- The long-standing US-Europe relationship now appears to be approaching a critical turning point.
- The United States has gone all guns blazing against Europe, targeting European sovereignty, the European economy, and interfering in Europe’s political affairs.
- Several European countries that have been targeted for their refusal to cooperate with the United States over Greenland issued a joint statement stating that any matter involving Denmark and Greenland should be decided only by Denmark and Greenland.
- Europe has begun to realise that placing all its strategic weight behind the United States may not be sustainable.
The transatlantic partnership between the United States of America and Europe has been one of the most successful and strongest relationships in modern political history. The United States and Europe share deep civilizational links, shared political ideology, similar economic beliefs, liberal values, democratic institutions, and a rule-of-law-based order. This partnership has also been anchored in one of the world’s strongest military organisations, NATO. Since the Second World War, these shared principles have guided relations between the two sides.
Europe has long been a major geopolitical and economic hotspot for the United States. It has served American strategic interests across the European continent and has represented one of the strongest political, economic, historical, and cultural partnerships in the world. However, this long-standing relationship now appears to be approaching a critical turning point. The United States has gone all guns blazing against Europe, targeting European sovereignty, the European economy, and interfering in Europe’s political affairs.
Trump and the Reshaping of US-Europe Relations
President Trump has significantly altered the overall dynamics of US-Europe relations. One of the most striking examples is the recent move regarding Greenland, where the United States has publicly asserted that Greenland should come under the United States ‘ sovereignty. The argument presented by Washington is that if Greenland does not come under US control, it could fall under the influence of Russia and China, which would allegedly pose a serious threat to American national security.
This move has put the United States in confrontation with Denmark, a NATO member state, as Greenland is an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. The United States has publicly advocated for Greenland to be transferred under its control, directly challenging Danish sovereignty. In addition, the United States has imposed a 10% tariff on Sweden, Norway, Finland, the Netherlands, Germany, France, the United Kingdom, and Denmark, citing European obstruction of the US move on Greenland.
The Greenland Flashpoint and Europe’s Collective Response
This development has come as a major shock to Europe. Several European countries that have been targeted for their refusal to cooperate with the United States over Greenland issued a joint statement stating that any matter involving Denmark and Greenland should be decided only by Denmark and Greenland. Europe has made it clear that it will not allow violations of its sovereignty by the United States.
This development marks a critical juncture in US–Europe relations. It raises serious questions about where Europe stands today and what its strategic move might be. Is Europe prepared to distance itself from the United States and actively build relations with other global powers?
These tensions did not emerge overnight. They trace back to President Trump’s first term, beginning in 2016, when the United States became vocal about political issues within Europe. The US criticised progressive liberal politics in Europe, arguing that Europe was no longer the same as it once was. President Trump frequently criticised cities such as London and Paris, stating that they had changed drastically due to open border policies and immigration, which, according to him altered their social and cultural dynamics.
European countries strongly opposed such comments, arguing that they amounted to unwarranted interference in domestic political matters and were therefore unacceptable. President Trump’s approach clearly showed support for conservative political forces in Europe. He openly endorsed Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and supported Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, while simultaneously criticising the United Kingdom and France. This created a perception that the US leadership was selectively backing conservative ideologies while opposing liberal political values across Europe.
Trade Wars and Defence Burdens
During President Trump’s second term, relations reached a historic low. The United States introduced tariffs on European markets that are deeply intertwined with the US economy through merchandise trade, services, people-to-people exchanges, and heavy industries such as manufacturing. These tariffs placed significant pressure on European economies.
Another major disagreement emerged over defence spending. President Trump demanded that European NATO members increase defence expenditure to nearly 5% of GDP. He also insisted that greater responsibility for the war in Ukraine should rest primarily on European NATO members. However, Europe currently lacks the industrial capacity and economic strength to match the United States. The American defence industrial base and economic capacity far exceed those of Europe, creating an imbalance and further deepening tensions.
Greenland as a Strategic Battleground
The Greenland issue, however, stands out as the most critical flashpoint. Greenland is one of the largest islands in the world and geographically falls within the North American region. It is an autonomous territory within Danish control. President Trump has repeatedly claimed Greenland as vital to American national security, arguing that both Chinese and Russian presence in the Arctic is increasing. According to Washington, failure to secure influence over Greenland would pose a serious threat to US security interests.
European countries have firmly rejected this claim, stating that it violates Danish sovereignty. Greenland itself has rejected the proposal, reaffirming its desire to remain an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark. Denmark has stated that it is open to dialogue but will never allow Greenland to be placed under the control of the United States.
France has emerged as a leading voice opposing US actions. The French President has made it clear that France will not remain silent if European sovereignty is threatened and will take necessary steps to protect European integrity. The UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has also stated that US actions are completely unacceptable. In response, France, Germany, and Denmark have increased their military presence around Greenland. France and Germany have even deployed small contingents of troops to demonstrate support and protection for Greenland.
Reinstating the Monroe Doctrine
This raises the question of whether Russia and China, in fact, pose a major threat to Greenland. In reality, both countries have maintained limited influence in the region due to a strong European and American security presence. President Trump’s interest in Greenland appears to be driven more by a desire to revive the Monroe Doctrine, under which the United States seeks dominance over the entire American continent and rejects external influence.
President Trump has also indirectly supported conservative leaders across the Americas, including backing conservative candidates in Central America. Europe now finds itself under pressure from the United States, creating a continental dilemma. Since the Second World War, Europe’s security, economy, and military capabilities have been deeply dependent on the United States. European militaries rely heavily on American weapons systems, and European economies are closely intertwined with US markets.
One of the most striking examples of this dependence is Europe’s relationship with Russia. Russia is Europe’s largest geographical neighbour and a major nuclear power. Despite long-standing energy ties that once supported European economic growth, Europe severed much of its relationship with Russia following the war in Ukraine. This shift was largely driven by broader US strategic interests, as the United States views Europe as a critical lever to counter Russia.
For the US, Russia is a strategic rival without deep economic interdependence. For Europe, the situation is far more complex due to geography, energy dependence, and economic ties. Yet Europe aligned itself fully with the US, benefiting Washington by making Europe more dependent on American energy, security, and markets.
European Resurgence and Strategic Reorientation
A strategic reorientation is now beginning to take shape in Europe. Europe has begun to realise that placing all its strategic weight behind the United States may not be sustainable. The Greenland issue, tariffs, and political interference have pushed European leaders to reconsider their approach.
German Chancellor Merz recently stated that Russia is Europe’s largest geographical neighbour and that Europe must find a balanced approach. Italian Prime Minister Meloni has echoed similar sentiments, calling for renewed dialogue with Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron has shifted his tone, emphasising European strategic independence and even comparing French military capabilities favourably with those of the United States.
Toward Strategic Autonomy and Multipolar Engagement
These developments indicate that Europe is reassessing its long-standing alignment. This shift is further reinforced by Europe’s recent decision to sign a major free trade agreement with Mercosur, comprising Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, and Uruguay. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated that Europe prefers economic engagement over strategic confrontation.
Europe is also moving closer to concluding a major free trade agreement with India. Through these actions, Europe is signalling that it is ready to look beyond the United States. However, the responsibility for this shift now lies with Europe itself. For decades, European policy has been more structurally more American centric than European-centric.
The greatest paradox is that the same United States that created a rift between Europe and Russia is now indirectly pushing Europe to reconsider its stance and explore renewed engagement with Russia.
Aayush Pal is a freelance writer on contemporary geopolitical developments. The views expressed in his work are entirely his own.
Sanhita Pandey 
Deepa Bhaskaran