Search

Begin New Search Topic Transatlantic Relations

1. Untangling the Transatlantic Knot: Germany, France, and the United States

Author:
Gesine Weber and Jacob Ross
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMFUS)
Abstract:
France’s and Germany’s reactions to Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine reveal their significantly different relationships with the United States. Their interpretations regarding the European security architecture are almost diametrically opposed. While Berlin concluded that European security must be constructed transatlantically, Paris saw confirmation of its interpretation that Europeans must be able to address security challenges independently of Washington. Donald Trump’s reelection constitutes a challenge for the two countries because both need to fundamentally rethink their respective relationships with the United States and Europe-US relations more generally. The scope of the US withdrawal from European security remains to be seen, but it will be similarly challenging for Paris and Berlin.
Topic:
NATO, Geopolitics, Transatlantic Relations, and Defense Cooperation
Political Geography:
Europe, France, Germany, North America, and United States of America

2. Another Transatlanticism Is Possible: Europe’s Moment in Latin America amid Trump’s Return

Author:
Raffaele Piras
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has reignited his hallmark “America First” agenda, with significant consequences for Latin America. During his inaugural address, Trump emphasised the need to regain US control of the Panama Canal, framing it as a cornerstone of national security amidst heightened competition with China.[1] This rhetoric marks the continuation of a policy approach that relies on coercion and transactional diplomacy to achieve US objectives. While Trump’s focus on Latin America will undoubtedly reshape the region’s geopolitical dynamics, it also presents a strategic opportunity for the European Union to strengthen its role as a stabilising force and reliable partner.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Politics, European Union, Institutions, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe, Latin America, North America, and United States of America

3. A Three-year War and Four Lessons for Europe

Author:
Alessandro Marrone
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
The tragic third anniversary of the Russian invasion of Ukraine that began on 24 February 2022 witnesses the start of diplomatic talks between Russia and the United States on the possible end of the conflict. Three years of large-scale, high-intensity war of attrition in Europe, with over a million dead or injured soldiers, offers at least four politico-military lessons for European countries, the EU and NATO. Lessons to bear in mind through this negotiation for the future not only of Ukraine but of the security of the whole continent.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Transatlantic Relations, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine

4. Giorgia Meloni’s Italy between Trump and Europe: Fateful Choices Ahead

Author:
Maria Luisa Fantappiè, Leo Goretti, and Filippo Simonelli
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
The priority should be “preventing divisions within the West and the transatlantic alliance”, while “rooting for” this or that side would not be helpful: it is thus that Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni commented on the spat in the Oval Office between President Volodymyr Zelensky and Donald Trump,[1] and by extension, between Washington and Europe. In the aftermath of the clash, while most European leaders openly supported Zelensky, Meloni’s reticence was notable. The choice was tough. Siding with Zelensky would jeopardise Meloni’s aspiration to become the go-to EU leader for Washington. And yet, siding with Trump would lay bare a lack of commitment to Europe and especially the defence of Ukraine, for which Meloni had previously shown constant support. At the ensuing London Summit on Ukraine, Meloni couldn’t hide her discomfort.[2] The resolve of European leaders – spearheaded by the French president Emmanuel Macron and the UK’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer – in advocating for a strategic Europe seemed to shelve Meloni’s carefully crafted plan to leverage her bilateral ties with the Trump administration to bolster her role in Europe – even at the cost of fragmenting its unity. Meanwhile, at home, her junior coalition partner Matteo Salvini openly sided with Trump, in an attempt to present himself as an alternative to Meloni and to win consensus among that sizable chunk of the Italian public opinion who wants to see an end to the war in Ukraine.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Transatlantic Relations, Donald Trump, Russia-Ukraine War, and Giorgia Meloni
Political Geography:
Europe, Italy, and United States of America

