With the fall of the Soviet Union, the strong alliance between the United States and Europe — based on shared principles of democracy and a free market — seemed to promise unprecedented prosperity and security for the West. This relationship was best summarized by former President of the European Council Donald Tusk, who once stated, “Whoever turns against America harms Europe. Whoever attacks the European Union harms America. And whoever undermines the foundations of liberal democracy harms one and the other.”
However, recent events have undermined that relationship, plunging the international community into uncertainty and greatly threatening the global balance of peace. Through his foreign policy, President Donald Trump has turned the United States against Europe, demonstrating a disregard for democratic values, international law and the United States’ allies.
The first signs of this betrayal became apparent in Trump’s rhetoric about the war in Ukraine. Despite Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which killed thousands, including civilians, Trump blamed Ukraine for the war, claiming it “should have never started it” — rhetoric that echoed Kremlin state propaganda.
Perhaps the most disastrous impact, however, of Trump’s Ukraine policy has been his cessation of material aid to the country. Shortly after the Trump administration paused the provision of air defense missiles to conduct an internal review, Ukraine was hit by a blitz of Russian air attacks. Two days after Trump’s decision was made, the Ukrainian capital of Kyiv was struck by 11 missiles and 539 drones, the largest attack of its kind.
Ukrainian air defense crews, already suffering from manpower deficiencies, have been forced to contend with the prospect that their country’s numerous U.S. air defense systems will lack the munitions to operate. Russia has since continued to intensify its aerial attacks on Ukrainian civilian energy infrastructure, plunging most of the country into rolling blackouts, leaving citizens without heat amid freezing temperatures.
Then came the crisis over Greenland. From a strategic perspective, it is hard to see how a U.S. invasion of Greenland makes any sense. For starters, Greenland remains under Danish control, a longtime U.S. ally. As for security concerns, the United States already maintains a military presence in Greenland with Denmark’s consent. If the United States were truly concerned about Russia or China, which have shown no interest in seizing Greenland, it could maintain a military presence through a cooperative effort with Denmark.
It’s not like Greenlanders prefer to join the United States either. In fact, public opinion polling from Verian Group shows that just six percent of Greenlanders favor joining the United States, compared with 85 percent who oppose such a union. Nonetheless, Trump has set his sights on acquiring Greenland by any means necessary, including possible military force. While international pressure eventually forced the president to publicly back away from the military option, this concession has done little to assuage the concerns of many of the United States’ democratic allies.
If territorial ambitions can be created at the president’s whim, the United States’ European allies have more cause to view the United States as a potential adversary rather than a crucial partner.
Even worse, these threats have coincided with Trump’s obsession with Canada, which he has repeatedly claimed he wants to make the “51st state.” Although some have dismissed these threats as a joke or another one of Trump’s fad obsessions, the Canadian government certainly does not see it that way, drawing up plans to prepare for an American military invasion for the first time in 100 years.
The Trump administration recently moved to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on allegations of narcoterrorism and drug trafficking. It is important to note that Maduro has ruled as a brutal dictator, rigging elections and committing unspeakable crimes against those opposed to him. However, his capture raises many questions about U.S. foreign policy in the Western Hemisphere.
Firstly, Maduro was essentially kidnapped from Venezuelan soil, representing a clear violation of international law. It is also not clear that the Trump administration has much of a strategy for leading Venezuela away from the control of the Maduro regime.
Furthermore, after the capture, Trump did not criticize the regime’s remnants, but Venezuela’s democratic opposition. Trump argued that opposition leader María Corina Machado “doesn’t have the support within or the respect within the country” despite a mountain of evidence showing she overwhelmingly won Venezuela’s last election.
Instead, Trump has praised Delcy Rodriguez, the interim president and Maduro loyalist who “temporarily” assumed office after Maduro’s capture. Rodriguez has made no commitments and few concessions to ensure a democratic transition in Venezuela.
Thus, Trump’s primary concern appears not to be democracy, nor the rights of the Venezuelan people. Instead, Trump has primarily collaborated with Rodriguez to open up Venezuelan natural resources to American oil interests. Trump’s conduct regarding the crisis in Venezuela has not only continued to paint the United States as a militarily aggressive power, but further puts into doubt his commitment to democratic values and international order.
With these actions, Trump’s foreign policy goes beyond appeasing dictators — it also outright threatens the United States’ democratic allies and further casts doubt on his commitment to European security.
Frighteningly, the most consequential effect of Trump’s foreign policy may be yet to come. As a result of the United States’ sudden aggressiveness, its former partners could shift away and soon seek new, more stable military and economic ties. The trustworthy, staunchly democratic United States that the Western world has become accustomed to is gone.
As long as Donald Trump can continue his foreign policy agenda, the global standing of the United States will continue to decline, especially among our closest allies. From Trump’s perspective, there is no incentive to change course; the only way to stop the rampage is at the ballot box in the 2028 presidential election.
If the American people wish to rebuild their country’s international credibility, they will have to firmly rebuke Trumpism when they cast their vote.
James Heins is a junior majoring in political science.
Views expressed in the opinions pages represent the opinions of the columnists. The only piece that represents the view of the Pipe Dream Editorial Board is the staff editorial.