Western nations finally admitting what many had suspected for some time: the United States is not as reliable an ally as previously thought. At the Davos economic forum, Donald Trump recently claimed that without America, most countries would not even "work," but for the first time in decades, a group of Western leaders have come to the opposite conclusion β they will function better without the US.
This shift in sentiment has been sparked by Trump's erratic behavior and his tendency to use tariffs as a means of intimidating his allies. His threat to invade Greenland, while half-hearted in its delivery, was enough to prompt many nations to reevaluate their relationship with Washington.
Leaders such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have stated that the world is no longer defined by rules-based order, but rather by raw power and technological advancements. Von der Leyen declared that Europe needs its own levers of power in a increasingly "lawless" world.
France's President Emmanuel Macron has also weighed in on the matter, stating that the US is seeking to weaken and subordinate Europe. Macron argues that liberal Europe is being squeezed twice over by the US due to Washington no longer valuing European interests or seeing it as an ideological enemy.
Finland's President Alexander Stubb has taken a similar stance, arguing that the US is leading a movement against liberalism, globalisation, and interdependence. Stubb suggests that nations such as the UK are being forced to compete with one another for favor or combine in order to create a third path with impact.
In contrast, Keir Starmer, the UK's leader, remains reluctant to challenge Trump directly. However, it appears that Starmer may be slowly coming around to the idea of investing in a network of middle-power alliances to withstand the behemoths of China, Russia, and the US.
Starmer's allies believe that he should engage with Macron to reopen stalled talks on a closer defence alliance with Europe. Such an alliance could provide access to the European defence industry, which has been a major point of contention in the past.
The reality is that many European powers now share a common diagnosis: the US's values-based realism requires Europe and the UK to work more closely together than ever. This means taking the world as it is, rather than as one would like it to be.
It does not mean giving gratuitous offense, but it does mean "naming reality." As Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney counselled his fellow leaders, when middle powers criticise economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent on another, they are keeping the sign in the window. For Starmer, this could be a huge wrench, breaking with 80 years of foreign policy. It may be that Trump has left him no choice.
Ultimately, it appears that many Western nations are finally admitting that their relationship with the US is not as secure as previously thought. As they move forward, it will be interesting to see how they choose to navigate this new landscape and whether they can find a way to work together effectively in the face of increasingly powerful rivals like China and Russia.
This shift in sentiment has been sparked by Trump's erratic behavior and his tendency to use tariffs as a means of intimidating his allies. His threat to invade Greenland, while half-hearted in its delivery, was enough to prompt many nations to reevaluate their relationship with Washington.
Leaders such as European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen have stated that the world is no longer defined by rules-based order, but rather by raw power and technological advancements. Von der Leyen declared that Europe needs its own levers of power in a increasingly "lawless" world.
France's President Emmanuel Macron has also weighed in on the matter, stating that the US is seeking to weaken and subordinate Europe. Macron argues that liberal Europe is being squeezed twice over by the US due to Washington no longer valuing European interests or seeing it as an ideological enemy.
Finland's President Alexander Stubb has taken a similar stance, arguing that the US is leading a movement against liberalism, globalisation, and interdependence. Stubb suggests that nations such as the UK are being forced to compete with one another for favor or combine in order to create a third path with impact.
In contrast, Keir Starmer, the UK's leader, remains reluctant to challenge Trump directly. However, it appears that Starmer may be slowly coming around to the idea of investing in a network of middle-power alliances to withstand the behemoths of China, Russia, and the US.
Starmer's allies believe that he should engage with Macron to reopen stalled talks on a closer defence alliance with Europe. Such an alliance could provide access to the European defence industry, which has been a major point of contention in the past.
The reality is that many European powers now share a common diagnosis: the US's values-based realism requires Europe and the UK to work more closely together than ever. This means taking the world as it is, rather than as one would like it to be.
It does not mean giving gratuitous offense, but it does mean "naming reality." As Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney counselled his fellow leaders, when middle powers criticise economic intimidation from one direction but stay silent on another, they are keeping the sign in the window. For Starmer, this could be a huge wrench, breaking with 80 years of foreign policy. It may be that Trump has left him no choice.
Ultimately, it appears that many Western nations are finally admitting that their relationship with the US is not as secure as previously thought. As they move forward, it will be interesting to see how they choose to navigate this new landscape and whether they can find a way to work together effectively in the face of increasingly powerful rivals like China and Russia.