The publication of the United States’ new National Security Strategy (NSS) on December 5 allowed President Donald Trump to hammer home the foreign policy choices distilled on numerous occasions since the 2024 election and the Munich Security Conference.
The real novelty is that, beyond the flurry of social media posts and occasional statements to the press, a document bearing the president’s seal and signature launches a virulent ideological fight against the European Union and some of its member states.
For 13 months now, European leaders have become accustomed to America’s waning commitment to NATO, its withdrawal from international climate negotiations and acceleration of domestic oil and gas production and exports, trade litigations, the end of USAID, the intended end of mass immigration, and the fight against drug cartels. These ‘America First’ policy choices are all part of the NSS, and they are not new.
But, shocking as it may be to a number of European leaders and analysts, the newly published strategy’s blunt transparency has one merit: it describes what to really expect from U.S. diplomacy
until January 2030 at least.
Europe’s response amid rising tensions
Geographical priorities are explicit: America First, second Asia, then the West, including Europe, and lastly Africa. The order is, again, no surprise. Yet, it is striking to read that Russia is not a subject in and of itself, it is not described as a major strategic challenge for the United States, nor indeed as the invader of Ukraine.
Instead, the document notes sanctimoniously that “many Europeans regard Russia as an existential threat”, and offers significant diplomatic engagement to “reestablish conditions of strategic stability across the Eurasian landmass”. Notable too that the Asia chapter doesn’t mention Russia at all, although it is America’s neighbour to the West.
To most Europeans and some Americans, such a narrative is bound to sound like the biggest reversal of U.S. foreign policy in 80 years. But all the decisions made by the United States since January have shattered the foundations of the Western world and, with few exceptions, left European leaders perplexed and angry.
The brief section in the NSS about Europe is nothing short of a violent tirade. The continent is described as facing the “stark prospect of civilisational erasure”, to the point that it may be “unrecognisable in 20 years or less” due to mass migration. The EU itself is specifically targeted for its “regulatory suffocation” and its “activities (…) that undermine political liberty and sovereignty”.
Furthermore, we learn that the U.S. officially considers that many European governments “trample on basic principles of democracy to suppress opposition” and operate a “subversion of democratic processes”. In Washington, nations states matter and America’s goal will now be to “help Europe correct its current trajectory”.
In retrospect, Vice-President J.D. Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference in February was not an early-tenure gaffe, as some Europeans may have wanted to think back then. It was the harbinger of an unapologetic policy of interference in European political processes, in tune with the Trump Administration’s core interests and connivance with Russia.
Washington’s chosen allies inside Europe
European far-right parties have now become privileged partners, as their real, growing influence “gives cause for great optimism” in Washington D.C. The untold part of the story is that many of these “patriotic” parties and politicians are financially and ideologically supported by Moscow.
One can now foresee vibrant relations with the European governments most closely aligned with the United States on such key topics as the reduction of military support to Ukraine or normalisation with Russia: Hungary, Czech Republic, and Slovakia.
Prime Minister Viktor Orbán was quick to reveal on December 7 that he had already started negotiations about postwar economic cooperation with both Moscow and Washington. Predictably, Robert Fico of Slovakia and Andrej Babiš of the Czech Republic will follow suit, as will party leaders in a number of other European countries.
From a purely European standpoint, the fundamentally negative factor is that the above-mentioned “domestic disruptors” have now gained a massive and public ideological support from the White House, and are promoted as real patriots, all in perfect tune with Moscow’s stance against the EU and NATO. Again, this agenda is nothing new or unpredictable.
On December 18-19, the union’s 27 Heads of State and Government will hold their regular meeting known as the European Council. Their agenda was already packed: Ukraine, the Middle East, migration. They now face two additional challenges.
First, how to maintain as much unity as possible, while its most disruptive members—with Viktor Orban in the lead—are now officially anointed by Donald Trump ? Second, how to stop flattering and pandering to the U.S. President—a naïve technique with no obvious results—while continuing to work toward an end to the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the related security arrangements ?
The new National Security Strategy just issued by the White House is a considerable challenge for European Union leaders. Their December summit could end up in paralysis, with massive consequences for the continent’s security. Alternatively, a surge in cohesion and courage could isolate the most disruptive EU leaders and, over time, lead to their estrangement from some of the future security mechanisms.
Far from dividing Europe, the NSS may well serve to reinforce European cohesion.
