Across capitals from Berlin to Paris, policymakers are digesting a stark warning from one of Europe’s most influential security forums: the days of automatic reliance on a friendly, democratic United States may be ending, and Europe must learn to push back.
Europe’s security wake-up call
A new report from the Munich Security Conference (MSC) says Europe is experiencing a “painful realisation”: the US under Donald Trump is no longer a predictable guardian of the liberal order it helped build.
Longstanding assumptions about shared democratic values, stable alliances and transatlantic trust are being shaken. The report paints a picture of an America drifting towards “competitive authoritarianism”, with Trump and his inner circle portrayed as “demolition men” tearing at global rules and institutions.
European officials, the report argues, must stop treating Trump’s America as a temporary aberration and start planning as if it could become the new normal.
The study, which sets the intellectual backdrop for this year’s high-profile gathering in Munich, urges EU governments to develop a far more assertive and independent stance – not only in foreign policy, but in defence, technology and energy security.
Polling shows Europeans ready to move without Washington
The MSC did not rely on rhetoric alone. It commissioned fresh polling across several European countries, asking citizens whether they still believed US leadership was necessary.
The results point to a quiet revolution in public opinion. Large numbers now say Europe should be prepared to operate without the United States on security and foreign policy.
- Many respondents no longer see Washington as a consistently reliable partner.
- Support is growing for a stronger, more autonomous European defence posture.
- Trust in US commitment to democracy and rule-based cooperation is slipping.
This shift in sentiment gives political cover to leaders in Paris, Berlin, Rome and beyond who argue that Europe needs its own capacity to act, even if that means occasional confrontation with the White House.
Trump, Putin and the ‘lust for destruction’
The language of the report is unusually blunt for a forum that typically prefers cautious diplomacy. Trump is described as having a “lust for destruction”, and his perceived alignment with Vladimir Putin is highlighted as a core concern.
➡️ A gigantic buried block beneath Hawaii may explain why volcanic hot spots stay put
➡️ Goodbye air fryer: new kitchen gadget goes beyond frying with 9 different cooking methods
➡️ If your mind races at night, this grounding trick works surprisingly well
From NATO tensions to abrupt policy reversals in Syria, Ukraine and Iran, European governments have watched the Trump administration tear up decades of carefully constructed policy frameworks. The MSC analysis suggests this is not a series of random outbursts, but part of a broader pattern aimed at weakening international constraints on US behaviour.
The report warns that the same energy Trump brings to tearing down institutions must be matched by an equal, if not greater, energy from those determined to defend them.
European officials, it argues, can no longer rely on quiet diplomacy and incrementalism when facing a Washington that thrives on shock tactics and permanent confrontation.
‘Demolition men’ and the call for political courage
One of the most striking sections of the document calls for a cultural shift in European politics. It urges leaders to learn from some of the Trump team’s methods – rapid decision‑making, bold communication, unapologetic framing – without mimicking its disregard for norms.
“Effectively pushing back against the demolition men requires much more political courage and innovative thought,” the report insists.
In practice, that means fewer carefully hedged statements and more clear red lines. It also means taking calculated risks, whether by coordinating sanctions, investing in joint defence projects, or publicly confronting disinformation linked to foreign powers, including Russia.
From dependence to deterrence
The MSC outlines several areas where Europe could move from dependency on Washington toward a more balanced partnership:
| Area | Current reality | Suggested shift |
|---|---|---|
| Military defence | Heavy reliance on US troops, intelligence and logistics | Build EU-led capabilities and rapid reaction forces |
| Diplomacy | US-led crisis management and mediation | European-led initiatives in neighbouring regions |
| Technology | Dependence on US platforms and data flows | Stronger European digital infrastructure and regulation |
| Energy | Exposure to US sanctions and fossil fuel volatility | Diversified supply and faster clean‑energy rollout |
The report does not advocate cutting ties with the US. Instead, it argues that only a more self‑reliant Europe can negotiate with a Trump White House from a position of strength rather than fear.
A broader Trump-era climate of confrontation
The call for European backbone comes amid a series of other controversies swirling around the Trump administration.
