Blog by Daniele Schirru, Marion Le Nabec, and Nora Doorley
Introduction
The first month of Donald Trump’s presidency, since his assumption to office on January 20, 2025, has been exceptionally eventful. Having issued more than 100 executive actions, including executive orders, proclamations, and memos, the new administration has triggered significant repercussions around the world, including in the European Union.
This period of insecurity has highlighted a crisis in multilateralism, especially concerning EU-US transatlantic relations. Consequently, the EU can no longer blindly trust the US as an ally on key matters such as trade and security. While the early weeks of the presidency were marked by threats to historic allies such as fellow NATO members Canada and Denmark, the highlight of recent weeks has been the dialogue initiated between the US and Russia to pursue a peace deal in Ukraine. However, neither Ukraine nor the EU have been adequately included in these talks, raising alarm bells across the continent about the potential consequences of these negotiations, given the lack of European representation.
Furthermore, the US has withdrawn from the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Paris Agreement; it has sanctioned the International Criminal Court (ICC); ceased dispatching foreign aid and development assistance through USAID (US Agency for International Development); and has repeatedly threatened the EU with heavy tariffs on products such as steel and aluminum, adding to the uncertainty of this new era of power politics.
It remains unclear how the EU will navigate its current relationship with the US and how constructive discussions with the new administration can be established. The 47th President of the United States shares a cordial relationship with French President Emmanuel Macron, but the only EU leaders invited to Trump’s inauguration were Giorgia Meloni and Viktor Orbán. Although Orbán did not attend due to a state address, the invitee list could indicate which European leaders Trump wishes to establish amicable connections with and, importantly, who might aspire to be his “whisperer” in Europe.
Trade, Technology, and Tariffs
The perception of an imbalanced trade relationship between the United States and the European Union has been a major factor behind the US administration’s decision to adopt an aggressive stance towards the bloc, mirroring its earlier hardline approach toward Canada, Mexico and China on tariff policies. At the heart of this shift is a goal to reduce America’s trade deficit with its partners, a priority explicitly outlined in the “America First Trade Policy”. This directive, formalised in a memorandum issued on January 20 as an executive order by President Trump, seeks to revamp US trade policy in a way that purportedly benefits “American workers, manufacturers, farmers, ranchers, entrepreneurs, and businesses.”
In a significant escalation, President Trump announced that the US would be imposing tariffs of 25% on aluminium and steel imports, effective from March 12 – a move that is expected to have a substantial economic impact on European industries. Reacting to the announcement, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen issued a strongly worded statement, warning that the EU would not allow unjustified trade restrictions to go unanswered. She stressed that “the EU will act to safeguard its economic interests” and reiterated the bloc’s commitment to protecting its “workers, businesses, and consumers.”
Adding to tensions in the transatlantic relationship has been the EU’s regulatory approach towards American tech giants like Apple, Meta and Google, which the US deems “overregulation”. On February 21, President Donald Trump signed a memorandum intended to shield US companies from what he termed “overseas extortion”. The document singles out EU regulations – such as the Digital Markets Act and the Digital Services Act – and warns of possible tariff retaliation.
A Changing Geopolitical Landscape
Beyond trade and technology, broader geopolitical concerns are also shaping transatlantic relations. President Trump’s continuous threats to gain control of Greenland have startled EU leaders, and the US response to Russia has had seriously destabilising consequences for Ukraine and the Europe continent as a whole. In a break from what had been the US approach during the Biden administration, the United States split from European countries and sided with Russia, Belarus, and North Korea when it voted against a Ukrainian amendment in the United Nations General Assembly, which called for the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine. The vote took place on February 24, a day that marked the third anniversary of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.
Meanwhile, there have been calls for a reassessment of Europe’s defence strategy in the context of a more isolationist United States. Nathalie Tocci, Director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali and a key commentator on European foreign policy, has argued that “Europe will need to do even more on [defence] if it is to defend itself against Russia without – or even at crosshairs with – the United States”, contending that if Washington continues to pursue policies that weaken Europe, rather than attempting to appease the US by increasing purchases of US weapons or liquefied natural gas, Europe should instead work to reduce its strategic reliance on the United States.
We’ll Always Have Paris
Through a series of executive orders, President Trump unravelled a number of environmental and climate measures dating from the previous administration. Since January 20, the USA withdrew from the Paris Agreement and its commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions; revoked the US International Climate Finance Plan; terminated the Green New Deal (IRA, “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022”), including cutting funds for electric vehicles; established a National Energy Dominance Council to increase the production of oil and gas; and implemented cuts in funding and personnel to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Even if the EU27 remains the world’s fourth biggest greenhouse gas emitter (after China, the US and India), the EU, its Member States, and the European Investment Bank are currently the largest providers of public climate finance to developing economies, contributing €28.6 billion in 2023. In the context of climate backsliding in the USA and their withdrawal from international agreements, European Commission President von der Leyen has reiterated that: “The Paris Agreement continues to be the best hope of all humanity. So Europe will stay the course, and keep working with all nations that want to protect nature and stop global warming.” However, there are growing calls in the EU as well to weaken European environmental and climate policies.
Conclusion
From trade disputes and geopolitical shifts to divergence on environmental issues, the European Union has found itself facing an increasingly unpredictable partner. The EU must now reassess its strategic autonomy, while navigating a delicate balance between cooperation and self-reliance. As the global order continues to shift, only time will tell whether transatlantic ties can be repaired, or whether the EU must chart a more independent path in the face of US unilateralism.