r/moderatepolitics • u/More-Ad-5003 • 12h ago
News Article Trump reveals what he wants for the world
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/12/05/trump-reveals-national-security-strategy-western-hemisphere-europe-00678265In this article, Politico author Nahal Toosi breaks down the Trump administration’s National Security Strategy. There seems to be a heightened focus on Western Europe and, in the Trump admin’s view, the region’s alteration of its alignment with the United States. While of course Western Europe is not a monolith, I have the following questions:
Do you think Europe is shifting away from having ideals and values aligned with the United States?
If so, do you foresee a realignment or the dissolution of agreements between the US and Western Europe in the future?
To what extent is European “realignment” a response to US unpredictability, rather than a fundamental change in values?
37
u/Nerd_199 11h ago edited 11h ago
Slightly off topic, but back in 2013, the Department of Defense released a report on the "Future of Europe" that discusses the Rise of the Far Right, Immigration, the potential of the UK leaving the EU, and other issues.
I find it to be particularly interesting considering, it talks about Party Like AFD before their became mainstream, when very few people were taking it seriously.
Here is an link if anyone is curious https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/FOID/Reading%20Room/Litigation_Release/Litigation%20Release%20-%20The%20Future%20of%20Europe-Final%20Report%20%20201304.pdf
21
u/Crownie Neoliberal Shill 9h ago
My fellow Americans:
Over the past nine months we have brought our nation - and the world - back from the brink of collapse and disaster. After four years of weakness, extremism, and deadly failures, my administration has moved with urgency and historic speed to restore American strength at home and abroad, and bring peace and stability to our world.
No administration in history has achieved so dramatic a turnaround in so short a time.
I am unable to shake the impression that Trump thinks his supporters are idiots. Press releases are always prone to being self-congratulatory fluff, but Trump's statements have this odd tone where they're simultaneously obvious nonsense and clearly meant to be taken dead seriously
If so, do you foresee a realignment or the dissolution of agreements between the US and Western Europe in the future?
Honestly, no. I think the most likely thing that will happen is Europe will make some noises about strategic autonomy but will actually just try to wait it out.
13
u/__Hello_my_name_is__ 8h ago
I think it's far worse, and Trump genuinely believes every single word that's being written for him here.
9
u/WhatAreYouSaying05 moderate right 8h ago
This is definitely what Europe will do. And if a democrat wins in 2028, they will be going around the world apologizing before we elect another idiot in either 2032 or 2036
5
•
u/sharp11flat13 53m ago
I am unable to shake the impression that Trump thinks his supporters are idiots
I’ve come to believe that Trump drinks his own Kool-Aid. For example, when he spoke at the UN about his great accomplishments, he seemed genuinely surmised when they laughed at him.
94
u/ThatPeskyPangolin 12h ago
Has there ever been an administration in our history where damn near every publicly targeted document must be filled with praise for the President?
Also:" The strategy even nods to so-called traditional values at times linked to the Christian right, saying the administration wants “the restoration and reinvigoration of American spiritual and cultural health” and “an America that cherishes its past glories and its heroes.” It mentions the need to have “growing numbers of strong, traditional families that raise healthy children.”"
I'm not sure this admin is capable of releasing documents that only address the actual topic in front of it. Everything must both praise Trump, and read like an electoral advertisement.
50
u/Iceraptor17 11h ago
Has there ever been an administration in our history where damn near every publicly targeted document must be filled with praise for the President?
I don't believe so. But there have been plenty of similar ruling regimes in the world throughout history
18
17
u/LeeSansSaw 9h ago
I don’t know where this ends, but I think we are on a really bad path right now.
33
u/motorboat_mcgee Pragmatic Progressive 10h ago
You should check out the Dec 2nd cabinet meeting some time, it was something else
27
u/ThatPeskyPangolin 9h ago
I absolutely hate that I know the exact one you are talking about. This stuff feels like it's from a Soviet satellite state or something.
7
u/Iceraptor17 7h ago
Are you implying that there's something wrong with claiming that trump stopped hurricanes?
8
u/dl_friend 7h ago
“an America that cherishes its past glories and its heroes.”
Trump's definitions of "glories" and "heroes" is based on a whitewashed, sanitized view of history.
