While Americans wait to decide between someone whose gaffes make us cringe and someone who just makes us cringe, we should know that we are not the only ones fearful about the results in November. The people of Europe — and especially their leaders — worry about what a failing Joe Biden and a re-emerging Donald Trump would mean for their lives and their future.
Concerns are not unfounded.
Trashed ties
In the years between 2017 and 2021, then-President Trump trashed U.S.-European ties thoroughly and on purpose and left us all worse off at home and globally. In virtually every area of crucial cooperation, Trump derailed joint action and demeaned and dismissed the efforts of the Europeans.
These were not verbal stumbles or momentary loss of concentration. These were the aims and means of Trump’s “America first” policy. Neither we nor the Europeans can doubt that this approach will be in play again if he is re-elected.
Complaining that America got a “raw deal” in trade, Donald Trump ended negotiations on a comprehensive treaty with our most important partner. U.S.-Europe trade is more than double that with China; U.S. investment stock in Europe, twenty times that in China. European investment supports one-quarter of a million jobs in Pennsylvania.
Instead of cooperation in the face of an economically aggressive China, Trump embraced trade wars, describing them as “good, and easy to win.” He applied tariffs on European aluminum, steel and other exports to the U.S., dressing them up as national security.
On that, he also eschewed joint action. In 2018 Trump pulled the U.S. out of the multi-sided Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that aimed at monitoring and restricting Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The plan provided for enforceable limits, on-site inspections and included the UK, France, Germany and the International Atomic Energy Agency.
It offered the first effective restraints on Iran’s nuclear capabilities. No. Much better, under “American First,” to have no monitoring or effective penalties at all, especially in light of Iran’s peaceful orientation.
For good measure, Trump pulled the U.S. out of the longstanding bilateral treaty with Russia that had limited deployment of intermediate range nuclear missiles targeting Europe. Glad we’re not hearing any nuclear threats from Vladimir Putin.
Going it alone
The path of U.S.-European relations during Trump time is littered with U.S. rejection of multinational efforts to deal with problems that do not respect national boundaries — America’s or anybody else’s. Like disease. Trump suspended funding for the World Health Organization and started withdrawing the U.S. from that organization.
He withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate accords, which, for the first time, put binding goals and limits on national production of the CO2 emissions that are cooking the planet and rendering weather more unpredictable and dangerous than ever. Both of these actions — as well as many other such isolationist moves — were reversed by Joe Biden.
As these examples show, Donald Trump’s go-it-alone strategy was not confined to Europe. He pulled the U.S. out of the Trans Pacific Partnership that would have facilitated the efforts of 12 of the largest Asian economies to stand up to China.
During 2018 he abruptly ordered U.S. troops out of Syria, then back in to protect oil, then abandoned our Kurdish allies there — the most effective counter to the Islamist ISIS forces. These policies prompted his own Secretary of Defense, General Jim Mathis, to resign.
Still, these could at least be considered policies. Those enamored of an “America first” approach could make a principled argument about their merits. But as in domestic policies, Trump foreign policy was essentially transactional.
He offered aid to an embattled Ukraine only on condition that its leader dig up dirt against an election opponent. Trump fawned over dictators like Kim Jong Un of North Korea (who promptly rolled out new and bigger missiles), disparaged ties with our South Korean ally, and blessed Vladimir Putin’s denial of Russian meddling in our elections when U.S. intelligence findings showed exactly that.
Casting NATO as a protection racket, he invited Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to any ally who did not pay up.
Too dangerous for solipsism
Half a decade ago, the world was already too dangerous for such solipsism. Since then, we have seen a devastating pandemic, the return of national and subnational warfare in Europe and the Middle East, and a deterioration of natural conditions that, along with desperation and war, is producing a global migration crisis.
In the midst of this, U.S. interests and values, which we share with our allies, face major political and ideological challenges. Given Europe’s turbulent history, its people know — and we should as well — the consequences of spurning cooperation in favor of a transactional unilateralism that can only offer nationalistic fantasies.
Ronald H. Linden is professor emeritus of political science at the University of Pittsburgh, where he directed the Russian and East European Studies and European Studies programs. From 1989 to 1991 he served as director of research for Radio Free Europe. His previous article was “The growing European Right may change Europe, and for the worse.” On this subject, see also his “Donald Trump is wrong: America needs NATO.”
First Published: July 9, 2024, 9:30 a.m.