For the umpteenth time this week, President Trump threatened the Europeans. Have “the courage” to sail into the Strait of Hormuz and “take the oil,” he advised them. And: “You must learn how to fight yourselves, because the US is no longer there to help you, just as you were not there for us.” In *The Telegraph*, he subsequently threatened to withdraw from NATO. Legally, Trump cannot withdraw from NATO himself, but as Commander-in-Chief he can suspend Europe’s defence.
An ally who does not want to protect us, posts videos glorifying violence on the website of a pro-Russian White House, speaks of the war with Iran as a “lovely stay”, and has a Secretary of War who prays for brutal “violence” against enemies who deserve no “compassion”, is of no use to us any more. Moreover, morality has left the White House and the transatlantic community of values is over.
Europe stands alone.
When I wrote in my latest book, *America and Us*, less than six months ago, that America must leave NATO and that Europe can take care of its own defence, I was met with pitying looks. But since then, a debate about a European-led NATO has emerged. I notice that colleagues are slowly shifting their focus. We must now seize upon Trump’s remark to ask the Americans to indeed leave NATO or to suspend their membership. We still have a chance for an orderly separation. Later, it will become a dirty, acrimonious divorce.
But wishful thinking and disbelief still prevail in European politics; hoping that everything will turn out fine and that things will not get that bad. Meanwhile, a nightmare scenario is rapidly approaching.
This scenario will become reality if Trump does not stop within the announced few weeks, the war continues to escalate, and pro-Iranian militias refuse to back down. The Houthis have already resumed their attacks. If they turn against the EU-led mission Aspides in the Red Sea, Europe will also be involved in this conflict.
The risks for Europe will grow even greater if all Patriot missiles in the Middle East are used up, or if America decides to stop supplying advanced weaponry to Ukraine in addition to Patriots. Trump has already threatened this.
If things go badly, Trump may no longer grant his oil to those unwilling Europeans.
If Trump puts more pressure on President Zelensky to hand over the rest of the Donbas to Russia without a fight and actually turns his back on NATO, not only will Ukraine face a precarious situation, but other European countries will too.
Putin will see this as a victory that whets the appetite for more. He could then set his sights on the Baltic states, which he believes belong to Russia. Trump would then say to the Europeans: “You’re on your own; I haven’t forgotten that you didn’t want to support me in the Strait of Hormuz.” And if things really go badly, Trump may grant his oil and LNG to others rather than to those unwilling Europeans.
An unthinkable scenario? Certainly not. That means Europe must stop wishful thinking and begin building a wartime economy.
1 Comment
Translation from Dutch:
For the umpteenth time this week, President Trump threatened the Europeans. Have “the courage” to sail into the Strait of Hormuz and “take the oil,” he advised them. And: “You must learn how to fight yourselves, because the US is no longer there to help you, just as you were not there for us.” In *The Telegraph*, he subsequently threatened to withdraw from NATO. Legally, Trump cannot withdraw from NATO himself, but as Commander-in-Chief he can suspend Europe’s defence.
An ally who does not want to protect us, posts videos glorifying violence on the website of a pro-Russian White House, speaks of the war with Iran as a “lovely stay”, and has a Secretary of War who prays for brutal “violence” against enemies who deserve no “compassion”, is of no use to us any more. Moreover, morality has left the White House and the transatlantic community of values is over.
Europe stands alone.
When I wrote in my latest book, *America and Us*, less than six months ago, that America must leave NATO and that Europe can take care of its own defence, I was met with pitying looks. But since then, a debate about a European-led NATO has emerged. I notice that colleagues are slowly shifting their focus. We must now seize upon Trump’s remark to ask the Americans to indeed leave NATO or to suspend their membership. We still have a chance for an orderly separation. Later, it will become a dirty, acrimonious divorce.
But wishful thinking and disbelief still prevail in European politics; hoping that everything will turn out fine and that things will not get that bad. Meanwhile, a nightmare scenario is rapidly approaching.
This scenario will become reality if Trump does not stop within the announced few weeks, the war continues to escalate, and pro-Iranian militias refuse to back down. The Houthis have already resumed their attacks. If they turn against the EU-led mission Aspides in the Red Sea, Europe will also be involved in this conflict.
The risks for Europe will grow even greater if all Patriot missiles in the Middle East are used up, or if America decides to stop supplying advanced weaponry to Ukraine in addition to Patriots. Trump has already threatened this.
If things go badly, Trump may no longer grant his oil to those unwilling Europeans.
If Trump puts more pressure on President Zelensky to hand over the rest of the Donbas to Russia without a fight and actually turns his back on NATO, not only will Ukraine face a precarious situation, but other European countries will too.
Putin will see this as a victory that whets the appetite for more. He could then set his sights on the Baltic states, which he believes belong to Russia. Trump would then say to the Europeans: “You’re on your own; I haven’t forgotten that you didn’t want to support me in the Strait of Hormuz.” And if things really go badly, Trump may grant his oil and LNG to others rather than to those unwilling Europeans.
An unthinkable scenario? Certainly not. That means Europe must stop wishful thinking and begin building a wartime economy.