With Donald Trump’s victory in the United States of America and his imminent inauguration in January, Europe faces an uncertain future. The continent faces the possibility of a repeat of the scenario from Trump’s first term—a period characterized by unpredictable moves, disregard for traditional alliances, and a strong emphasis on “America First.” Unlike his previous term, Trump now has a large majority in the Senate, allowing him to implement his program with minimal obstacles. This change in American governance will certainly have consequences for Europe, forcing the European Union to maneuver under these new circumstances.
If Trump’s campaign rhetoric is any indication, he intends to once again demand higher financial contributions from NATO member states. His previous calls for allies to increase defense spending to a target of 2% of GDP, as well as his doubts about NATO’s value to US security, suggest that Europe can expect renewed pressure to shoulder a significantly larger financial burden for transatlantic defense. With stronger legislative support, Trump’s demands are likely to intensify and become more urgent, positioning them as crucial for upholding American commitment.
Trump’s approach to the economy is expected to be equally disruptive. His commitment to US isolationism could manifest through significant tariffs on European products, further straining trade relations between the US and the EU. His administration has hinted at possible trade restrictions on key European exports such as cars and luxury goods, which would hit Germany, France, and Italy in particular. Trump’s pursuit of isolationism and protectionism could undermine the basic principles of global trade and cooperation that Europe fosters. This policy stance reflects a broader effort to withdraw the US from global integration by reinforcing a trend that has steadily intensified since his first term in office.
Similar to his first term, Trump’s foreign policy is expected to be largely driven by his personal preferences, often bypassing diplomatic norms and strategic considerations. A series of actions during his last term destabilized longstanding alliances, including decisions on the Paris Agreement, the Iran nuclear deal, and even trade partnerships. With fewer constraints on his power, Trump’s impulsive nature could become even more pronounced, posing a potential risk to diplomatic relations with Europe and fueling tensions in multilateral forums.
Trump’s decision-making ability is susceptible to change, so Europe must also prepare for the possibility of inconsistent policies. Such an approach increases the risk of unexpected geopolitical shifts that could undermine the stability that European leaders want to maintain. For Europe, Trump’s potential to act as a “ticking time bomb” underscores the need for a strategy that isolates it from his whims so that it does not suffer the consequences of his opportunistic foreign policy decisions.
The EU must consider the potential for internal divisions when formulating its approach to a second Trump term. Some EU leaders, particularly those with populist leanings, could align with Trump’s ideology and policies. Figures like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, Slovakian Prime Minister Robert Fico, and potentially the Austrian Chancellor might view Trump as a valuable ally, as they perceive his administration’s anti-globalist stance as aligning with their own objectives. This alignment could lead to divisions within the EU, making it more difficult to develop a unified approach to US policy and weakening Europe’s negotiating position.
Germany, France, and Italy—European economic giants—will probably face the difficult task of bridging these internal differences. It will be crucial for these countries to preserve European unity, not only to protect their own economic interests but also to preserve the integrity of the EU itself. Germany, in particular, will have to assert its leadership role by advocating policies that preserve cohesion within the bloc. Failure to reconcile these various national interests could exacerbate divisions within the EU and limit its ability to respond effectively to the challenges of a second Trump term.
To mitigate the potential damage that Trump’s policies could cause, Europe must take a proactive stance. The strongest European economies should lead efforts to strengthen the EU’s autonomy in both the economic and security spheres. Europe must reduce its dependence on the American market and financial system. This transformation could include strengthening intra-European trade and deepening economic ties with other global partners such as China, the Far East, and developing countries. By investing in diverse trade relationships, the EU could create buffers against potential tariffs and trade restrictions imposed by the US under Trump’s leadership. For example, creating a European-focused digital economy would help reduce dependence on American technology companies.
As Trump increases demands on NATO, the EU must strengthen its own defense initiatives. Europe could strengthen its collective security by increasing defense investment and expanding the mandate of initiatives such as Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) and the European Defense Fund (EDF). It could also establish the European Defense Force. A more integrated European defense framework would reduce dependence on NATO and allow the EU greater autonomy in managing security issues.
Trump’s first term saw a resurgence in US oil exports, and in his second term he is likely to prioritize domestic energy production over international cooperation on climate policies. In response, the EU could accelerate the transition to renewable energy sources, reducing dependence on foreign energy sources, including the US and other external actors. This commitment would not only be in line with the EU’s environmental goals but would also strengthen its resilience to geopolitical instability.
Trump’s presidency represents more than just a temporary phase in American politics. Rather, it signals a broader shift in global governance as isolationist and populist forces gain strength in Western democracies. This new reality requires Europe to take decisive action to secure its position in the world. Europe can no longer afford to regard the US as its de facto pillar of security and economy. Instead, it must adopt a new paradigm—one in which it stands as an independent and self-sustaining force capable of withstanding the turbulence of political shifts in the world.
Failure to adapt to this paradigm could have existential consequences for the EU. If the EU remains dependent on the US under Trump’s unpredictable leadership, it risks undermining its own sovereignty and stability. European leaders must therefore seize this moment to rethink the EU’s role in the global order and take steps to build a more resilient and self-sustaining Europe.
The time when Europe could rely on the US as a stabilizing force is over. Instead, the EU must put its strategic interests first and recognize that Trump’s second term is not an isolated incident but part of a broader trend toward internal focus and unpredictable governance. In this context, Europe’s long-term stability depends on its ability to cultivate independence from the US and find its own way in a rapidly changing world. Only by accepting this new reality can the EU maintain its integrity and secure its future in an increasingly unstable global landscape. Otherwise, the disintegration of the EU will be an inevitable consequence.