Immigration, policing and a shaken public mood
In US domestic policy, Trump’s hardline approach to immigration is feeding both political support and deep unease. Tom Homan, widely dubbed the administration’s “border czar”, privately warned last year that overly aggressive, unfocused deportations could erode public backing.
Activists, journalists and even local communities are already feeling the pressure:
- A federal judge has blocked a California law that would have stopped federal immigration agents from covering their faces, though they must still display clear identification.
- Maine, the country’s whitest state, has been rocked by immigration raids that now threaten Republican prospects in a key Senate race.
- Cultural figures such as Bon Iver’s Justin Vernon have turned small objects – in his case a whistle on the Grammys red carpet – into symbols of resistance in neighbourhoods targeted by immigration enforcement.
Former CNN anchor Don Lemon, arrested alongside another reporter, has warned that the US must “keep fighting” for a free press, describing independent journalism as “the breath in the lungs of democracy”. His words echo the MSC’s concerns about creeping authoritarian traits in American politics.
Tensions over accountability and secrecy
Questions over transparency also hang over the administration. In Congress, Democrat Jamie Raskin has accused the justice department of a “cover‑up” after reviewing unredacted Jeffrey Epstein records that, he says, still mask the identities of alleged abusers while exposing victims’ entities.
Ghislaine Maxwell’s refusal to answer questions in a closed‑door deposition has fuelled anger on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers are asking who she may be protecting and whether the Trump administration has offered unusually soft treatment at a low‑security facility.
Separately, newly surfaced files suggest Epstein had deep ties to the upper tiers of the cryptocurrency industry, raising concerns about opaque wealth flows and financial influence that stretch far beyond the original criminal case.
Cultural flashpoints around Trump’s image
The Trump era is also remaking the cultural landscape. “Melania”, a documentary following the first lady in the run‑up to Trump’s 2025 inauguration, suffered a 67% drop at the US box office in its second week. Critics are debating whether the plunge reflects franchise fatigue, political polarisation or simple lack of interest.
In Hollywood, studio chief Tom Rothman has taken the rare step of publicly condemning Trump’s sharing of a racist video targeting Barack and Michelle Obama, calling the post “despicable”. For an industry that relies heavily on global audiences, association with overtly racist messaging carries serious reputational and financial risk.
Europe’s options if Trumpism endures
The MSC report implicitly asks a hard question: what if Trump or a similar figure shapes US politics for another decade? European leaders cannot assume a quick snap‑back to pre‑Trump norms.
Several scenarios are on the table:
- Managed divergence: Europe and the US remain allies but disagree sharply on climate, trade and human rights, forcing constant ad‑hoc fixes.
- Strategic autonomy: The EU invests heavily in defence and technology, enabling it to act alone in crises from the Balkans to the Sahel.
- Deeper fractures: Repeated clashes over NATO, sanctions or tariffs push parts of Europe to hedge between Washington, Beijing and Moscow.
Each path carries different risks for NATO’s credibility, Europe’s borders and the balance of power with Russia and China. The report leans toward a controlled form of strategic autonomy that still keeps the transatlantic bond alive.
Key terms and practical stakes
The phrase “competitive authoritarianism” used in the document describes systems where elections exist but the playing field is skewed: media is pressured, courts are challenged, and ruling parties blur the line between state and campaign. The MSC’s worry is not that the US has already crossed that line fully, but that elements of this model are appearing in Washington’s politics.
For European citizens, the stakes are concrete. Decisions about defence spending, tech regulation and energy diversification will affect taxes, jobs and household bills. Choosing to rely more on European-made weapons or digital services might cost more in the short term, yet reduce exposure to abrupt US policy swings or sanctions later on.
On the diplomatic front, a more assertive Europe could mean sharper, clearer positions on conflicts in the Middle East, Africa and Eastern Europe, rather than waiting for signals from the White House. That carries the risk of open disputes with Washington, but also the potential benefit of more credible, consistent European leadership in its own neighbourhood.
The MSC’s message is blunt: Europe cannot afford to simply hope that the “demolition men” will leave the stage. It has to be ready if they stay.
Originally posted 2026-02-21 19:46:48.