What Trump's power over Europe really means | Berlin Briefing Podcast

Berlin Briefing: NATO, Trump, and the Shifting Sands of European Security

Key Concepts:

• 5% GDP Defense Spending: NATO's agreement to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP, driven by Trump's pressure.
• Trump Effect: The significant influence of Donald Trump on European political and security agendas.
• Zeitenwende (Turning Point): Germany's shift in defense policy following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, initially marked by a special defense fund.
• Transatlantic Relationship: The evolving dynamic between Europe and the United States, moving towards a more transactional model.
• Strategic Autonomy: Europe's potential to become more independent in defense and foreign policy.
• International Law: The selective application of international law by Western powers, particularly concerning the use of force.

1. NATO's Historic Shift: 5% GDP Defense Spending

• NATO has agreed to a substantial increase in defense spending, aiming for 5% of GDP. This decision is seen as a deterrent to Vladimir Putin and an appeasement strategy towards Donald Trump.
• Terry Schultz emphasizes the historical significance, noting that many NATO members currently fail to meet the existing 2% target. The commitment involves potentially doubling defense spending within the next decade.
• While Secretary General Rut claims the increase was inevitable, Trump's consistent pressure and demand for 5% GDP spending were major drivers.
• Trump's perspective on Article 5 (attack on one is an attack on all) seems to have evolved, expressing a newfound appreciation for NATO and European commitment to their own countries.
• European leaders reportedly agreed to repeatedly thank Trump to secure his support, avoid a withdrawal from Article 5, and prevent the removal of key US resources.

2. The Trump Effect: Shaping the European Agenda

• German Chancellor Scholz and NATO Secretary General Rut have actively attempted to "charm" Donald Trump, a departure from traditional diplomatic approaches.
• Germany's strategy involves avoiding principled statements that might provoke Trump, prioritizing pragmatic deal-making.
• Nina Haza highlights the rapid policy shifts in Germany following Russia's invasion of Ukraine, including the initial "Zeitenwende" announcement and the creation of a special defense fund of 100 billion euros.
• The NATO summit in the Hague is now seen as the true "Zeitenwende," with potentially profound and long-lasting effects on European societies and policies.
• JD Vance's speech at the Munich Security Conference and the perceived mistreatment of the Ukrainian president in the White House served as wake-up calls for Europe, highlighting the tangible threat of US disengagement.

3. Nuances of the 5% Pledge: Beyond the Headline Number

• Terry Schultz clarifies that the 5% figure is somewhat misleading. The agreement involves a base of 3.5% for core defense spending, plus an additional 1.5% that can include broader security-related investments.
• The 1.5% category is loosely defined, allowing countries to include items not traditionally considered defense-related, such as climate change initiatives.
• Aid to Ukraine can now be counted towards either the 1.5% or 3.5% targets, acknowledging Ukraine's security as integral to European security.
• Discussions are ongoing among EU leaders regarding the source of funding for the increased defense spending, whether it should come from EU-level funds or national budgets.

4. Germany's Shifting Stance: From Moral Leadership to Pragmatic Alignment

• Misha Kua points out a significant shift in Germany's foreign policy approach, particularly regarding the Iran-Israel conflict.
• Chancellor Scholz's veiled support for US and Israeli strikes on Iran's nuclear program marks a departure from Germany's traditional emphasis on international law and multilateralism.
• This contrasts sharply with a joint statement signed by Germany's Foreign Minister just days earlier, calling for de-escalation and restraint from all parties.
• The decision to align with the US and Israel without explicitly addressing the legality of the strikes raises concerns about undermining the concept of international law.
• Terry Schultz notes that NATO Secretary General Rut went even further, explicitly endorsing the strikes and praising Trump's willingness to use force.

5. The Credibility of American Power and the Global South's Perspective

• The speakers acknowledge that the credibility of American power is inextricably linked to the credibility of NATO's power.
• However, concerns are raised about the selective application of international law by Western powers, fueling perceptions of double standards in the "Global South."
• The contrast between the condemnation of Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the tacit acceptance of the strikes on Iran highlights this perceived hypocrisy.
• Germany's lack of independent intelligence capabilities further complicates its ability to assess the legitimacy of the US and Israeli claims regarding the Iranian nuclear threat.

