Farren Palsi’s account of the scary consequences of Trump’s return for Europe

“Foreign Policy” in an analysis referring to Trump’s election slogans about the need to reduce American support to European countries, warned of the security and political crisis in Europe after Trump’s possible victory in the US presidential election.

Hall Brands stated in this article that Washington’s lack of support for Europe led to the return of this continent to its illiberal and chaotic past.

Brands, who is a professor of international relations at the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, considered Trump’s victory in the upcoming American elections to be effective in the shaky and critical conditions of European countries and wrote: “Trump in his first term of office is about the withdrawal of the United States.” He warned against NATO, while some of his former aides believe that he might actually do this if he gets to the White House.

This article added: A post-American Europe (without American support and cooperation) is receiving more attention and analysis day by day. Some optimistically hope that Europe can continue to prosper even with the loss of the US security umbrella. In this case, the United States may go about its affairs, but Europe, which has become rich, stable and (according to this media) democratic in the last 80 years, must prepare to act as an independent force in a multipolar world. Meanwhile, NATO leaders are going to celebrate the 75th anniversary of its formation this month in Washington.

The author of this analysis speculated that post-American Europe may return to the darker, more chaotic and illiberal patterns of its past in order to deal with the threats it faces, and wrote: Old Europe was some of the biggest aggressors and most ambitious tyrants. It contained history. Its imperial ambitions and internal rivalries created conflicts that affected the entire world. The basic issue was geography, which limited a large number of powerful competitors in a single space. The only way to survive in this environment was to spend money from others. This dynamic led Europe to a cycle of disastrous conflicts.

A part of this article states: The most critical security commitment of the United States was through NATO and the deployment of its forces that stabilized it. With the US militarily protecting Western Europe against the Soviets, the old enemies no longer had to fear each other. Western European countries were finally able to achieve security without denying it to each other. This, in turn, reduced the political and arms rivalries that plagued the region and allowed its members to face a common threat.

Referring to the unprecedented economic and political cooperation and new political changes in this continent after the support and cooperation of the United States, the author described it as the unique solution of the United States to solve the problems of Europe and added: At that time, The United States was powerful enough to protect Europe from its enemies, yet far enough away to pose no real threat to permanent European conquest and subjugation.

In the continuation of this analysis, the role of the United States in Europe has imposed great costs at the same time as the extraordinary benefits it brought to this country. The United States is committed to defending countries thousands of miles away, even at the risk of nuclear war. By providing foreign aid and allowing asymmetric access to its vast domestic market, it rebuilt the continent and helped European countries grow faster than the United States itself. But today, while the old irritants still exist and new challenges have drawn Washington’s attention to other parts of the world, America’s pessimism towards Europe is stronger than ever, and it can be said that Donald Trump, the former US president, is the epitome of this pessimism.

This analysis added: Trump has long lamented the burden that Washington carries in NATO. He has threatened to allow the Russians to do “whatever they want” with America’s European allies. He has openly expressed his hatred for the European Union and considers this union not as the pinnacle of the continent’s unity, but as a fierce economic competitor for the United States. As an illiberal populist, he is indifferent to the wealth of liberal democracy in Europe and repeatedly asks why Americans should care about Europe when there is an “ocean” between America and Europe.

Trump’s “America First” foreign policy slogan is one in which the United States finally abandons the extraordinary commitments it has made since World War II. No one knows exactly what Trump can do in office. It may not be a complete withdrawal from NATO that angers the remaining Republican internationalists. However, due to Trump and his allies gaining power for the presidency and increasing China’s threat to the interests of the United States, it is time to take seriously the possibility of the real and complete end of American support for Europe.

Brands wrote: In an optimistic scenario, Europe will remain democratic, cohesive and united against its enemies. However, the problems with this plan are also easily recognized. When Macron speaks of European integration as an alternative to US leadership, he seems to forget that Europe has been united and cohesive precisely because of the climate of reassurance provided by Washington. In previous instances where the United States stepped back to let European powers get on with it—for example, at the start of the Balkan wars in the early 1990s—the result was often chaos rather than strategic coherence.

This article added: A Europe that can take charge of its security affairs will be heavily armed than today. Defense spending in many countries should double or triple. European countries will invest heavily in the world’s deadliest weapons—missiles, attack aircraft, and advanced power-launch capabilities. With the loss of the US nuclear umbrella, countries on the frontline against Russia—like Poland—may seek to develop their own nuclear weapons.

At the end of this analysis, Faren Palsey wrote as a conclusion: In the absence of the security cover of the United States, the action of European countries to develop the capabilities they need in order to face threats, can cause many concerns about the military imbalance in the green continent. Enthusiasts of the “America First” slogan might think that the United States can enjoy all the benefits of a stable Europe without paying any of the costs. A claim that is false. A weak and incoherent Europe has a difficult task ahead of it in facing the existing challenges from countries like Russia and China.

Source: IRNA