5. Can France Provide European Allies with Nuclear Deterrence?

Author:
Roberto Zadra
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
In his speech to fellow citizens on 5 March, French President Emmanuel Macron announced the opening of a “strategic debate on the protection of our allies on the European continent by our (nuclear) deterrent”.[1] It is not the first time: already in the 1990s then-president François Mitterrand alluded to a vocation européenne of French nuclear deterrence.[2] Macron himself proposed, already in February 2020, the opening of a dialogue on the matter.[3] The initiative was not very successful at the time, essentially because European allies considered the security guarantees provided by the United States to Europe through NATO sufficient, together with the repeated reassurances of NATO communiqués that the British and French nuclear forces “have a deterrent role of their own and contribute significantly to the overall security of the Alliance”.[4] This time, however, the reactions by many European allied countries to the French initiative will probably be different. For a simple reason: excluding the deployment of its own forces to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire and denying security guarantees to Kyiv, the Trump administration fuels the fears of European allies that Washington’s commitment to collective defence is less solid than in the past. Indeed, the Ukraine crisis has shown the limitations of the traditional NATO distinction between Article 5 and non-Article 5 – that is, between those who are members of NATO and therefore protected by collective defence, and those who are not because collective defence is not valid for NATO partners – as it has laid bare how crisis management and cooperative security are having a direct impact on (the perceived lack of US commitment to) collective defence in Europe.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Nuclear Weapons, Deterrence, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe and France

6. NATO-Europe-US Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific: Challenging Times Ahead

Author:
Gabriele Abbondanza
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Istituto Affari Internazionali
Abstract:
As the Indo-Pacific gradually becomes the world’s geopolitical and geoeconomic epicentre, states and regional organisations are progressively pivoting to it. Due to a combination of drivers – chiefly US pressure, economic opportunities, strategic interests and politico-normative priorities – European and Indo-Pacific actors have increased cooperation with Washington and NATO in the region. However, the second Trump administration looks considerably less aligned with the conventional pillars of US foreign policy. In light of the unfolding fracture between the US and its European allies over Ukraine, what lies ahead for NATO-Europe-US cooperation in the Indo-Pacific?
Topic:
NATO, International Cooperation, Geopolitics, Transatlantic Relations, and Military
Political Geography:
Europe, United States of America, and Indo-Pacific

7. Greenland: a geostrategic challenge for the European Union in the age of Trump 2.0

Author:
André Gattolin
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
Donald Trump's return to the White House confirms, after a first term marked by an attempt to buy Greenland, that the Arctic Island is a critical geopolitical issue for the United States - and that it should also be the same for the European Union. The new situation, in which the military threat has become a factor, is forcing the European Union to rethink its relationship with Greenland and, more broadly, with the North in a clearly strategic way. What does Donald Trump really want? Is he serious about annexing Greenland? Is he prepared to do whatever it takes, including military action, to make it happen? Why should the United States want to appropriate this territory? More generally, are we witnessing a change of direction by Washington in its Nordic and transatlantic relations? What does this mean for Europe? Do we have the means to resist at a time when the United States is talking about its possible withdrawal from NATO and threatening the world, and therefore the European Union, with a significant increase in customs duties? The question of the future of this Arctic territory that sits at the crossroads of Europe and America is far from anecdotal. The shock provoked by Donald Trump is all the greater given that the subject has long been neglected by European chancelleries. Even Denmark, on which the island has depended for more than two centuries, has to admit that it had not sufficiently considered the geostrategic importance of Greenland.
Topic:
European Union, Transatlantic Relations, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Greenland and Arctic

8. Assessing the Zeitenwende: Implications for Germany, the United States, and Transatlantic Security

Author:
John R. Deni, Marina E. Henke, Aylin Matlé, Sophia Besch, and Tim Bosch
Publication Date:
02-2025
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
The essays in this volume analyze Germany’s Zeitenwende, a pivotal shift in security policy triggered by Russia’s reinvasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Key topics include national security strategy, defense policy, energy policy, industrial strategy, and international relations with Russia, China, the United States, NATO, and the EU. Regarding strategy, Germany’s approach lacks focus, offering broad goals without addressing trade-offs or specific threats. On defense policy, the Zeitenwende marked a renewed commitment to defense spending, bolstered by a €100 billion modernization fund. But delays in procurement, operational shortcomings, and an underfunded long-term defense budget hinder Germany. Similar challenges affect the defense industry, despite increased spending and exports. In energy policy, Germany rapidly diversified energy sources and expanded its liquefied natural gas infrastructure to reduce its dependence on Russian gas. Still, achieving energy security, affordability, and sustainability remains complex. Internationally, Germany abandoned decades of Ostpolitik, prioritizing Ukraine over ties with Russia. Germany’s evolving China policy focuses on derisking and maintaining economic ties, raising questions about whether Berlin has reduced vulnerabilities. Though Washington supports Germany’s strategic shift, concerns remain about its sustainability, particularly in Germany’s NATO and EU commitments. Each chapter concludes by identifying the implications for the United States as well as the steps to overcome identified challenges.
Topic:
NATO, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Transatlantic Relations, Energy Security, Burden Sharing, and Zeitenwende
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Germany, and United States of America

