The election of Donald Trump has already reshaped the electoral map of the United States, but Trump’s foreign policy agenda is likely to have far-reaching consequences for the geopolitical map of Europe as well.
Since 2016, Mr. Trump has proposed significant departures from business as usual: reducing America’s involvement in NATO, making significant concessions to Vladimir Putin’s Russia, and even buying Greenland. Now that Trump has won, what will happen next? If Ukraine cannot resist Russian intervention, and cannot count on Western support, who is to say that the Baltics will be immune from a similar attack by Moscow?
With more experience, the confidence of a popular mandate, and a deep bench of loyalists poised to fill the ranks of the U.S. State Department, America’s voters and Europe’s policymakers will understand the security implications for Europe, and the preservation of democracy. Methods of keeping should be considered. In the region
The most immediate change under the second Trump administration will be a reduction in US military and economic aid to Ukraine. Trump has repeatedly criticized the level of US involvement in the conflict, and has suggested that Europe should take more responsibility for its own defense.
During his last term, Trump often expressed frustration with European allies, accusing them of not contributing enough to their security, particularly in NATO, and calling on Russia to withdraw from NATO. “Do whatever you want” with a country. its fair share. This may be true for the “old European” members of the EU, such as France, Germany and Italy, but not for the newer members in the East. In fact, both Estonia and Poland spend an even higher percentage of their GDP on defense than the U.S. Trump’s isolationist stance has promised less U.S. funding (or none at all), leaving the region The future of war in I looks very different.
Trump’s transactional approach to foreign policy will force Ukraine to make territorial concessions to end the war. This could include pressuring Ukraine to relinquish control of Russian-held territories such as Crimea and the Donbass, compromising Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Such a move would not only embolden Putin, but also set a dangerous precedent for other authoritarian regimes seeking to expand their influence through military aggression. Such a change in policy would also abandon a fundamental principle of the post-World War II order: borders cannot be changed by force or the threat of force.
Moreover, Trump’s support for Putin’s insistence on Ukraine’s neutrality would make Ukraine vulnerable to future Russian aggression. By ending NATO’s prospects for protection, Trump would undermine Ukraine’s security and undermine its aspirations for closer integration with Western institutions such as the European Union. It will be a victory for Russia.
Trump’s next term also puts the Baltics within Putin’s reach. A weakening of NATO due to a reduction in US intervention in Ukraine would have far-reaching consequences for European security. Countries on NATO’s eastern flank, including Poland and the Baltic states, will be particularly vulnerable. These nations have been among the most vocal supporters of Ukraine and have significantly increased their defense budgets in response to Russian aggression.
Putin has made no secret of his desire to reestablish Russian influence over former Soviet territories. Western reactions, such as a lack of US leadership in NATO or continued military aid to Kiev, will encourage Putin to seize control of Central Europe.
Finally, Trump will divide Europe’s long-term response to the war. Recent electoral gains by far-right parties across the continent suggest that public opinion in some countries is turning in favor of Russia. In Austria, France and Germany, right-wing parties have already made significant gains, capitalizing on fatigue over rising energy and food prices due to sanctions against Russia. If Trump scales back U.S. intervention in Ukraine as he has suggested, it could further embolden those parties to push for similar policies within their governments.
The rupture could undermine the EU’s unified stance against Russian aggression, a position that has been more or less ironclad since the end of the Cold War. Countries with authoritarian leanings, such as Hungary under Viktor Orbán, have already shown a willingness to align with Brussels on issues related to Russia.
A divided Europe will struggle to maintain pressure on Moscow through sanctions or military aid to Ukraine, leading not just across the continent but anywhere in the world where authoritarian regimes seek to change borders by force. , will lead to a divided response with serious implications for security.
Be sure to read more comments posted by good luck:
Opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect their views and beliefs. good luck.
