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.
"The only question is whether Europe will finally rise up and do the same." Hear, hear. The trillion dollar question. If Europe is serious, leaders need to have a frank conversation with citizens about: energy (scrapping net zero targets), reducing welfare spend - and that's only the beginning.
Yes, exactly. If Europe is serious about becoming a hard power, this represents a massive shift in the political psyche of European voters. Europe’s signal principle has long been redistribution—both within nations and across the EU. These are things you can do in a ‘nice’ world. Hard power demands a fundamentally different mindset: prioritizing strength over security nets, production over consumption, and strategic autonomy over collective deliberation.
The energy and welfare trade-offs you mention aren’t just policy tweaks; they challenge the core assumptions of the European model. Are European voters ready for that? Because a true pivot to hard power means embracing a more ruthless, competition-driven outlook—something that cuts against decades of political culture.
I think you’re right that it starts with a frank conversation. But who is willing to have it? And who can win on that platform?”
The complication is that a "European" defies that singular term. In reality, the [truer imperfect] union is 27 competing states with differing cultures, languages and national legislatures. This places it as flat-footed in its agility and decision-making, when compared with the USA or Russia.
The current dramatic changes being forced upon European-wide thinking present a number of inflection points, which offer some distinct opportunities. With the turmoil in higher education and research in the US, Europe appears to be a much more attractive destination for knowledge talent; the cheaper training costs for LLMs make European challengers a distinct possibility. Rapid and evolving changes in spending (e.g. defence, manufacturing…) could inject growth potential...
The potential is there, but, as you have pointed out in your posts, getting there will be the real hard work and fraught with difficulties. 'Twas ever so.
Hi James. “The complication is that a "European" defies that singular term. In reality, the [truer imperfect] union is 27 competing states with differing cultures, languages and national legislatures.” Yes. Absolutely. This is how it has been, Europe as less a singular entity than a collection of competing states, each with its own identity together with a degree of wariness of Brussels.
That resistance to centralisation was, for a long time, manageable because the Western world was the world that counted, at least to Europeans. The US, New Zealand (where I am), Australia, Canada and the rich Asian economies formed a comfortable order, and Europe’s internal divisions didn’t threaten its place within this world.
But the world has changed. The applecart has been overturned, and for the first time in decades, Europeans are looking out at a world that does not have them in their natural place within it. (This is true for NZ as well. We just sacked our High Commissioner to the United Kingdom for making a non-lickspittle joke about Trump.)
This kind of uncertainty does something completely predictable: previously fractious people close ranks. An external threat—be it economic, geopolitical, or technological—has a way of forging common purpose, even among those who would rather not cooperate. And in this mess, there is both the opportunity (as you note) and the necessity to respond. Europe’s usual sluggishness may not be an option much longer.
From my location here in New Zealand I am wondering what we peripheral bits and bobs of the old order will find as our new path as we pick our way through the shards. I have an unexpected (by me) aspect of exhilaration at the thought of new opportunities.
I agree with a lot of that save that Trump may be "doing things" but he is not "acting decisively". His strategic and economic ignorance and incoherence will damage America. The EU's strength is that it is a consensus organisation of states but this does carry a weakness of inflexibility and a lack of direction. But Europe is not and cannot be a federated state like the US, so it must maximise its strengths and be mindful if its weaknesses. There are few Europeans who would rather live in the US.
I think Elon’s chainsaw is the best image as a symbol for what he is doing to the international order, achieved after 8 decades of patient and expensive work.
Not just his lack of coherence, but also the people advising him on how to scale up the AI 'industry', which is still a very unpredictable market and often simply a solution looking for a problem.
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.
It isn't so wrong now, is it? Zelenskyy had to come back a few days later, and the only thing that changed is that Ukraine has lost even more leverage.
You know the 'actual situation' and yet what's come to pass? The big blow up in the Oval Office - and as awful as it was, I don't think it was premeditated. Less than a week later, and Zelensky is back to the table, saying he is ready to sign the deal 'anytime'. Trump will make him wait until he feels ready to 'do things.'
