Europe Is Not Ready for Donald Trump
Published in Rzeczpospolita
(Poland) on 2 October 2024
by Jędrzej Bielecki (link to original)
(Poland) on 2 October 2024
by Jędrzej Bielecki (link to original)
Translated from
by Danuta Kowalska.
Edited by Patricia Simoni.
“America's credibility depends on the outcome of the Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Deputy Secretary of Defense Celeste Wallender tells Rzeczpospolita. China is paying close attention.
This year's edition of the Warsaw Security Forum is of particular significance. In a little more than a month, Americans may again send Donald Trump to the White House — and he has repeatedly warned that he would not only pursue a peace agreement with Moscow behind Ukrainian's backs, but would even encourage the Russians “to do whatever the hell they want” with those NATO allies who fail to meet a 2% of GDP defense spending requirement. This is the case of nine out of 32 members of the alliance.
So, can Trump really pull the U.S. out of the Atlantic alliance? And would Europe be capable of defending itself in such a case? These were the questions that were on the minds of the participants of this year's forum.
“It is safe to say that Donald Trump is unpredictable. No one knows if he will carry out what he threatens,” Democratic Rep. Jason Crow, from Colorado, who served three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, told Rzeczpospolita. “But I know a lot of Republicans who staunchly support the trans-Atlantic alliance. Therefore, I would not expect any sudden moves immediately after Trump takes power, but rather a heated debate within the Republican Party itself on what to do with relations with Europe.”*
The US Understands That Russia and China Form One Bloc
Celeste Wallander, who previously served as President Joe Biden's special adviser on relations with Russia, tried to be reassuring. “Elections are primarily about national politics. I can say today on behalf of America that the U.S. would not have been able to support the Ukrainians to such an extent without European involvement. It was thanks to this cooperation that we were able to stop Russia from escalating this war beyond Ukraine,”* Wallander told Rzeczpospolita.
Crow believes that, unlike in the days of Barack Obama and the pivot from Europe to Asia, there is now a widespread awareness among American elites that Russia and China form a single bloc of authoritarian military powers. A U.S. defeat in Ukraine would strengthen Beijing. China is widely seen as the biggest threat in America. This calls for maintaining American commitment to Europe's security.
There is also an internal context in the U.S. Senior military sources tell Rzeczpospolita that if Trump acts to the detriment of the strategic security interests of the U.S., the U.S. military will not carry out his orders. According to our sources, this is allowed by the U.S. Constitution. There have been precedents. The Pentagon, for example, didn't let the military get involved in securing the border with Mexico, which Trump insisted on during his first term.
But what if Trump stands his ground and America stops guaranteeing Europe's security?
Military Sources: The U.S. has a long list of military capabilities that Europe does not have. This, in particular, is the possibility of a long-range strike deep into enemy territory, the use of space forces or artificial intelligence. Europe does not have the huge production potential of the U.S. arms industry, which can very quickly increase production of not only heavy weapons but also ammunition. Another problem in Europe is that they don't have enough cruise missiles. Furthermore, only the United Kingdom and France possess nuclear weapons, and it is unclear to what extent they would be willing to use them in defense of other allies.
If European countries purchased weapons from Europe, their development could be financed.
“How many years it took to agree between Germany and France on a common tank! We have a multitude of weapon models, which makes us very weak. Catching up on this backlog also makes us very weak,” our sources say.
Europe does have potential, though. Wouter van Wersch, vice president of Airbus, is convinced of that. “We produce a lot of advanced products. But what of it, when 63% of armaments that European governments purchased after the Russian invasion of Ukraine came from outside our continent? And yet, the development of new technologies is very expensive and must somehow pay off,” van Wersch tells Rzeczpospolita.
Military sources point out that the time factor is crucial here. Americans, as well as Koreans, are capable of fulfilling purchase orders very quickly. And this is of paramount importance when facing the Russian threat. That is why, for example, Germany bought American F-35s capable of carrying nuclear missiles under the NATO code-share system. They also picked U.S. patriots to develop the Sky Shield air defense system.
