2025 was a good year for Donald Trump—success on all fronts. His tariff hikes did not destroy the global trading system; instead, they filled US state coffers. Inflation did not go through the roof. America’s trading partners absorbed, as he predicted, a substantial part of the costs. The war in Ukraine is now fully paid for by Europeans. NATO partners have committed to increasing their defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP and will buy plenty of American weapons. Big business, media magnates, Congress, and the Senate are all eager to fulfil the president’s will. He can send the army into cities governed by Democrats. The rich and powerful are queuing up to make donations for his golden ballroom at the White House. The Supreme Court largely supports his agenda. He is not very popular, but he relentlessly pursues and succeeds with his goals. A democratic socialist as mayor of New York might be a glimmer of hope, but it does not count for much.
Hamas has been destroyed. Hezbollah is decimated. The Assad regime is history. His friend Benjamin Netanyahu had—and still has—a largely free hand in Gaza and the West Bank to pursue his policy of a “Greater Israel,” eradicating the two-state solution even as a distant dream. Iran’s “axis of resistance” lies in tatters. Regime change in Tehran seems more likely than ever. Nigeria, Yemen, and Syria have learned the hard way that Trump is not chickening out but willing to hit hard. Javier Milei wins the Argentinian election thanks to a US bailout. Nicolás Maduro is captured and presented to the world in chains. The US has reasserted full control over its backyard and pushes back against Chinese footholds in the Americas. Cuba and Greenland seem next on the president’s list. In pursuing his agenda, he shows little respect for American law and none for international law.
Canada and Mexico simultaneously offer concessions and try to maintain national independence. While Claudia Sheinbaum and Mark Carney at least try to maintain some dignity, European leaders are spineless. In fear of Putin, they are, in front of Trump, the Chamberlains of our day. They desperately beg Trump to stick with Ukraine. They make concession after concession, only to learn again and again that he prefers Putin over Volodymyr Zelensky.
Trump must feel vindicated that he can do and demand whatever he wants—and the Europeans will swallow it. His impressive record of victories will convince him and his supporters that the “stable genius” in the White House can shape the world according to his will.
It sounds like a joke when the German chancellor says that the legal situation surrounding the Maduro kidnapping is complicated. It is very simple: bombing a foreign country and kidnapping its president is a breach of the UN Charter and international law. Maduro is a terrible dictator, but so are many others.
The fragile bulwark against catastrophe
International law and rules should not be morally oversold as a “values-based order,” but they are crucially important as mechanisms to limit the risk of great wars. They help ensure that competing interests and rivalries between states do not spiral out of control. World War I and World War II were consequences of a multipolar world of competing great powers. A multipolar world does not result in a peaceful system of separate spheres of influence; at best, it becomes a world of heavily armed deterrence with the permanent risk of uncontrolled military escalation. Ignoring and dismissing international law and norms makes the world a far more dangerous place.
Trump’s appeasers, like all appeasers, have valid arguments why it is unwise to provoke the mighty President of the United States. The US is right to demand higher defence spending from NATO allies. Europe should pay for the Ukrainian war, as it is largely a European problem. Europe should accept higher tariffs to keep the US in NATO. Bombing Iran is illegal, but it targets a hideous regime. Why spoil relations with Trump over Maduro? And it is not worth provoking the US in defence of what is left of Denmark’s colonial past. Praising Trump as a superman and pandering to his ego seems a small price to pay to avoid him turning against Europe.
Concession follows concession, always with the hope that the latest one will finally satisfy Mr Trump. However, the appeaser loses more respect each time in the eyes of the appeased, and the demands become more outrageous. These cautious leaders are an embarrassment to their own people, who see that they are not governed by statesmen but by wretched lackeys.
Trump means and does what he says. Destroying the European Union is part and parcel of his understanding of a new world order. Europe, with its rules-based multilateralism and still largely intact democracies, is the most important countermodel to great-power multipolarism. The scramble for Europe is an interest the US now seems to share with China and Russia.
A continent committing suicide out of fear of death
Is there, for Europe—given its apparent weaknesses—an alternative to appeasing Trump? Currently, Europe is committing suicide out of fear of death. Instead of being afraid of everything, Europe should start with two admittedly debatable assumptions: Russia is too weak to conquer Europe. The US is too weak to dominate the world.
Given political will, Europe is strong enough to help Ukraine defend its independence. Yes, it will be a bitter and fragile peace for Ukraine, but it can win the peace as long as it remains an independent state integrating into Europe. Globally, Europe must become the anchor for a new concept of non-alignment. It remains the beacon of hope that democracy—this inherently fragile form of governance, which delivers best for its citizens—can survive the global onslaught it faces.
Inviting big democratic countries like Brazil, Mexico, Canada, Japan, South Africa, and perhaps still India into an alliance that upholds the idea of multilateralism versus multipolarism would be a better strategy than hoping Trump does not mean what he says. These countries together are big enough to form a counterweight.
However, this requires courage and leadership. The fact that the Mercosur agreement, after 25 years of negotiations, is again delayed because Donald Tusk and Emmanuel Macron are giving in to their farmers’ lobbies shows that they are not living up to the moment. Europe will not be able to build alliances with countries in the Global South if it is unwilling to offer something in return. Also, the German chancellor’s suggestion to Trump—”if you do not wish to engage with Europe, then at least make Germany your partner”—is not helpful for fostering European unity.
In order to meet global challenges, Europe needs strong institutions and majority decision-making in key policy areas. More importantly, governments must convince their people that it is possible and desirable to defend our societies. Economic and regulatory policies that have undermined welfare states, allowed unprecedented tax evasion by the wealthy, alienated people from political and economic elites, and destroyed democracy from within must be replaced by inclusive policies of shared prosperity.
Expanding defence capacities and increasing resilience are incompatible with winner-takes-all economies. It is most worrying that business leaders are demanding further cuts to taxes, workers’ rights, and welfare-state provisions—at a moment when national unity, basic fairness, and genuine patriotism—meaning to stand up for peace, freedom, democracy, and social justice—have become questions of Europe’s survival.
Frank Hoffer is non-executive director of the Global Labour University Online Academy.
