U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently attended the Munich Security conference—more politely (than J.D. Vance at last year’s conference) criticizing the Europeans using right-wing nationalist buzz words—and then visited two of the most pro-Russian countries of the NATO alliance, Hungary and Slovakia. This whiff of MAGA foreign policy came after the wake-up jolt the Europeans got from Trump’s threats to use military force to take Greenland. Now in Europe, there have been calls for “de-risking,” or distancing themselves from an unreliable and possibly dangerous U.S. partner.

Even before the scorching J.D. Vance speech last year at Munich and the breathtaking Trumpian threat about conquering Greenland, the Europeans were nervous about Trump effectively changing sides in the Russia-Ukraine War by cutting U.S. military aid to Ukraine, initially backing a baldly one-sided peace plan put forth by Russian leader Vladimir Putin, and then pressuring Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to rush into an unfavorable peace deal that ceded even Ukrainian territory not occupied by Russia in the war. This U.S. “peace-at-any-price” strategy—to be imposed on Ukraine—is apparently designed to blatantly gain trillions in commercial returns with Russia and bolster Trump’s case for winning his coveted Nobel Peace Prize. 

However, all this unnecessary short-term antagonizing of traditional U.S. allies and cozying up to Russia and its European sycophants may result in better long-term outcomes for both Europe and the United States.

For decades, France has been urging Europe to become more independent of the United States in the security arena. But most Europeans paid no heed to this useful proposal. They grew fat and happy under the U.S. security umbrella during the Cold War, and especially after the Soviet threat receded. Most European nations spent too little on their own defense, instead using the savings to compete with U.S. companies and run expansive social welfare programs. The European Union added another layer to Europe’s already overregulated economies.

Although the Biden and Trump administrations have successfully pressured those countries to increase defense spending incrementally, they need even greater funding increases if they want to achieve greater independence from the now clearly unreliable United States. If Europe wisely goes its own way, these rich nations can defend themselves without U.S. assistance. However, their militaries are not well integrated and have many redundant capabilities. 

In addition to defense spending increases, each country needs to specialize and then more efficiently integrate its capabilities into a more effective collective defense. These reforms will not break the bank. The European Union already has a combined GDP that is more than 10 times Russia’s. (This disparity could even widen if a more independent Europe increased the efficiency of its economies by much-needed deregulation.) And despite all the hysteria that an emboldened Russia could attack a NATO country, its military has been severely debilitated by the long, bloody and destructive war with Ukraine, as has its economy by sanctions and the expenses and manpower requirements for the war. In fact, Russia’s current weakness will give Europe some time to implement any new independent posture.

As for the United States, if Europe could defend itself conventionally, as the Trump administration desires, the United States should be able to significantly reduce its own defense spending—a favorable outcome that the U.S. president, with his macho veneer, seems unwilling to consider. Right now, the United States spends about $1 trillion yearly on defense—more than double the combined defense spending of China and Russia. The U.S. national debt is almost $39 trillion and rapidly expanding; the will, when combined with the apparent ability to cut defense spending substantially, would help mitigate this massive financial danger. 

Thus, despite Trump’s needless bullying of traditional allies and excessive cozying up to Putin, Orban and other autocratically minded European rulers, his unreliability and even unhinged behavior may have at least some silver linings abroad.

This article was published at the Independent Institute

© Eurasia Review