Not too long ago, President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was rallying European partners to stand against the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This aligns with a sentiment echoed by top American diplomat R. Nicholas Burns, who highlighted a strategy for the United States to thrive in global power dynamics: “Treat your allies well.”

In stark contrast, President Trump has often expressed a different perspective. For years, he has shown antagonism towards Europe, perceiving alliances as competitors and burdens. His recent decision to impose controversial tariffs on American allies, notably Ukraine—while sparing Russia and North Korea—reveals his inclination to undermine a trans-Atlantic partnership that has helped maintain European peace for 80 years.

Trump’s insistence that NATO allies contribute up to 5 percent of their gross domestic product for military expenditures, along with his past ambitions for territorial claims on Denmark, a NATO member, underscores the long-lasting damage to U.S.-European relations that may never be completely mended.

“These tariffs reinforce a belief in Europe that the U.S. under Donald Trump is not just an inconsistent partner but one that cannot be relied upon at all,” stated Guntram Wolff, an economist and previous director at the German Council on Foreign Relations. “This marks a significant pivot from 80 years of postwar history, where the trans-Atlantic alliance was foundational to the Western world and the global multilateral framework.”

Although Brussels will strive to maintain essential relationships, Wolff noted, “Europe cannot single-handedly sustain the global system.”

Trump’s attempts to reshape the global landscape may inadvertently aid Russia, NATO’s primary adversary, by potentially weakening its opposition in Europe, despite falling oil prices impacting Russia as well.

“It appears there’s chaos amid the disorder,” remarked Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission, on Thursday. “There’s no clear direction through the complexities and turmoil being created as all U.S. trading partners are affected,” while “the most vulnerable citizens are suffering.”

Europeans increasingly recognize that Trump, unrestrained and further bolstered by advisors aligned with his ideology in his second term, aims to distance the U.S. from Europe. However, “the intensity, speed, aggression, and imperialistic tendencies of this administration have taken many by surprise,” commented Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations.

Numerous European governments believed they could manage Trump’s demands through negotiations, such as purchasing more military equipment and liquefied natural gas—two key American exports—and enhancing burden-sharing. Recent developments illustrate the shortcomings of this approach, including the inconsistent enforcement of tariffs on Britain and the European Union and demands for Ukrainian minerals in exchange for military support over the years.

“Europe’s challenge is navigating a predatory America willing to exploit the vulnerabilities of its allies, whether through mineral deals in Ukraine or attempts to annex Greenland, or the open strategy of Trump to create divisions between Britain and the EU with varying trade agreements,” Leonard stated.

Currently, the European Union remains intact, mainly because Trump imposed the same 20 percent tariffs on all 27 member countries, including nations like Hungary, Slovakia, and Italy that have closer ideological ties. However, Washington might opt to apply differentiated tariffs on specific sectors to exert pressure on certain countries, such as Denmark, concerning Greenland.

There’s a general belief that the tariffs may lead to negotiations, as Trump’s son Eric suggested in a message on X. “I wouldn’t want to be the last country to try negotiating a trade deal with @realDonaldTrump,” he wrote. “The first to negotiate will succeed—the last will definitely lose.”

Sophia Besch, a German analyst at the Carnegie Endowment in Washington, observes two distinct messages coming from the Trump administration. “It’s uncertain if this is merely an initial offer for negotiations or if they genuinely seek to reshape the world with no interest in mending it,” she explained. “Different factions around Trump seem to be pursuing varying objectives.”

The issues concerning tariffs and security are separate yet interconnected, according to Besch and others, reflecting Trump’s readiness to exploit American power indiscriminately and carelessly against allies, their economies, and the most vulnerable populations who are likely to bear the brunt of rising inflation and higher consumer taxes.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio attempted to provide some reassurance in Brussels this past week during a NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, blending soothing comments with warnings. He denounced the “hysteria and exaggeration” from the media, asserting that Trump supports NATO and its collective defense commitments. “President Trump has made it clear that he backs NATO,” Rubio stated. “We will continue our involvement in NATO.”

But not in the way NATO currently operates.

Rubio cautioned that Trump expects European allies to take primary responsibility for their security and that of Ukraine as America shifts its focus toward Asia. “He opposes a NATO that is lacking the capabilities needed to meet the treaty obligations each member must satisfy.”

Nonetheless, the economic ramifications of the tariffs, which are anticipated to lead to inflation and slower economic growth, will complicate European allies’ efforts to enhance military spending to the NATO-recommended goal of 3.5 percent of GDP in July, let alone the 5 percent that Trump is advocating.

For Germany, a wealthy nation, the ramifications will be significant, with Finance Minister Jörg Kukies predicting a 15 percent drop in German exports to the U.S. He mentioned that Germany would still aim to negotiate better terms with Washington, while Brussels plans to respond forcefully, yet cautiously, on behalf of the bloc. Still, the German Economic Institute estimates that the costs of these tariffs for Germany could reach around 200 billion euros ($218 billion) over the next four years.

Europeans are now on the lookout for alternative markets and additional free-trade agreements, similar to those with Canada and Mexico, stated Maggie Switek, an economist and research director at the Milken Institute. “There is still potential for collaboration with the U.S. and American companies as we navigate this new reality and American approach,” she noted.

However, for Moscow, which has limited unsanctioned trade with the U.S., the tariff hit on American allies presents another advantage. Dmitri Medvedev, former President of Russia, excitedly commented on X about the damage inflicted.

Quoting an old Chinese proverb, he remarked that Russia would “sit by the river, waiting for the body of the enemy to float by. The decaying corpse of the EU economy.”