a second Trump term.
Fossil fuel and climate inaction
With the aforementioned tax cuts on fossil fuels and generally deprioritization of climate action, Europe will lose a global climate partner and have to take on more responsibility and seek other international partnerships on this subject. But it will be a change Europe would have preferred not to endure.
The European Green Deal is, however, an indication that the EU can take action alone, although some call for increased spending and action from Brussels. But unlike other political themes, climate change affects even those who have 0% emissions, when others emit a lot. This was also what we saw in 2020, when Mr. Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Agreement and the remaining countries still had to address the issues, just now without a strong US leadership. A leadership which the European Union has to some extent attempted to take, but with varying success. A strong position in terms of green energy and technology has, however, put the EU in a better position.
Where the Biden administration has promoted green technology innovation, fostering US-EU partnerships in areas like electric vehicles, battery production, and clean energy research. Under Trump, who has typically favoured fossil fuels and deregulated environmental standards, the US could scale back investments in renewable energy research and infrastructure. This would limit opportunities for cross-Atlantic collaboration in green technology, forcing the EU to rely more on its own resources or seek partnerships with other global players. This would also mean a smaller US spending on green technology, which could hit the economy but also research funding.
Not everybody is fearful; maybe it could even make the union stronger?
Hungary’s Viktor Orbán has been a fan and friend of Mr. Trump for a long time, even being invited to Mr. Trump’s Florida residence, Mar-a-Lago. Mr. Orbán even commented that he would celebrate the return of Mr. Trump to the White House with “several bottles of champagne.” The Hungarian prime minister is not alone in his celebrations of the election of Mr. Trump. The far-right Italian prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, has also declared her support for the president-elect and shared her well wishes and delight with the outcome of the election. Generally, the more populist and Eurosceptical policymakers have been public about their support and pleasure with the election, and there may be a reason. Though they may not have a direct share in Mr. Trump and his presidency, his success could help legitimise their own existence, as they often share some ground beliefs.
Though the general notion in Europe is that people were hoping for Ms. Harris to win the election, this is not as certain as some like to present it. A new poll from Euro Elects shows that even though a majority of Europeans would have voted for Ms. Harris, there is also quite a substantial amount of Europeans, who would have voted for Mr. Trump. This is especially true for the eastern part of the continent and in countries like Hungary and Serbia. More concentrated movements across Europe have also been rooting for a second term, most likely with the aforementioned reason of shared views and legitimising, in mind. These are movements like the National Rally in France or the Freedom Party in the Netherlands, led by Jordan Bardella (Marine Le Pen in the past) and Geert Wilders, respectively.
It could also prove to be an opportunity for the more pro-European movements, as stated by several EU officials. They think it could be the shock to wake up the EU and prepare it for the times that lie ahead. Given that the United States is no longer going to be as reliable an ally as they have been in the past, Europe has to invest massively in its strategic autonomy and, in general, prepare to emancipate themselves from the United States. It is, however, not only in the defence department Europe needs to rethink their current strategy.
As discussed before, the European industries could take a strong hit with the new US administration, as the trade policy will become more protectionist. This gives the EU an opportunity to seek new trading partners globally, although it will not be an easy feat to replace the loss coming with the new administration. Europe does have some industries that need to modernise in the coming years regardless of the policy coming out of the White House, but the pressure has only increased with the new president-elect. This could be a chance to work together in the union to revitalise the inner market and look at how it could be reinforced to be able to handle the challenges that lie ahead. It could be a chance to revitalise the European community in general and have discussions about where the member states see the European Union in the future.
There are a lot of interesting topics that could have been discussed in relation to how the US election is going to influence Europe in the years to come, but I thought these to be some of the most important. To know if the speculations are going to be more than just that, we will have to wait. But as they say in the States, “the best is yet to come”!