The actual situation is - Putin will not agree for any type of peace and Trump has nothing to force him with. Why is a long story, but that's how the situation is. Therefore someone should be blamed, and it can't be Trump and unlikely to be Putin. Therefore Zelensky is to blame. The end of current situation:)
Specifics will differ, but in the end result will be the same. There will be no peace or cease-fire. The war will continue. There will be no help for Ukraine. It will be, somehow, Zelensky's fault; Trump will find or create a way to blame him, one way or another.
Specifics can't be predicted, but the end result will be the same.
I will refrain from making any final judgments. In recent months they have been aging too quickly and usually the outcome of the talks is completely different than everyone thought it would be.
Errr... No? The outcome of the talks never differs from one very significant outcome: Trump declares that he wants something plainly impossible (like compensating trade deficit with Canada), fails to achieve it, gets something random, pointless and belligerent and declares big win.
There can be no peace with Putin. It is an impossibility. If Putin wanted any type of peace or ceasefire I would see signs and I don't see them. There is no way to pressure Putin, for Trump or US, at least short-term, in the next year or two. If something is not possible, it is reasonable that instead some possible thing will happen.
The most obvious possible thing which seems to be in character for Trump is to get another big win over the weakest opponent. The easiest big win is, of course, over Ukraine. Trump can crush Ukraine in so many ways. It is not necessarily that's what will happen, there are other possible things that can be turned into a big win, but it's a reasonable expectation.
While it is possible that some other possible things will happen, impossible things will not happen. Compensating trade deficit with Canada is impossible. Getting peace from Putin is impossible.
Just want to say, President Trump is not “just doing things”, he is UNDoing all the evil corrupted schemes and grand theft that have been going on in the name of many fake “charities and humanitarian efforts”. You all liberals can attack all you want, the people is not having it, they support Trump! So your own paycheck will still means something and the government will not be bankrupt.
You ask what planet 'they' are living on. In my case it is the one that is being destroyed by our greed and stupidity. The only inhabitable planet we know of, with its rich biodiversity, great beauty, intricate ecosystems and, seemingly unique in the universe, life. So, if I put protecting the environment that we depend upon for every second of our existence ahead of which particular flavour of exploitative elite rules us, then that seems entirely rational to me. No doubt you'll argue that some exploiters will be more destructive of life than others. True, but all inevitably take us to civilizational collapse, so its just a matter of how quickly.
Somewhat agreed, but we as Europeans have the ability to drive at 90mph into a concrete wall and brake at the last moment. Bit like Max verstappen drives his f1 car in corners. This is a needed wake up call and it gives room for other powers to arise. We as Europeans are a sleeping giant (very deep sleep until recently 🛌 but once waken up (and braking in time) we can get moving. Problem with giants? They move slow. So it’s too late imho. And Lets not forger that the US actively made us depended on their power and military.
Analyzing the U.S.-Europe relationship and the Trump administration objectively does not equate to endorsing him as 'my guy.' To safeguard liberal European values in a shifting geopolitical landscape, we must confront reality clearly—without resorting to simplistic, ad hominem attacks. Europe needs a rigorous, honest debate about its future if our values and influence are to endure. It is critical.
Intentional. It’s been the Heritage Foundation’s goal to shed our relationships with Europe, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Canada to embrace the growth potentials of India, China, Russia, Brazil and other Russian-led nations.
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.
"The only question is whether Europe will finally rise up and do the same." Hear, hear. The trillion dollar question. If Europe is serious, leaders need to have a frank conversation with citizens about: energy (scrapping net zero targets), reducing welfare spend - and that's only the beginning.
Yes, exactly. If Europe is serious about becoming a hard power, this represents a massive shift in the political psyche of European voters. Europe’s signal principle has long been redistribution—both within nations and across the EU. These are things you can do in a ‘nice’ world. Hard power demands a fundamentally different mindset: prioritizing strength over security nets, production over consumption, and strategic autonomy over collective deliberation.