*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, this quoted passage could not be independently verified.
This year's edition of the Warsaw Security Forum is of particular significance. In a little more than a month, Americans may again send Donald Trump to the White House — and he has repeatedly warned that he would not only pursue a peace agreement with Moscow behind Ukrainian's backs, but would even encourage the Russians “to do whatever the hell they want” with those NATO allies who fail to meet a 2% of GDP defense spending requirement. This is the case of nine out of 32 members of the alliance.
So, can Trump really pull the U.S. out of the Atlantic alliance? And would Europe be capable of defending itself in such a case? These were the questions that were on the minds of the participants of this year's forum.
“It is safe to say that Donald Trump is unpredictable. No one knows if he will carry out what he threatens,” Democratic Rep. Jason Crow, from Colorado, who served three tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, told Rzeczpospolita. “But I know a lot of Republicans who staunchly support the trans-Atlantic alliance. Therefore, I would not expect any sudden moves immediately after Trump takes power, but rather a heated debate within the Republican Party itself on what to do with relations with Europe.”*
The US Understands That Russia and China Form One Bloc
Celeste Wallander, who previously served as President Joe Biden's special adviser on relations with Russia, tried to be reassuring. “Elections are primarily about national politics. I can say today on behalf of America that the U.S. would not have been able to support the Ukrainians to such an extent without European involvement. It was thanks to this cooperation that we were able to stop Russia from escalating this war beyond Ukraine,”* Wallander told Rzeczpospolita.
Crow believes that, unlike in the days of Barack Obama and the pivot from Europe to Asia, there is now a widespread awareness among American elites that Russia and China form a single bloc of authoritarian military powers. A U.S. defeat in Ukraine would strengthen Beijing. China is widely seen as the biggest threat in America. This calls for maintaining American commitment to Europe's security.
There is also an internal context in the U.S. Senior military sources tell Rzeczpospolita that if Trump acts to the detriment of the strategic security interests of the U.S., the U.S. military will not carry out his orders. According to our sources, this is allowed by the U.S. Constitution. There have been precedents. The Pentagon, for example, didn't let the military get involved in securing the border with Mexico, which Trump insisted on during his first term.
But what if Trump stands his ground and America stops guaranteeing Europe's security?
Military Sources: The U.S. has a long list of military capabilities that Europe does not have. This, in particular, is the possibility of a long-range strike deep into enemy territory, the use of space forces or artificial intelligence. Europe does not have the huge production potential of the U.S. arms industry, which can very quickly increase production of not only heavy weapons but also ammunition. Another problem in Europe is that they don't have enough cruise missiles. Furthermore, only the United Kingdom and France possess nuclear weapons, and it is unclear to what extent they would be willing to use them in defense of other allies.
If European countries purchased weapons from Europe, their development could be financed.
“How many years it took to agree between Germany and France on a common tank! We have a multitude of weapon models, which makes us very weak. Catching up on this backlog also makes us very weak,” our sources say.
Europe does have potential, though. Wouter van Wersch, vice president of Airbus, is convinced of that. “We produce a lot of advanced products. But what of it, when 63% of armaments that European governments purchased after the Russian invasion of Ukraine came from outside our continent? And yet, the development of new technologies is very expensive and must somehow pay off,” van Wersch tells Rzeczpospolita.
Military sources point out that the time factor is crucial here. Americans, as well as Koreans, are capable of fulfilling purchase orders very quickly. And this is of paramount importance when facing the Russian threat. That is why, for example, Germany bought American F-35s capable of carrying nuclear missiles under the NATO code-share system. They also picked U.S. patriots to develop the Sky Shield air defense system.
*Editor’s note: Although accurately translated, this quoted passage could not be independently verified.
Previous article![]( "It’s Time US Woke Up and Smelled the Coffee")
Next article![]( "(Fictional) Female US Presidents We Remember")
