In his era of "Just Doing Things," Donald Trump is breaking Europe
This is most apparent in security and AI
President Trump seems to have decided that America can simply "do things," regardless of the collateral damage. And do things it will. So far, Europe has been the obvious casualty.
As the US bulldozes ahead with policies, announcements and plans, the chasm between American energy and European intransigence couldn't be starker.
The impact is already seismic—both in the dismantling of old political orthodoxies (i.e., the Transatlantic Alliance) and - equally importantly, but perhaps less reported on - in the race for global technology supremacy.
The emergence of technological superiority— will be the most significant geopolitical trend of our time. I’ll write more about this soon.
But for now, let’s go back to Trump just doing things and how that's sending Europe into a tailspin.
Security: A Continent on Ice
The war in Ukraine—now entering its third year—is the biggest issue. Trump has made it clear he intends to end it, one way or another. If that means cutting a deal with Russia, so be it. Let’s get it done.
Having worked for a NATO Secretary General, I know full well how the European security establishment feels about being frozen out of these talks: indignation, horror, shock.
Adding insult to injury, Europe has been told it is failing on democracy, free speech, and migration at the Munich Security Conference. No wonder the Chairman (a German diplomat) literally cried during his closing remarks.
It’s not that Europe isn’t trying to respond.
Macron was in D.C. this week, desperately trying to secure U.S. commitments to provide a backstop for Ukraine and to advocate for European involvement in the talks. Surprise: nothing came of it. On the contrary, Trump made it clear that he would not offer a security guarantee and that Europe would have to step up instead:
“I’m not going to make security guarantees beyond very much. We’re going to have Europe do that.”
Almost as soon as Macron left, Trump riffed on how the EU was invented to ‘screw America,’ and warned of a 25% tariff on European exports.
Today, Keir Starmer has entered the lion’s den. The British Prime Minister has been donning military fatigues, writing op-eds, and calling for a historic, all-nation effort to rise to this once-in-a-generation security challenge.
He’s right, of course, but he can’t do much. He’s already increased UK defense spending to 2.5% of GDP— but as expected, this is already facing massive pushback at home, not least because the government doesn’t have any money.
To scrape together funds, it had to slash the international development budget—yet even that is a source of disapproval and hand-wringing from certain quarters of the UK political establishment. (What planet are these people living on?)
Even 2.5% of GDP is nowhere near enough — not for Britain, nor for any other European country. After decades of chronic underinvestment in defense, throwing money at the problem now won’t fix it overnight.
And none of this should come as a shock. The U.S. has been telling Europe to spend more on defense since Truman’s administration in the 1950s.
Iced out of Ukraine
As for including the EU itself? Nope. No luck there either—despite Macron’s best attempts.
Trump is reportedly close to securing a deal with Ukraine that would grant the U.S. long-term economic control over a significant portion of its critical minerals—potentially worth up to $1 trillion.
When Trump first declared that Ukraine should pay the U.S. $500 billion in rare earth minerals a few weeks ago, European leaders and media (and many others) were outraged. Now, under the current plan, the U.S. will gain deep economic leverage over Ukraine’s mineral wealth, energy resources, and infrastructure through joint ownership of a Reconstruction Investment Fund.
American companies will get priority access to Ukraine’s mining, oil, and natural gas sectors, cementing U.S. dominance in its post-war economy. More than that, the U.S. will hold political leverage over Ukraine’s financial and reconstruction decisions—while ensuring that adversaries like Russia don’t benefit.
Tomorrow, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is expected in Washington to finalize and sign the agreement with Trump.
You know who won’t be there? The EU.
Trump is just doing things. And he’s doing them decisively, whether rightly or wrongly.
What can the EU do? Apparently, not much. Leaders are either politically hamstrung, staring into empty coffers and unable to agree on much.
At emergency summits over the last two weeks, France pushed for a ‘European security’ response. The UK (not even part of the EU proper anymore) wanted to deploy troops in Ukraine.
Germany rejected any deployments as premature. It also resisted joint EU funding, preferring to funnel support through NATO. Italy hesitated, unwilling to commit without U.S. backing. Poland, keen to bolster its own military capabilities, wasn't ready to commit troops either.
Clear path forward then.
AI: A New World Order
On AI, it’s the same convoluted mess. The Europeans are trying—the Americans are doing. And as they do, they are rendering the EU and key European nations increasingly irrelevant from a geopolitical perspective.
Here, too, the U.S. has unleashed a cat among the pigeons. While European leaders spent years working closely with the Biden administration to mitigate AI risks and align on safety regulations, all of that was scrapped on Day 1 of the Trump presidency.
Trump signed the "Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence" executive order, overturning Biden’s AI policies and fast-tracking an AI Action Plan to ‘cement U.S. dominance within 180 days.’
The language was blunt:
The Biden AI Executive Order established unnecessarily burdensome requirements for companies developing and deploying AI that would stifle private sector innovation and threaten American technological leadership.
It goes on:
It is the policy of the United States to sustain and enhance America’s global AI dominance in order to promote human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security.”
JD Vance then delivered the key speech on U.S. AI policy to date. He wasted no time ‘course correcting’ the narrative. First, he framed AI as something which should be considered an opportunity, not a risk.
Further, he declared that the Trump administration will pursue AI dominance relentlessly, industrializing the economy to make it happen. Lastly, he warned that attempts to rein in U.S. tech companies—especially through excessive regulation —would be treated as a hostile act against industries vital to American prosperity and national security.