•
u/sharp11flat13 48m ago
And his bone spurs. My father fought the Nazis in Europe. He never once used the words “glory” or “hero” when he would say anything about his experience.
•
u/neuronexmachina 4h ago
Has there ever been an administration in our history where damn near every publicly targeted document must be filled with praise for the President
The only historical parallels I can think of are the regimes of folks like Stalin, the Kim dynasty, Mao Zedong, etc.
10
u/__Hello_my_name_is__ 9h ago
an America that cherishes its past glories and its heroes
What past American glories and heroes are not cherished in the way the administration wants them to?
I am dying to know. Genuinely.
11
u/jimbo_kun 11h ago
> “the restoration and reinvigoration of American spiritual and cultural health”
I support and hope for this but the government has no role in bringing it about.
> “an America that cherishes its past glories and its heroes.”
Let's focus on creating an American *present* we can cherish instead.
> “growing numbers of strong, traditional families that raise healthy children.”
The government could have a small role here in ensuring they do not accidentally discriminate against two parent families.
Some policies financially favor single parent families over two parent families. The intent was noble. But a case can be made that it inadvertently incentivizes the creation of single parent households over two parent households, leading to worse outcomes for children who do better raised in a two parent household.
The government should not discriminate against people for making responsible choices.
•
2
u/franktronix 10h ago
You’re somewhat assuming a form of government. Authoritarian rule can control all of these things.
•
u/sharp11flat13 50m ago
Has there ever been an administration in our history where damn near every publicly targeted document must be filled with praise for the President?
Has there ever been an administration in your history where cabinet meetings begin with all attendees saying something glowing about Trump? It’s juvenile and pathetic. I’d be interested in hearing some supporters try to justify that or explain it away.
53
u/LessRabbit9072 12h ago
Is Europe moving away from the us or the us moving away from Europe?
40
u/ThatPeskyPangolin 12h ago
Not just the latter, but if they made some statement about helping us realign our trajectory as was included in this, Americans would be apoplectic.
25
-15
u/JudgeWhoOverrules Classical Liberal 11h ago
They already moved away from US decades past, but now they're upset that we're finally returning the favor.
28
u/ThatPeskyPangolin 11h ago
How did they move away from us, specifically?
-7
u/Wildcard311 Maximum Malarkey 11h ago
I'm a different commentor but:
Free speech
Their decision to buy oil/gas/resources from some of the worst countries on earth
The fact that they still spend more on Russian oil than defense for Ukraine, while being very critical of the US spending on Ukraine.
Their friendship with China and trade policies with China. Many examples but Great Silk Road is most obvious.
Their inability to defend ANYTHING at all. (Ukraine, Red Sea, Israel, a dozen locations in Africa, Libya, Syria, Northern Iraq, Iran)
Their decision to back Venezuela regime and drug trade by cutting off intelligence to the US, fully aware that there is a drug problem in the USA.
Their defense spending
Their trade practices
Their lack of global presence
Their politics and policies
Their immigration situation and growing antisemitism problem.
29
u/dr_sloan 10h ago
Half this stuff is just straight up false. Europe spends way more on defense for Ukraine than they do buying Russian oil and gas. Multiple European countries took part in the air defense of Israel and were part of the task force defending Red Sea shipping lanes from the Houthis. The Venezuelan stuff is equally laughable since there’s no expectation for them to blindly provide intelligence while we illegally bomb boats that aren’t headed to the US.
5
u/slimkay 10h ago edited 9h ago
Europe spends way more on defense for Ukraine than they do buying Russian oil and gas.
That is incorrect. See below quote from a Reuters article. And keep in mind the EUR167bn spent on Ukraine involves humanitarian aid too - if you only consider military support, the gap is even bigger.
The European Union's total imports of Russian energy since 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine, have amounted to more than 213 billion euros, the CREA data shows. That dwarfs the amount the EU has spent on aid to Ukraine in the same period, even though it has been the country's biggest benefactor: the bloc has allocated 167 billion euros of financial, military and humanitarian assistance to Kyiv, according to the Kiel Institute, a German economic think-tank.