The energy and welfare trade-offs you mention aren’t just policy tweaks; they challenge the core assumptions of the European model. Are European voters ready for that? Because a true pivot to hard power means embracing a more ruthless, competition-driven outlook—something that cuts against decades of political culture.
I think you’re right that it starts with a frank conversation. But who is willing to have it? And who can win on that platform?”
The complication is that a "European" defies that singular term. In reality, the [truer imperfect] union is 27 competing states with differing cultures, languages and national legislatures. This places it as flat-footed in its agility and decision-making, when compared with the USA or Russia.
The current dramatic changes being forced upon European-wide thinking present a number of inflection points, which offer some distinct opportunities. With the turmoil in higher education and research in the US, Europe appears to be a much more attractive destination for knowledge talent; the cheaper training costs for LLMs make European challengers a distinct possibility. Rapid and evolving changes in spending (e.g. defence, manufacturing…) could inject growth potential...
The potential is there, but, as you have pointed out in your posts, getting there will be the real hard work and fraught with difficulties. 'Twas ever so.
Hi James. “The complication is that a "European" defies that singular term. In reality, the [truer imperfect] union is 27 competing states with differing cultures, languages and national legislatures.” Yes. Absolutely. This is how it has been, Europe as less a singular entity than a collection of competing states, each with its own identity together with a degree of wariness of Brussels.
That resistance to centralisation was, for a long time, manageable because the Western world was the world that counted, at least to Europeans. The US, New Zealand (where I am), Australia, Canada and the rich Asian economies formed a comfortable order, and Europe’s internal divisions didn’t threaten its place within this world.
But the world has changed. The applecart has been overturned, and for the first time in decades, Europeans are looking out at a world that does not have them in their natural place within it. (This is true for NZ as well. We just sacked our High Commissioner to the United Kingdom for making a non-lickspittle joke about Trump.)
This kind of uncertainty does something completely predictable: previously fractious people close ranks. An external threat—be it economic, geopolitical, or technological—has a way of forging common purpose, even among those who would rather not cooperate. And in this mess, there is both the opportunity (as you note) and the necessity to respond. Europe’s usual sluggishness may not be an option much longer.
From my location here in New Zealand I am wondering what we peripheral bits and bobs of the old order will find as our new path as we pick our way through the shards. I have an unexpected (by me) aspect of exhilaration at the thought of new opportunities.
I agree with a lot of that save that Trump may be "doing things" but he is not "acting decisively". His strategic and economic ignorance and incoherence will damage America. The EU's strength is that it is a consensus organisation of states but this does carry a weakness of inflexibility and a lack of direction. But Europe is not and cannot be a federated state like the US, so it must maximise its strengths and be mindful if its weaknesses. There are few Europeans who would rather live in the US.
I think Elon’s chainsaw is the best image as a symbol for what he is doing to the international order, achieved after 8 decades of patient and expensive work.
Not just his lack of coherence, but also the people advising him on how to scale up the AI 'industry', which is still a very unpredictable market and often simply a solution looking for a problem.
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.
*Brussels wants to become like Washington with national governments being the states having limited say.*
That would be great, but it's very hard to do. We shall, of course, help Brussels as much as we can.
I think he’s already broken the USA…
The Ukraine part of the analysis is already very wrong just few days later. Didnt predict that one did you?
It isn't so wrong now, is it? Zelenskyy had to come back a few days later, and the only thing that changed is that Ukraine has lost even more leverage.
Who could have?!
I don't think that anybody could predict such an outcome.
I think it was quite obvious for anyone knowing the actual situation.
You know the 'actual situation' and yet what's come to pass? The big blow up in the Oval Office - and as awful as it was, I don't think it was premeditated. Less than a week later, and Zelensky is back to the table, saying he is ready to sign the deal 'anytime'. Trump will make him wait until he feels ready to 'do things.'
The actual situation is - Putin will not agree for any type of peace and Trump has nothing to force him with. Why is a long story, but that's how the situation is. Therefore someone should be blamed, and it can't be Trump and unlikely to be Putin. Therefore Zelensky is to blame. The end of current situation:)
It doesn't matter what Zelensky will say or do. In the end, the war will continue, USA will not help, Trump will manufacture a way to blame Zelensky.
