5 Consequences of the Election: Putin Is Pleased, NATO Loses the US

Germany must consider the consequences of Donald Trump’s return, including rearming itself against Russia, which now believes it has a free hand to do what it wants. A federal government that permanently revolves around itself is out of place.

Now we have a problem. What was expected has come to pass. Four years of a Donald Trump who can rule with a majority in Congress now loom before us.

Naturally one asks, how has Europe adapted to this specter? Not so much? How about Germany? Our annoying government could fall apart at any time, day or night. It is a twist of fate that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, [recently fired] German Federal Finance Minister Christian Linder, and German Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck have been circling around themselves for some time, while the outside world is rearranging itself.

This discrepancy is a reason to prefer a bad ending to an endless horror. The traffic light coalition has its merits, but they are all in the past. This is proof that a country doesn’t need an uncertain government in times of maximum uncertainty. You do not need to like the leader of the Christian Democratic Union, Friedrich Merz, but the CDU/Christian Social Union has earned a chance with him as chancellor. The sudden and imminent advent of a new government in Germany is the first consequence of this year’s election in America.

Finally Getting Serious about the Turnaround

Ukraine will be the victim of the second consequence, because Trump will systematically reduce the support of weapons, tanks, rockets and ammunition, and [the reduction] cannot be compensated for by Europe.

This brings us to the third consequence, which affects us as well. In the future, NATO will have to manage with less America. Like it or not, we must defend Europe ourselves, and above all, Eastern Europe.

Russia now has a free hand. The enormous rearmament to which Vladimir Putin devotes himself cannot be explained by the war in Ukraine alone. More preparations are being made on NATO’s flank, such as in the Baltic states. The weakest point on the European border is the Republic of Moldova. Perhaps the reconquest of what was lost — for which Putin unconditionally strives — will begin there first.

A Merz government must now take the change of course seriously. Reducing the welfare state cannot save enough to consistently upgrade the Bundeswehr, the armed forces of Germany. We will probably be amazed at how suddenly the debt brake loses the ideological influence of Lindner.

There Is Actually No Alternative

The fourth consequence of Trump’s return will affect not only Germany, but also Europe; leaving wishful thinking behind won’t be so bad. The “peace project” is likely to be resurrected: Even the ancient Romans already knew that peace requires a willingness to wage war.

In fact, there are two politicians who have recently advocated for a European army: The first is French Prime Minister Emmanuel Macron, and the other is, surprisingly, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán. Of course, armed forces from many countries cannot be set up at lightning speed, but there are a number of approaches that really should be expanded. True, this will take many years, but there is no real alternative.

The prerequisite for this is the survival of the EU as an economic power. In a time of rampant protectionism, focusing on exports is not an advantage. Trump is likely to resume the trade war with China and extend it to Europe. The EU is already heavily involved, wanting to impose tariffs on Chinese electric cars, the production of which is heavily subsidized by the state.

In the long term, no country on the globe benefits from economic isolation. Triumphs become stale, as Trump will soon discover. In the end, state-run China will probably be the least vulnerable.

The Most Delicate Consequence

The fifth consequence is the most delicate. The CDU/CSU intends to reactivate nuclear power plants. Undoubtedly, some conservatives and many right-wing people dream of Germany becoming a nuclear power. This debate was initiated in the 1950s. The argument, then and now, is that if the U.S. turns away from Europe, nuclear weapons would be the best way to grant us independence. But does the argument still hold true in our complicated world?

There are two European nuclear powers: the United Kingdom and France. Nuclear weapons are not intended to be used, because whoever launches ballistic missiles first will die second. The theory used to be that atomic weapons were a political weapon for the purpose of averting danger.

What Was Once True Is No Longer True Today

Every nuclear-armed country has known that another nuclear-armed country could use those weapons; even if it were to be invaded, the consequences would be even more terrible. But what was once true no longer applies today. The threat is now empty.

There is a lot to think about because someone who wants to make America great will soon be in power in Washington. The logic is that strong men do what they want in China, Russia, Turkey and so on. And they take what they want. Not only is Ukraine’s existence threatened, but Taiwan is also losing its support in a Trumpian America.

Illusions have been shattered in many places in the world. It is now important to draw conclusions from the consequences, which we have so long avoided, of the new historical situation. For Germany, Europe and other parts of the world. Let’s brace ourselves for what comes next.