9. How can Europe’s nuclear deterrence trilemma be resolved?

Author:
Andrea Gilli and Francesco Nicoli
Publication Date:
06-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
The United States under President Donald Trump has adopted an ambiguous position on European security. Although no immediate risk of abandonment is apparent, European countries are rethinking their defence strategies in case the US declines to support them, or provides only partial support, in a crisis. This discussion is particularly sensitive in relation to nuclear weapons, the ultimate deterrent, for which European countries depend extensively on the United States. We argue that a possible future US withdrawal from European nuclear security will force European countries to face a policy trilemma. If they stick to the existing policy framework of no proliferation and no joint deterrence, they expose themselves to nuclear blackmail, should the US withdraw its external guarantee. If they want to protect themselves from nuclear blackmail, they must choose how to provide nuclear security: either collective nuclear security, which would compromise some national sovereignty, or independent provision by individual countries, leading to nuclear proliferation in Europe. Having established that uncontrolled proliferation is an inferior outcome to some form of joint deterrence, we identify four main alternatives: an extension of the Franco-British nuclear deterrent; an extension complemented by a jointly financed expansion of existing deterrence; the absorption of the French (and perhaps British) nuclear arsenals into a European arsenal; and the construction of a separate European submarine deterrent (with Europe using French or British technology or developing new technology). We also discuss briefly forms of non-nuclear deterrence, which however would likely be a complementary rather than a substitute for a nuclear deterrent. We compare these options using a set of parameters: strategic autonomy and credibility, changes to treaties (including non-proliferation), costs, capabilities and readiness. Our analysis shows that all options have advantages and disadvantages, but some are politically, financially and militarily more feasible.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Industrial Policy, Nuclear Weapons, Geopolitics, Macroeconomics, Deterrence, Transatlantic Relations, and Vulnerability
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

10. Ukraine: European democracy’s affordable arsenal

Author:
Jacob Funk Kirkegaard
Publication Date:
03-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Bruegel
Abstract:
European NATO members must raise defence spending by enough to deter through strength an irredentist Russia. This must be done possibly without the United States and when ageing populations demand higher social spending. Raising defence spending to sufficient levels could result in a doubling of current primary deficits to just over 3 percent of GDP on average. This seems likely to be a fiscally unattainable goal for this group of countries. European NATO members, in addition to their quantitative defence spending challenge, face the qualitative challenge of significantly increasing their outlays on new modern military equipment, especially drones, to credibly deter Russia. This will require all European NATO members to significantly increase investments in their domestic and regional military-industrial capacities. While its armed forces are physically defending their country against Russia’s onslaught, Ukraine is transforming gradually into a very large, advanced and cost-competitive military equipment and weapons producer. Through the so-called ‘Danish Model’, individual European Union and NATO members are already actively funding Ukrainian defence production, helping it to help itself against Russia. Much more focus should be put on Ukraine’s ability, if fully integrated with the military-industrial sector in the rest of Europe, to produce much of the modern military equipment wanted by itself and the rest of Europe. This Policy Brief shows how Ukraine already produces drones and modern howitzers, arguably the two most important weapons in defensive warfare today, at prices well below those achieved by other Western military suppliers. The EU, with a fully integrated and funded Ukrainian military-industrial sector, will have the capacity to produce much of the cost-competitive military equipment it will need in future, while continuing to fund its welfare systems. To facilitate this development, the EU must in all defence and military-related matters begin treating Ukraine immediately as a full EU member.
Topic:
Security, NATO, Industrial Policy, Governance, European Union, Geopolitics, Transatlantic Relations, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Ukraine