The outburst in front of the camera wasn't really predictable to anyone.
Specifics will differ, but in the end result will be the same. There will be no peace or cease-fire. The war will continue. There will be no help for Ukraine. It will be, somehow, Zelensky's fault; Trump will find or create a way to blame him, one way or another.
Specifics can't be predicted, but the end result will be the same.
I will refrain from making any final judgments. In recent months they have been aging too quickly and usually the outcome of the talks is completely different than everyone thought it would be.
Errr... No? The outcome of the talks never differs from one very significant outcome: Trump declares that he wants something plainly impossible (like compensating trade deficit with Canada), fails to achieve it, gets something random, pointless and belligerent and declares big win.
There can be no peace with Putin. It is an impossibility. If Putin wanted any type of peace or ceasefire I would see signs and I don't see them. There is no way to pressure Putin, for Trump or US, at least short-term, in the next year or two. If something is not possible, it is reasonable that instead some possible thing will happen.
The most obvious possible thing which seems to be in character for Trump is to get another big win over the weakest opponent. The easiest big win is, of course, over Ukraine. Trump can crush Ukraine in so many ways. It is not necessarily that's what will happen, there are other possible things that can be turned into a big win, but it's a reasonable expectation.
While it is possible that some other possible things will happen, impossible things will not happen. Compensating trade deficit with Canada is impossible. Getting peace from Putin is impossible.
Just want to say, President Trump is not “just doing things”, he is UNDoing all the evil corrupted schemes and grand theft that have been going on in the name of many fake “charities and humanitarian efforts”. You all liberals can attack all you want, the people is not having it, they support Trump! So your own paycheck will still means something and the government will not be bankrupt.
You ask what planet 'they' are living on. In my case it is the one that is being destroyed by our greed and stupidity. The only inhabitable planet we know of, with its rich biodiversity, great beauty, intricate ecosystems and, seemingly unique in the universe, life. So, if I put protecting the environment that we depend upon for every second of our existence ahead of which particular flavour of exploitative elite rules us, then that seems entirely rational to me. No doubt you'll argue that some exploiters will be more destructive of life than others. True, but all inevitably take us to civilizational collapse, so its just a matter of how quickly.
Minor correction: The war in Ukraine is now entering its fourth year (not third).
TY!
Correction breaking with European Alliances , Europe is not broken.
Trump is giving Europe a great opportunity to make Europe great again.
I have wrote about it:
https://open.substack.com/pub/weissword/p/the-unexpected-gift-of-trumps-isolationism?r=ttlrd&utm_medium=ios
Somewhat agreed, but we as Europeans have the ability to drive at 90mph into a concrete wall and brake at the last moment. Bit like Max verstappen drives his f1 car in corners. This is a needed wake up call and it gives room for other powers to arise. We as Europeans are a sleeping giant (very deep sleep until recently 🛌 but once waken up (and braking in time) we can get moving. Problem with giants? They move slow. So it’s too late imho. And Lets not forger that the US actively made us depended on their power and military.
Europe suicided itself many years ago, we’re just watching the slow death.
Your guy in charge isn't actually doing anything: he is breaking things (his own country in the process) and trying to steal things
Analyzing the U.S.-Europe relationship and the Trump administration objectively does not equate to endorsing him as 'my guy.' To safeguard liberal European values in a shifting geopolitical landscape, we must confront reality clearly—without resorting to simplistic, ad hominem attacks. Europe needs a rigorous, honest debate about its future if our values and influence are to endure. It is critical.
Well, that aged like a bottle of milk.
More like a bottle of fine wine.
Making. Not breaking.
Intentional. It’s been the Heritage Foundation’s goal to shed our relationships with Europe, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Canada to embrace the growth potentials of India, China, Russia, Brazil and other Russian-led nations.
Perplexity: Loss of the rule of law may mean that the dollar ceases to be the global currency.