The message landed hard. Another room full of stunned Europeans. With the U.S. doing something—moving decisively, unapologetically—European leaders immediately began scrambling to protect their own national interests.
France: Macron moved first. In fact, he saw it coming and tried to turn the Paris AI Summit into a showcase of French AI prowess. Anyone who was there could see the full spectacle— and to be fair, France does boast some of Europe’s top AI talent.
On day one, Macron also made a hard push for French nuclear power as the energy source for AI data centers—an unsubtle play for economic leverage. The subtext? France, not Britain or Germany, should be America’s primary European tech partner.
The UK: Meanwhile, the Brits went further—distancing themselves from the European AI agenda entirely to align with Washington. The UK outright refused to sign the Paris communiqué on AI ethics, rejecting the EU’s risk-averse regulatory stance.
It also rebranded its AI Safety Institute—a legacy of Rishi Sunak’s premiership—into the AI Security Institute, shifting its focus from algorithmic fairness and existential risk to national security threats like bio-weapons and cyber-warfare. The message was clear: the UK wants to be America’s AI partner.
In its latest effort to embrace AI-driven economic growth (Europe needs it desperately), the UK government proposed loosening AI copyright rules, allowing firms to use copyrighted material for AI training unless explicitly opted out.
The backlash has been swift. Over 1,000 musicians, including Kate Bush, Annie Lennox, and Elton John, have collaborated on a silent protest album titled "Is This What We Want?"—12 tracks of ambient noise recorded in empty studios and concert halls, symbolizing AI’s potential threat to musicians’ livelihoods.
Germany: And then there’s Germany—deindustrializing, paralyzed by its self-inflicted energy crisis, and politically adrift. Of the three major European economies, Germany is now the most distant from America, its postwar alliance fraying as it grapples with economic decline.
Nothing underscored this more than JD Vance meeting with AfD leaders rather than the now-rejected Scholz government. Berlin—once rebuilt under the Marshall Plan, long dependent on America’s security guarantee—is now more alienated from its former protector than at any time in the postwar era.
The EU: Even the EU’s attempt to flex its AI muscle — Ursula von der Leyen’s announcement of a €200 billion fund for AI infrastructure — remains shaky. It’s a big number, but only €50 billion is coming from the EU. The rest? Private investors and industry partners—if they materialize. Given the EU’s track record, this could be another bureaucratic promise meant to look decisive rather than actually getting it done.
The High Cost of Indecision
I spent the early years of my career working in European policy, and this moment feels like déjà vu. Whether it was the Eurozone crisis, the annexation of Crimea, or the migration crisis, the pattern never changed: Europe talks unity—until the moment of decision. Then, every nation looks out for itself.
We had a phrase for this: extend and pretend. And it still applies. Every crisis is met with half-baked solutions, kicked down the road until the next emergency forces another round of the same.
But in this new era, the cost of indecision is far higher—especially when, as Trump’s orbit is proving, you can just do things.
Trump is just doing things—and in the process, he’s breaking Europe.
Trump is “just doing things,” and Europe is floundering. But an interesting possibility is that his reckless or strategic approach is forcing Europe into a long-overdue hard power realignment. I see that in some of the comments above and around Substack.
Europe isn’t weak. With a $24T GDP and 500M people, it vastly outweighs Russia ($2T GDP, 140M people). The issue isn’t capability—it’s coordination. NATO estimates 23 of its 32 members will hit 2% GDP defense spending this year, with many pushing for 2.5–3%. The EU is ramping up weapons production and debating its own rapid reaction force. Yet political fragmentation (Germany hesitating, Poland acting alone) still undermines European autonomy.
Trump sees his economic play in Ukraine—securing $1T in mineral rights and post-war reconstruction contracts—as a shrewd business move. In reality, it looks more like standover tactics and extortion, locking Europe out despite Europe having funded more of Ukraine’s defense than the U.S. See my post: The Don Framework https://open.substack.com/pub/johnbaker768156/p/the-don-framework?r=294g0v&utm_medium=ios
If Europe wants real leverage, it can’t just be NATO’s ATM. It needs a seat at the decision-making table, whether through defense industrial expansion or securing its own economic stakes in Ukraine’s recovery. Most everyone seems to agree on this.
Trump’s AI policy is another case of the U.S. moving decisively while Europe dithers. AI’s economic value won’t be captured by patent holders alone but by who integrates it fastest into industry.
If Europe doesn’t want to be permanently dependent on American AI breakthroughs, it needs to think beyond regulation and start prioritizing deployment. STEM talent is the real resource here—and Europe lags behind the U.S. and China in adoption, not due to lack of research but because its industries haven’t fully embraced AI-driven transformation.
Trump’s unpredictability has jolted Europe, but the correct response as you note is action, not kicking more cans down more roads.
Europe has the money, technology, and people to take charge of its security and economic future. What it lacks is a coherent vision and the political will to execute. Trump’s America is acting decisively. The only question is whether Europe will finally rise up and do the same.
Excellent column but I have to disagree slightly. The EU is doing something, using every crisis as an opportunity to centralize power and Brussels and remove national government as having any say.
In the name of democracy, they just removed Hungary‘s veto. From Covid to Ukraine, Brussels wants to become like Washington with national governments being the states having limited say.