What Can Europe Do for America?

It is time for Europe to adopt a realistic and transactional approach to Trump’s policies, rather than a confrontational one.

It’s been a year since Europeans began watching in disbelief as Donald Trump showed that he genuinely intends to disrupt the world order – even though he said so openly.

It has also been a year of watching Trump express interest in stopping the killing in Ukraine, but not in addressing the causes of that killing.

And after a year, Europeans still have not found their footing or defined Europe’s place vis-à-vis the New America.

Greenland offers Europeans an opportunity to pose a paraphrased but timely question – What can Europe do for America? – and to reassert themselves by proposing a transaction: a stronger European NATO role in Greenland. This could help counter the Europe-haters within the Trump Administration.

Europeans could and should offer “help” in managing Greenland’s security.

Not good enough? Then consider a stick alongside the carrot. Europeans could point out what the US Administration would stand to lose if it adopted an aggressive approach toward Greenland – including, to name just two fundamental benefits, access to military bases and close cooperation with a vast and highly capable European intelligence network.

There would be at least three benefits of this approach:

This call runs counter to the prevailing disapproval of Trump’s policies and the temptation to punish his Administration by severing ties with America altogether — effectively showing the US a middle finger.

But such impulses are nearly suicidal. Europe is not yet strong enough to guarantee its own security alone. If forced to do so, it will have to – but it should not volunteer for autonomy prematurely.

There is another danger as well: isolationism. Isolationism is among the worst ideas in circulation because it is rooted in nationalism.

The notion of European “autonomy” increasingly reflects rising nationalism. And European nationalism needs no dark historical reminders – it is enough to observe how frequently EU member states find themselves in deep disagreement. Autonomic tendencies would lead straight to the dismantling of the most magnificent political project in Europe’s history: the European Union.

Europe should never champion isolationism – on the contrary. The fear that a less internationalist America might walk away from European security is understandable, but it should not lead to hasty efforts to “emancipate” Europe from the United States. Such moves would play directly into the hands of adversaries like Russia, who thrive on divisions within the West.

To recall NATO’s original purpose as described by its first Secretary General, Lord Hastings Lionel Ismay: the alliance exists to keep the Russians out and the Americans in. As for internal dangers, today it is not Germany but European nationalism that poses the greatest threat.

Europeans can strengthen their security capabilities without turning their backs on the United States – especially given that for 80 years it was the US security umbrella that allowed Europe to flourish. That surely counts for something.

Donald Trump and his Administration have engaged in ridiculous saber-rattling about taking Greenland “one way or another.” Setting pomposity and arrogance aside, the underlying concern – emphasis on concern – appears to be fear of growing Russian and Chinese influence in the Western Hemisphere. While there is no immediate danger of Russian or Chinese forces landing in Greenland, their expanding military and strategic activities in the Arctic are well documented.

If security accounts for only half of the Trump Administration’s interest in Greenland, the other half is the desire to exploit natural resources. Greenlanders themselves indicated as early as May last year that they were open to the highest bidder.

Would a European offer overcome Trump’s distrust of any deal unless he owns everything? Probably not. But his Administration would be far less pleased to hear Europeans say, “Please vacate the military facilities you occupy on our territory by the end of the month – and, by the way, we have decided to revisit our intelligence-sharing agreements.”

It is often said with scorn that Trump’s approach to politics is “transactional.” In reality, all foreign relations are transactional. Only the Soviet Union claimed altruism – promising a glorious future for free, while subjugating naive populations under its boot.

Honesty in international relations lies in clearly stating interests and negotiating compromises. Greenland offers precisely such an opportunity.

The Russians would be very unhappy about it.

The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.