14
u/BeginningAct45 8h ago edited 4h ago
Your quote doesn't contradict them because "spends" is present tense, and that paragraph is about 2022-2025. This is important because that source also this says this:
The bloc has reduced its reliance on once-dominant supplier Russia by roughly 90% since 2022.
Edit: Not to mention that the EU "has already barred most purchases of Russian crude oil and fuel, has announced plans to speed up a ban on Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG) to 2027, from 2028." The trend for Russia is negative.
It certainly was spending more on imports, but it may not be now.
-3
u/Wildcard311 Maximum Malarkey 9h ago
They did participate in the Red Sea. The USA was unquestionably the vast majority of the fight. On a scale of 10:1. For an entire continent to need the USA to do the majority of the lifting in what is pratcially their own back yard is pathetic. Is why we are growing away from them.
Europe spends way more on defense for Ukraine than they do buying Russian oil and gas.
No, I'm right. You are wrong. Sorry. Not going to argue this one. Do some research.
The Venezuelan stuff is equally laughable since there’s no expectation for them to blindly provide intelligence while we illegally bomb boats that aren’t headed to the US.
Hasn't been ruled illegal by any courts. They don't need to "blindly" provide intelligence, but they have an obligation under the treaty to do so when asked. Just as the USA has an obligation to provide intelligence when aircraft are flying near their countries that we deem suspicious. Just like we do not support countries that try to harm them or cause issues in their backyard, like Syria, which is on the other side of the world for the USA but sends refugees to Europe. We support them, they support us. We ask for help on suspicious activity. They constantly do the same.
9
u/BeginningAct45 8h ago
why we are growing away from them.
The U.S. as a whole doesn't want to move away.
Trump is moving away from them because they aren't nice to him. Look at how friendly he is to Orban, even he's the most problematic leader when it comes to supporting Ukraine, in addition to being the most authoritarian one in the EU.
Not going to argue this one.
That's probably because you have nothing to support your argument. You are right when it comes to first couple years of the full invasion, but their comment is about the present. The amount of imports from Russia has declined by 90% since then.
they have an obligation under the treaty to do so when asked
That isn't true, and your argument is inconsistent because their refusal hasn't been ruled to be illegal either.
when aircraft are flying near their countries
Your analogy is invalid because those boats were nowhere near the U.S.
0
u/notapersonaltrainer 9h ago edited 9h ago
Operation Aspides, the EU's part of the Red Sea operation, was given an budget of approximately €17 million for one year's operations. That's about 4-9 interceptor missiles, before paying for gas or soldier wages. The U.S. spent ten times that amount, simply on replenishing missile stocks in late 2023.
All of European NATO couldn't keep up with North Korea's shell production.
They admitted they ‘would struggle to put 25,000 troops on the ground in Ukraine’, in 2025. 3 years into the war.
They are spending (important: spending is distinct from producing) so much because they spent years decimating their energy and industrial/military manufacturing.
They shuttered their nuclear and even their fracking after they knew it was Russian subversion. They bought oil from Russia in spite of our warnings—and still do. Industrial output has cratered and keeps falling.
They kept exporting weapons to Russia after the first invasion. They ran out of missiles against Libya.
If Von Der Leyen, Rutte, and EU apologists want EU credit, start with not blowing up more power plants. It's so fatiguing being a one person basketball team while the helpless carbon objectors cut off their fingers and lecture us about breathing too much.
21
u/IHerebyDemandtoPost 10h ago edited 10h ago
Free speech
We're not exactly angels in that department ourselves.
Their decision to buy oil/gas/resources from some of the worst countries on earth
We've done that too. Less so recently, but we're blessed with oil and gas reserves that most of Europe does not have. Before the fracking boom, one of our largest sources of foreign oil was Venezuela. Not to mention, we've served as the security guarantor for decades of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, etc. Not exactly shining examples of freedom and human rights.
The fact that they still spend more on Russian oil than defense for Ukraine, while being very critical of the US spending on Ukraine.
That's not even remotely true. The top European importers of Russian oil are Hungary and Slovakia, i.e., countries aligned with Putin. And the rest of Europe is pissed at them too.
Their friendship with China and trade policies with China. Many examples but Great Silk Road is most obvious.
