World does not accept US diktats anymore

Since the launch of US President Donald Trump’s tariff war almost one year ago, many signs pointed to growing USEU fractures. Negotiations with Europe saw periods of lull in the dispute, but now the Trump administration wants to punish “disobedient” Europe over Iran sanctions and North Stream 2. Even though transatlantic fractures widened since the Trump administration took office, the gap between the two shores of the Atlantic has older roots.

The European integration project – imagined during 1930s-1940s and implemented after WWII – has been developed under the military umbrella and economic integration with the US. However, since the end of World War II, European space was not fully aligned with the US in a strong way. The continent was divided by the Iron Curtain and many socialist movements and parties did not accept geopolitical subordination to the US. They did not accept an aggressive NATO and excessive interference in their internal affairs, as happened with operation Gladio in Italy during the 1960s and 1970s. These feelings still exist, above all because of a combination of critics of NATO’s policies and military interventions, from the Western Balkans to the Middle East and North Africa, which worsened the migration crises, but also due to a US-subordinated EU, which is struggling with a faltering integration process.

Thus, the European subordination to the US’ strategic interests took form through a variety of linkages and agreements and consolidated since the end of the Cold War during the period of US unilateralism. In the last 30 years, however, the world hierarchy has changed gradually toward a multipolar structure, thanks to the new role and economic weight of emerging economies, with China and India contributing the lion’s share, while Russia rebuilt its military might.

As seen in the Palestinian issue, Syrian crisis and recently the situation in Venezuela– just to mention a few – the US is no more able to address an international consensus within the UN. Respect for sovereignty is demanded by many nations, interfering in the internal affairs of the other is rejected by important players who are new to the scene, like Russia and China, which is producing an agreement based on the fundamental principles of international law. The US should accept that it cannot dictate the agenda of many countries anymore and that trying to force situations according to its own will and strategic interests does not match many other priorities and sovereign interests. Above all, it does not grant the basic international right. It is happening in the Middle East, Europe and Latin America.

In Europe, there are currently two political layers. First, ruling class of the leading European countries still faithful to the US, but much more nervous about Trump’s policies and in crisis of popular legitimacy. Second, people of many EU countries are showing an increasing disaffection with Europe, its political and economic institutions, long-drawn economic crises and weak political integration, and the need to turn to national interests.

The US is adopting a confrontational approach with traditional allies for economic and geopolitical reasons, further weakening European integration. The US withdrawal from INF Treaty is a threat for Europe and this justifies the Franco-German intention to build a military independent from the US – even though it will be difficult and time-consuming due to the current situation in Europe.

The game is much more complicated if we consider these transatlantic problems embedded in a broader geopolitical and economic transformation at the world level. “The transition from a unipolar order, centered on Washington, to a multipolar world order, with numerous nations willing to reclaim a primary role on the global chessboard, has disrupted the precarious equilibrium in place since the beginning of the 1990s,” according to Federico Pieraccini, analyst for Strategic Culture Foundation. He added, “continuous and perpetual attempts to preserve the US-led unipolar order have reduced many Western capitals to mere vassals, perpetrating Washington’s interest instead of their own.” This helps us understand the frosty relations between US and Europe in the recently held Munich Security Conference.

Europe can’t be expected to keep obeying the US against its own interest. We should be able to do away with an infant approach, “or with me or against me” attitude. A simplified, rude approach, which goes against the spirit of international relations, should be shunned. Europe must find a balance with the US and simultaneously needs to be open and cooperative with the new Asia. In other words, the EU should be able to be at the same time ‘Atlantist’ and ‘Eurasianist,’ becoming a center of geopolitical equilibrium, instead of a center of conflicts and war for international competition.

The author is associate professor of Geography/International studies (ASN), teaching at the International Institute Lorenzo de’ Medici, Florence. He is also member of CCERRI think tank, Zhengzhou, and EURISPES, Laboratorio BRICS, Rome. His latest book is Geofinance and Geopolitics, Egea. On twitter @ fabiomassimos