Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free
Your guide to what Trump’s second term means for Washington, business and the world
It is tempting to say that the transatlantic alliance has hit rock bottom. Unfortunately, it could have a lot further to fall.
Donald Trump’s threat to annex Greenland raised the once unthinkable prospect that the US could use its military to seize territory from Denmark — a Nato ally. Several European nations responded by dispatching troops to the island — ostensibly as part of an exercise to bolster Arctic security. Trump’s counter reaction was to accuse the European nations involved — which include France, Germany and the UK — of playing a “very dangerous game”. The US president has said that all these countries will be hit with tariffs of 10 per cent at the beginning of February, rising to 25 per cent in June.
So what happens now? A wide range of outcomes is conceivable. At the more benign end, it is possible that Trump’s tariff threats will disappear into the mist. The US president has made empty tariff threats before — including a promise to impose 100 per cent levies on films made outside America and a 200 per cent tariff on champagne. Just last week, he was threatening to impose a 25 per cent tariff on any country that trades with Iran. But there has been little discernible follow up on that so far.
The most dangerous outcomes include the complete disintegration of the western alliance, including Nato. The steps leading to that outcome are not hard to game out: Trump presses ahead with his Greenland levies, Europe imposes counter-tariffs, Trump responds by threatening once again to withdraw from Nato or by saying he is no longer bound by the Article 5 mutual defence guarantee. The US could also halt all further support for Ukraine and adopt a resolutely pro-Russian position on how the war should end.
At the most extreme end of possibilities — if the US decided to use force — it is possible that US and European troops could actually clash in Greenland. That, after all, looked like one implicit message of the dispatch of European troops to the island.
Confronted with such a bewildering range of possible endgames, what should European leaders do? The answer is that to avoid the worst outcomes, European leaders need to push back now. Over the past year, they have tried appeasement and flattery. This is where it has got them. They need to change course immediately.
The low point for the EU was reached last summer, when the bloc’s leaders meekly agreed to accept a 15 per cent US tariff — without retaliating. That EU-US trade deal that was agreed back then has now been put on hold by the European parliament. Its ratification is hard to envisage, at least until Trump’s threatened additional tariffs are withdrawn.
Instead, the Europeans should draw up countervailing tariffs aimed at the US — moving beyond the cliched targets of Bourbon whiskey and Levi’s jeans. New targets could include the big US tech firms and crypto companies that are an integral part of Trump’s world.
Britain is one of the countries threatened by Trump’s new Greenland tariffs. Because of Brexit, it will not be part of any collective EU response on trade. But if the new tariffs go into force and persist, Sir Keir Starmer could take bold action — by moving to rejoin the EU’s single market. In a radically altered geopolitical environment, both the British public and the European Commission might decide that it is time to set aside old disputes and pull together fast.
European leaders will still hesitate to confront Trump, fearing that America’s security role means that the US can always inflict more pain on Europe than the other way around. But the evidence of the past year is that it is more dangerous to roll over in the face of Trump’s pressure than to fight back.
Those countries that have stood up to the White House — such as China and Brazil — have generally seen Trump climb down. In the classic style of a bully, the US president loves humiliating the weak. But he often backs off fast from anything that looks like it might be a fair fight.
Any European leaders who are tempted to say that it is not worth risking the transatlantic alliance, for the sake of a sparsely populated autonomous part of Denmark, need to think again. The issues at stake in Greenland are territorial integrity and the right of self-determination — principles that are fundamental to international law and the European project. Abandoning those principles would gravely damage the EU, the international order and what is left of the transatlantic alliance.
Europeans should also be aware that the whole world is watching how this plays out — and will draw conclusions about the EU’s ability to survive in the brutal new global order that Trump is striving to create. Over the past week, I have received several gloating messages from a Chinese nationalist friend — who is gleefully anticipating Europe’s humiliation. By giving way on Greenland, Europe would confirm that we are now irrevocably in a might-makes-right world. For China that is a potentially enticing prospect.
The Russians will also be eagerly watching how the current crisis plays out and will draw lessons about European resolve and strength. If the Kremlin concludes that Europe is weak and there for the taking, the whole continent could pay the price.
For its own sake — and for the sake of the wider world — Europe needs to stand firm on Greenland.
gideon.rachman@ft.com
Credit: Source link