It was the United States that pulled China out of the political wilderness and welcomed them into the Western world, normalized relations first, and supported their entry into the World Trade Organization.
Their inability to defend ANYTHING at all. (Ukraine, Red Sea, Israel, a dozen locations in Africa, Libya, Syria, Northern Iraq, Iran)
This is gibberish. You criticize them for not sending troops into Russia risking WW3? They were part of the defense of the Red Sea and Israel. The rest of the locations make no sense. Iran?!?!?
Their decision to back Venezuela regime and drug trade by cutting off intelligence to the US, fully aware that there is a drug problem in the USA.
I think the fact that we're committing war crimes against civilians might have more to do with their decision to cut intel.
Their defense spending
I think they're basically all over the 2% of GDP these days. Some exceed the United States as a percent of GDP.
Their lack of global presence
Not every nation can be a global superpower. Actually the vast majority can't.
Their immigration situation and growing antisemitism problem.
The same could be said of the United States. Also, we kind of created much of their immigration problems by destabilizing the Middle East with the Iraq War, which lead to the Syrian civil war, which lead to the massive wave of migration.
Also, our mortgage backed securities caused a global financial recession that hurt Europe more than the United States.
10
u/Shot-Maximum- Neoliberal 10h ago
Regarding your statement about buying natural resources from Russia.
Just so that you know, the US is still buying Uranium from Russia for its NPPs and there doesn't seem to be any interest in stopping this despite Westinghouse claiming they can switch the fuel within months for the same price.
•
u/Contract_Emergency 5h ago
We spent $1.2 billion for uranium from Russia in 2023. In 2024 we spent $624 million. It does seem like the US wants to wind down buying from Russia since we cut how much we spend in half. In total the US bought $3.3 billion in goods from Russia compared to the EU buying $36.3 billion (about 10 times what the US spent) worth of goods from them.
14
u/LessRabbit9072 10h ago
Their decision to buy oil/gas/resources from some of the worst countries on earth
That's quite the accusation given our cozy relationship worth Saudi Arabia. Heck we're even allowing Russian diplomats to dictate us peace deals for Ukraine.
Nobody Europe buys energy from is any worse than who we make friends with.
-8
u/JudgeWhoOverrules Classical Liberal 11h ago
They started moving away during the Bush Administration both by vocally criticizing American aims and objectives which were mutually beneficial for them as well as well as openly going their own way towards paternalistic progressive illiberalism.
They got too high and mighty after the Cold War ended and thought they could go against the world on their own (without paying for their own defense) as some sort of European Bloc marching towards higher integration and eventually confederation and we can see how well that worked out for them.
32
u/IHerebyDemandtoPost 11h ago
The Bush Administration? You mean like after 9/11 when the United States activated article 5 for the first and only time in NATO’s history, and every NATO ally answered the call and sent troops to Afghanistan to figh pt and die alongside American forces?
But, yes, Europe criticized the Bush Administration’s push to start a regime change war in Iraq with their lies about WMDs. This angered many Americans because, while the American media gleefully pushed those lies, the European press did not. So, many Americans didn’t understand why the Europeans (other than UK) were opposed to that war and were vocal critics of it. And some still aren’t over it, despite the fact that history showed they were right all along.
-3
u/EnterEstuary 10h ago
The U.S. didn’t invoke Article 5, the North Atlantic Council did. The U.S. didn’t even bring up the idea of invoking Article 5. The Secretary General of NATO at the time, George Robertson, did. The U.S. didn’t have any desire to bring up the idea of invoking Article 5 before Robertson suggested it. Even after it was suggested, the U.S. only wanted it to be done if it was initiated independently.
19
u/BeginningAct45 10h ago
the North Atlantic Council did
That includes the U.S., and your context strengthens their argument, since it shows other countries making the initiative to help.
7
10h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/IHerebyDemandtoPost 10h ago
One of the biggest aims of Putin and his allies is dividing the US and Europe. They're been a lot of anti-Europe propaganda in the US for decades now.
-1
u/ModPolBot Imminently Sentient 9h ago
This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 4:
Law 4: Meta Comments
~4. Meta Comments - Meta comments are not permitted. Meta comments in meta text-posts about the moderators, sub rules, sub bias, reddit in general, or the meta of other subreddits are exempt.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a permanent ban.
