Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free
Your guide to what Trump’s second term means for Washington, business and the world
Marco Rubio’s speech to the Munich Security Conference on Saturday was met with a standing ovation by some in his audience. So have European leaders decided that all is forgiven and they now love the Trump administration?
Not at all. For the moment, it is in the interests of both Europe and the US to avoid fresh crises. That largely explains the emollient tone of the US secretary of state’s speech and its warm reception inside the hall. But the speeches made by European leaders in Munich — and conversations with their aides — make it clear that Rubio has not healed the transatlantic rift. That rift is now set to widen and deepen — as European countries take steps to ready their defences against the Trump administration, in preparation for the crises to come.
A single speech cannot repair the damage done over the past year. JD Vance’s insulting and aggressive address to last year’s Munich conference set the tone for a steady deterioration in transatlantic relations. Trump’s recent threats to annex Greenland sharpened the sense in Europe that the current US government is as much an adversary as an ally.
While Rubio’s address was packed with cloying tributes to Michelangelo and the Beatles — as well as a curious nostalgia for European imperialism — its underlying message was not that different from Vance’s. Rubio’s appeal for a renewed partnership with Europe was very conditional — and the condition was that European leaders should embrace the blood-and-soil nationalism championed by the Maga movement.
It is clear the Trump administration sees its natural partners in Europe as far right and nationalist parties — the Alternative for Germany, the Rassemblement National in France, Reform UK in Britain and Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party in Hungary. These parties are direct threats to the current governments of Europe — and perhaps to European democracy itself.
The experiences of the past year have also drummed home two key messages in Europe. The first is that, in the Trump era, transatlantic relations will inevitably lurch from crisis to crisis. The next one could be over Greenland or trade or Ukraine or something else. But it will surely come. The second lesson is that appeasing Trump is a mistake. Europeans tried that on trade — accepting US tariffs without retaliating. But that decision signalled weakness and invited further attacks. On Greenland, they took a different approach — standing united and making it clear that they were prepared to hit back. Trump backed off.
These experiences do not mean that Europeans are resigned to a purely adversarial relationship with the US. The Nato alliance remains the linchpin of European security. If there are opportunities to work constructively with the Trump administration on Ukraine or other issues, they will be taken. But European governments are now also actively trying to reduce their vulnerability to US pressure.
Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, stated that “Europe must become more independent . . . in every dimension that affects our security and prosperity.” Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, made it clear that his country is beginning to think about creating a European nuclear deterrent — in co-operation with France and Britain — just in case America folds up the nuclear umbrella it has held over Europe for decades. French President Emmanuel Macron called for an industrial policy of “European preference” in everything from AI to cloud computing. Keir Starmer of Britain emphasised his government’s desire to draw closer to the EU single market and quietly noted that Britain rejects the notion that people who “look different to each other” cannot live peacefully together.
As well as preparing their defences against the Trump administration, Europeans are beginning to think of going on the attack. Here the area to watch is digital services — with Elon Musk’s X an obvious potential target. The first step might be to embrace Australian-style age restrictions on the use of social media. The next stage — more difficult and controversial — would be to demand access to the algorithms underpinning social media.
There are obviously reasons to doubt that the Europeans will be able to act swiftly and effectively — particularly given the ferocious American reaction that can be expected if the EU takes on the US tech giants.
Many of Europe’s current national governments are in serious political and economic trouble. Macron can still give a good speech but he is a lame duck at home. Starmer’s position as leader of the Labour Party and prime minister is under threat. Neither Britain nor France has much money to support their military and industrial goals. Merz leads an unwieldy and increasingly unpopular coalition.
Pan-European decision-making is famously ponderous. The structural impediments created by Brexit make it much harder for the UK and the EU to work together. Relations between the French and German governments are poor. Orban’s Hungary can often stymie European collective action.
All of these problems are very real. But Europe has formidable economic, intellectual and technical resources at its disposal, if it can find a way to mobilise them. It often takes a crisis to force Europeans to make difficult decisions. Trump has created that sense of crisis — and Rubio did nothing to dispel it.