6. Echoes of the Past: The Iraq War and Transatlantic Divergence

• The current situation evokes parallels with the lead-up to the 2003 Iraq War, where the US presented questionable intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction.
• Unlike in 2003, when Germany opposed the Iraq War, it is now largely aligning with the US on the Iran issue.
• The absence of a perceived active threat from Putin at the time allowed Germany to take a more independent stance in 2003.
• Terry Schultz recalls the intense pressure exerted by the Bush administration on European allies to support the Iraq War, including threats of trade sanctions.

7. The Looming Global Force Posture Review and its Implications

• Europe is concerned about the upcoming global force posture review by the Pentagon, fearing a potential withdrawal of US troops from the continent.
• While a pullback of troops surged to Europe after Russia's invasion of Ukraine might be understandable, a larger-scale reduction would raise serious concerns.
• The focus is not only on troops stationed in Europe but also on the readiness and assignment of US-based forces designated as follow-on forces in case of a Russian attack.
• Germany is also awaiting clarity on the US commitment to stationing medium-range missiles in Germany by 2026, a pledge made by the previous German government.

8. Berlin's Strategy: Navigating the Transatlantic Tightrope

• Germany's strategy involves maintaining close ties with the US, even if it requires a degree of "cowtowing."
• Despite having significant financial resources for defense, Germany recognizes its dependence on US security guarantees and infrastructure support.
• Germany needs to demonstrate concrete action, such as improving its infrastructure and addressing personnel shortages in its armed forces, to convince the US of its commitment.
• The potential for mandatory conscription is being considered as a way to address the personnel shortfall.

9. Bones of Contention: Tariffs, Russia, and the Far Right

• Several issues remain where Europe and the US are at odds, including tariffs, the approach to Russia, and concerns about the far right.
• Chancellor Scholz has publicly expressed his opposition to tariffs and advocated for a tougher stance on Russia, but his influence on these issues is limited.
• The potential for a digital tax on American tech companies could also create friction.
• Trump's transactional approach could easily link trade issues with defense spending, potentially targeting countries that fail to meet the 5% GDP target.

10. A Transactional Paradigm and the Erosion of Values

• The transatlantic relationship is increasingly characterized by a transactional paradigm, where cooperation is contingent on specific actions and commitments.
• This represents a departure from the traditional emphasis on shared values and collective security.
• Terry Schultz expresses concern about the lack of pushback against this transactional approach, attributing it to fear of reprisal from the Trump administration.
• However, Trump's recent expression of understanding and appreciation for European commitment to their own countries offers a glimmer of hope for a more constructive relationship.

11. The Paradox of Strength: A More Independent Europe?

• The increased defense spending driven by Trump's pressure could paradoxically lead to a more independent and capable Europe.
• A stronger Europe would be better positioned to stand on its own two feet and potentially say no to future US demands.
• European countries are also exploring joint procurement initiatives to enhance their defense capabilities and reduce reliance on the US.

12. Final Thoughts: Blackmail or Necessary Action?

• The speakers debate whether Trump's approach constitutes blackmail or a necessary catalyst for European action.
• Under pressure, European leaders are making decisions that were previously unthinkable, such as increasing defense spending and pursuing greater integration.
• Trump's actions are ironically helping to create the less dependency that many European leaders have long advocated for.
• The question remains whether European leaders can maintain public support for increased defense spending and potential cuts to social programs.

Conclusion:

The Berlin Briefing paints a complex picture of European security in the age of Trump. While Trump's pressure has spurred significant changes in European defense policy, it has also raised concerns about the erosion of values, the selective application of international law, and the long-term implications for the transatlantic relationship. The increased defense spending could ultimately lead to a more independent and capable Europe, but the path forward is fraught with challenges and uncertainties.