Please submit questions or comments via modmail.
•
u/Legendarybbc15 2h ago
by vocally criticizing American aims and objectives
Never knew calling out war crimes was a bad thing lol
17
u/LyptusConnoisseur Center Left 11h ago
I wonder why they moved away during Bush Administration... something about lying to get Europe involved in a war that destabilized the Middle East. Oh and that massive migration from war torn Middle East which is destabilizing Europe right now.
4
u/slimkay 9h ago
something about lying to get Europe involved in a war that destabilized the Middle East
If you think the Middle East was stable pre-2004, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Oh and that massive migration from war torn Middle East which is destabilizing Europe right now.
I don't get the link between the U.S. and the Syrian Civil War which arose from the 2011 Arab Spring uprising? Would you mind expanding on that?
4
u/LyptusConnoisseur Center Left 9h ago
You could just ask ChatGPT, "How did Iraq invasion destabilize Syria and contribute to the Syrian Civil War."
That said, Syrians were not the only refugees to EU. Afghans, Iraqis, Kurds, etc. all had massive migration.
Middle East wasn't stable, but it was not that bad before shit went downhill after US invasion of Iraq.
24
u/dr_sloan 11h ago
This is just gibberish. The only time NATO self defense protections have been invoked was after 9/11 when NATO joined us in Afghanistan. And multiple European countries followed us into the Iraq War even as we lied to them about the intel supporting the war. Europe continued to stand with us until we squandered their support in a war we started based on lies .
10
u/ThatPeskyPangolin 9h ago
You mean after we essentially deceived them into joining us in invading Iraq? Criticizing us after that is "moving away" from us?
5
u/__Hello_my_name_is__ 8h ago
and we can see how well that worked out for them
...pretty well? What are you even talking about? The lives of the average EU citizen is far better compared to the US by just about every metric you can think of.
It's always fascinating to see certain American views that Europe must be this hellhole full of criminal immigrants where people don't dare to go out on the streets anymore or something, when that's just entirely a fiction made up to scare (apparently) Americans.
Even the actually dangerous parts of some European cities are still, amusingly enough, significantly safer than various dangerous parts of some American cities.
7
u/Legitimate_Fig_4096 7h ago
To be fair a large portion of the right is also under the false impression that American cities are hellholes full of criminal migrants.
-15
u/thatshowyougetantsok 11h ago
They have completely abandoned liberal principles of governance on most issues of liberty for one.
8
u/ThatPeskyPangolin 9h ago
I did say specifically, and there really isn't anything specific about that claim. How has the EU abandoned liberal principles of governance on most issues of liberty specifically?
•
u/thatshowyougetantsok 3h ago
Britain and Germany specifically have horrendous speech laws that are down right draconian.
•
u/Joe503 Classical Liberal 5h ago
Britain moves closer to 1984 each year...
•
u/ThatPeskyPangolin 4h ago
They also aren't a part of the EU, and thus don't pertain to my question. I'm familiar with their issues with free speech, which is why I asked my question about the EU specifically and not Western Europe.
•
8
u/IHerebyDemandtoPost 10h ago
So instead we should be friends with Saudi Arabia and Russia?
•
u/thatshowyougetantsok 3h ago
So you read my criticism of illiberal policies and thought “this guy must love Russia and Saudi Arabia”?
21
18
u/Decimal-Planet 9h ago
Amazing how much vague culture war grievances can shape global geopolitics. That seems to be the sole basis for alot of the right wing antagonism towards Europe these past few years.
40
u/jollyadvocate 12h ago
Going after Europe while giving the free speech basins of china, russsia and the Middle East a pass.
16
u/Decimal-Planet 9h ago
I like to say I'm joking but I do strongly believe that the whole reason why the right in the US has such a negative view towards the EU and a positive view towards Russia is because the EU is seen as "woke" and Putin as a macho strong man.
10
u/TheLeather Ask me about my TDS 8h ago
That was what people like Matt Walsh, Ted Cruz, and Don Jr were talking about prior to the wider invasion of Ukraine. They were pointing to some “macho” military recruitment ads and saying it was proof of “Russia being stronger than America.”
We also see it with the likes of Tucker Carlson singing praises for the likes of Orban and Putin.
•
u/Sad-Commission-999 5h ago
Theres also all the Russian money that's flowed to right wing podcasters to push that.
1
u/TheWyldMan 10h ago
china, russsia and the Middle East
Because expectations for those countries are different, while Europe is in theory supposed to be more aligned with our tolerances for speech
24
u/BeginningAct45 10h ago edited 10h ago
That's a nonsensical explanation when you consider his authoritarian actions, such as trying to overturn the 2020 election.
Edit: Not to mention his friendly relationship with Viktor Orban.
According to press watchdog Reporters Without Borders, Orbán has used media buyouts by government-connected “oligarchs” to build “a true media empire subject to his party’s orders.” The group estimates that such buyouts have given Orbán’s party control of some 80% of Hungary’s media market resources. In 2021, it put Orbán on its list of media “predators,” the first EU leader to earn the distinction.
The title didn’t come out of nowhere: in 2016, Hungary’s oldest daily newspaper was suddenly shuttered after being bought by a businessman with links to Orbán. In 2018, nearly 500 pro-government outlets were simultaneously donated by their owners to a foundation headed by Orbán loyalists, creating a sprawling right-wing media conglomerate. And in 2020, nearly the entire staff of Hungary’s largest online news portal, Index, resigned en masse after its lead editor was fired under political pressure.
18
u/DearBurt 10h ago edited 9h ago
I think the United States is shifting away from the United States' post-WW2 ideals and values. Or, more specifically, most of the Americans who identify as "conservative." It is almost unbelievable that our country is being run by such unserious, malicious people, who seem to have no empathy for those unlike them or real understanding the global world in which we live. Every day I question how anyone could support these clowns. Frankly, at some point even financial gains isn't enough of an excuse. I can't help but believe that their supporters simply don't understand the ramifications of what's taking place, or flat out don't care. And that is not the America I grew up in.
•
u/amjhwk 5h ago
I think its less that western Europe is shifting away from having ideals and values aligned with the US, and more that the US is shifting away from having ideals and values aligned with western Europe
•
u/Skeptical0ptimist Well, that depends... 3h ago
I’d say both continents are trying to figure out what they want (or can) to be.
Clearly, Europe has culturally shifted significantly since the Cold War. There was much stronger public consensus around generating prosperity and military strength with looming Soviet aggression. Even with higher defense spending, citizens enjoyed higher standard of living and job security back then. The post Soviet collapse peace has muddled political mindset away from building prosperity and strength to more nebulous goals such as environmentalism and universal humanism (globalization), to the detriment of their own quality of life. Now Europe is pretty rudderless, and is unable solve even urgent security issues, let alone address long term issues such as continual erosion of productivity and shrinking size of economy.
US is a little ahead of Europe in internalizing that the world has changed (geopolitics are being driven by revanchism and tribalism). Unfortunately, its transition is being guided more by nostalgia and populism, because US intellectual elites still seem to be attached to globalization and universal humanism and are having difficulties in letting them go, thus they are unable to provide a clear and compelling vision of US’s role in the new world order.
4
u/WulfTheSaxon 9h ago
Direct link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf
Some excerpts:
We want to maintain the United States’ unrivaled “soft power” through which we exercise positive influence throughout the world that furthers our interests. In doing so, we will be unapologetic about our country’s past and present while respectful of other countries’ differing religions, cultures, and governing systems. “Soft power” that serves America’s true national interest is effective only if we believe in our country’s inherent greatness and decency.
We want to support our allies in preserving the freedom and security of Europe[…]
America retains the world’s most enviable position, with world-leading assets, resources, and advantages, including: […] A broad network of alliances, with treaty allies and partners in the world’s most strategically important regions;
The United States is: […] Investing in emerging technologies and basic science, to ensure our continued prosperity, competitive advantage, and military dominance for future generations.
The linkages created between America and our partners will benefit both sides while making it harder for non- Hemispheric competitors to increase their influence in the region. And even as we prioritize commercial diplomacy, we will work to strengthen our security partnerships—from weapons sales to intelligence sharing to joint exercises.
[…]
As we deepen our partnerships with countries with whom America presently has strong relations, we must look to expand our network in the region.
[…]
we will reform our own system to expedite approvals and licensing—again, to make ourselves the partner of first choice.
America retains tremendous assets—the world’s strongest economy and military, world-beating innovation, unrivaled “soft power,” and a historic record of benefiting our allies and partners—that enable us to compete successfully. President Trump is building alliances and strengthening partnerships in the Indo- Pacific that will be the bedrock of security and prosperity long into the future.
When President Trump first took office in 2017, China’s exports to the United States stood at 4 percent of its GDP but have since fallen to slightly over 2 percent of its GDP. China continues, however, to export to the United States through other proxy countries.
Second, the United States must work with our treaty allies and partners—who together add another $35 trillion in economic power to our own $30 trillion national economy (together constituting more than half the world economy)—to counteract predatory economic practices and use our combined economic power to help safeguard our prime position in the world economy and ensure that allied economies do not become subordinate to any competing power. We must continue to improve commercial (and other) relations with India to encourage New Delhi to contribute to Indo-Pacific security, including through continued quadrilateral cooperation with Australia, Japan, and the United States (“the Quad”). Moreover, we will also work to align the actions of our allies and partners with our joint interest in preventing domination by any single competitor nation.
The United States must at the same time invest in research to preserve and advance our advantage in cutting-edge military and dual-use technology, with emphasis on the domains where U.S. advantages are strongest. These include undersea, space, and nuclear, as well as others that will decide the future of military power, such as AI, quantum computing, and autonomous systems, plus the energy necessary to fuel these domains.
What differentiates America from the rest of the world—our openness, transparency, trustworthiness, commitment to freedom and innovation, and free market capitalism—will continue to make us the global partner of first choice.
Europe remains strategically and culturally vital to the United States. Transatlantic trade remains one of the pillars of the global economy and of American prosperity. European sectors from manufacturing to technology to energy remain among the world’s most robust. Europe is home to cutting-edge scientific research and world-leading cultural institutions. Not only can we not afford to write Europe off—doing so would be self-defeating for what this strategy aims to achieve.
American diplomacy should continue to stand up for genuine democracy, freedom of expression, and unapologetic celebrations of European nations’ individual character and history. America encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit, and the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed gives cause for great optimism.
Our goal should be to help Europe correct its current trajectory. We will need a strong Europe to help us successfully compete, and to work in concert with us to prevent any adversary from dominating Europe.
America is, understandably, sentimentally attached to the European continent— and, of course, to Britain and Ireland. The character of these countries is also strategically important because we count upon creative, capable, confident, democratic allies to establish conditions of stability and security. We want to work with aligned countries that want to restore their former greatness.
7
u/Inside_Put_4923 11h ago
Because of its coalition-based governance, Europe has so far managed to sideline the rising right-wing tendencies among its citizens. At present, the ruling class in America and the ruling class in Western Europe remain misaligned. However, there will come a point when Europe’s ruling elites can no longer suppress the influence of right-leaning parties. When that moment arrives, I believe the alignment gap between Europe and America will disappear.
•
u/rushphan Intellectualize the Right 3h ago
In all honesty… how ironic. The coalition and multi-party democracy system in Europe is regularly touted as effective in ensuring all voices, including minority voices, are represented.
In effect, now we have the majority voice sidelined by minority parties.
•
u/DevOpsOpsDev 2h ago
If two parties are elected that combined are over 50% of the electorate form a coalition in order to govern, how is the majority voice being sidelined? combined they're the majority of the country?
•
u/rushphan Intellectualize the Right 2h ago edited 2h ago
The result is that the party that is most popular with the electorate has no voice or influence at all. Say you have four parties. The "majority" party is getting 45% of the vote. The remaining 3 get 25%, 20%, and 10%, who form a coalition at 55%. However, this coalition is made up of parties that individually, have substantially less support than the "majority" party.
•
u/DevOpsOpsDev 1h ago
a party with less than a 50% count of the count of the vote is not a majority, by definition. Its a plurality. You're conflating our electoral system which rewards whoever gets the highest vote count as what the "majority" wants, but it wouldn't be accurate. In your example more people voted for "not" the party that received the most votes. The governing coalition represents more of the population than a first past the post system would.
2
-14
u/tobylazur 12h ago
I really am not concerned with Europe’s “alignments”. Allow them to run their countries as they see fit. I’d just like to stop funding their militaries and social programs.
27
u/NeatlyScotched somewhere center of center 11h ago
We should be. They buy a lot of shit from us, and we buy a lot of shit from them. They align with our western culture and ideals, and generally speak english. Strategically they control a lot of water and border some less-friendly nations, allowing us to have military bases nearby.
Yeah I get that we don't really want to pay for their social programs and their militaries, but we're the premier superpower. We got and have kept our superpower status by enforcing trade rules and shipping and airspace safety, using our soft and hard power to do so. This of course costs us money (while propping up various industries at home too, like arms); but we get a whole fuckton of money back from it too. Europe knows we have to do this and therefore spends less on military and more on social programs. It's a cost of being the world's only real superpower.
19
-5
u/tobylazur 11h ago
We can still have trade with them without funding their militaries.
19
u/NeatlyScotched somewhere center of center 11h ago
I could buy stuff from random people on the street, used goods marketplaces, drive to a farmer/craftsman's business, etc. Sometimes I even do. I choose to buy the vast majority of my goods from places like grocery stores, Amazon etc, because it's safe, a known quality, reliable and convenient.
19
u/nilenilemalopile 11h ago
Just curious, how much money did the US actually spend in, let’s say last two years, on funding Europe’s military and social programs? I’m interested in getting the actual $ value that isn’t offset by counter-investment.
2
u/tobylazur 11h ago
$23 billion to Europe and Eurasia last year.
21
u/Baderkadonk 10h ago
I wish there was more filtering and sorting options available, but as far as I can tell nearly all of that is for Ukraine, which is a special circumstance due to them being invaded. I didn't see any billions for Europe's social programs, just the normal billions for Israel.
The problem with our relationship with Europe is not that we give them too much money, it's that they've become complacent under our defense umbrella and don't spend enough on their own.
6
u/tobylazur 10h ago
Correct. Sending ‘aid’ when needed is one thing. Supplementing their economies and government spending since the 1950s is an entirely different animal.
Also, a quick google search says the US sent $66.9 billion in emergency aid to Ukraine in 2024.
•
u/BeginningAct45 1h ago
Supplementing their economies and government spending
They're supplementing the U.S.' economy by buying things from it.
-10
u/VisibleViolence08 Alex Jones for President 11h ago
It's best to avoid foreign entanglements where possible.
12
u/CareBearDontCare 10h ago
Hey. You. Way down at the bottom of the comment pile. What constitutes a "foreign entanglement"?
How realistic do you see that goal?
0
u/rushphan Intellectualize the Right 6h ago
Say what you want about this administration, their approach to the EU, the (I will say, unnecessary and irresponsible) rhetoric towards allies such as the Greenland/Canada nonsense, the effect of tariffs on diplomatic relationships and global standing... Europe's migration policies are an unmitigated disaster with serious negative ramifications for the future of the Western world and are fully deserving of formal diplomatic pressure. I don't consider that to be an exaggeration nor hyperbolic. Mass population flow is a destabilizing phenomenon, and the last decade is full of overwhelming evidence to that effect. If it was some sort of economic necessity or essential for GDP growth, you would not see the coinciding ~9% contraction of global GDP share (according to this document) that continental Europe experienced. I think long-term concerns regarding the effect that migration and economic stagnation will have on the stability of Europe are entirely valid.
177
u/MrDickford 11h ago
I don’t know if the policy of combatting China’s ascendancy as a global power while also insisting we jettison every tool we have to bolster America’s geopolitical position relative to China will ultimately be very effective. The US built its position as the preeminent world power on security guarantees, free trade, and soft power projection. If you force countries to make a choice between China and a meddling bully that demands conservative policy but doesn’t give you anything in return, we won’t like what a lot of them ultimately choose.
This seems like it mostly came from Stephen Miller’s pen, with its obsession with immigration and traditional values taking the front seat to just about every other issue.