Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1697818390-scaled

New survey of European public opinion signals trouble for transatlantic alliance

Supporters of a strong U.S.-European relationship should be mindful of the problems with this alliance beyond Trump, which have become more apparent in the context of the global pandemic.

Analysis | Washington Politics

Amid the ongoing global crisis caused by COVID-19, a new report from the European Council on Foreign Relations has troubling implications for the much-vaunted transatlantic alliance.

The report, released June 29, shows that the present crisis has brought European trust in the United States to an all-time low. In several European countries, including Denmark, Portugal, and Germany, two-thirds or more of respondents said that their views of the U.S. had worsened during the pandemic; in Germany, 65 percent, in Portugal, 70 percent, and in Denmark, 71 percent. Even in Poland, a country generally more sympathetic to the U.S. under Donald Trump, 38 percent said their view had worsened, while only 13 percent said it had improved.

Similarly, in no country did the percentage of respondents who said the U.S. had been their “greatest ally” during the crisis exceed the mid-single digits. In Germany, France, Spain, and Sweden, it was a dismal 1 percent, in Poland, 4 percent, and in Italy — which gave the U.S. its highest marks — 6 percent.

This data caps off several years of decline in European — and particularly Western European — perceptions of the United States in the Trump era. While the survey does not break down respondents’ reasoning for their change of views, the Trump administration’s abysmal handling of coronavirus both at home and abroad surely accounts for much of this shift.

Within the United States, the Trump administration has utterly failed to develop or implement a strategy for containing the pandemic on a national level. It was slow to support lockdowns, and slow to marshal resources for producing more medical equipment and PPE, while the president himself has proffered dangerous misinformation about the disease and has, through muddled messaging, actively discouraged mask-wearing and social distancing.

Internationally, the Trump administration has adopted a downright thuggish “every man for himself” approach to the pandemic. The administration has put more effort into casting blame on China and the World Health Organization — even attempting to pull funding from the latter — than to coordinating an international response to the pandemic. Even more egregiously, the Trump administration has been accused of seizing or diverting shipments of masks and other medical equipment bound for countries including Germany and several Caribbean nations.

It is no surprise, then, that such a vanishingly small number of Europeans see the United States as an ally in the fight against COVID-19.

It is worth noting that predictions that the pandemic would herald a new China-led world order appear premature, at least from a European standpoint, as the ECFR’s report shows that European perceptions of China have also worsened significantly during this crisis — even in Italy, where 25 percent say that China has been a key ally in addressing the pandemic.

Optimistic transatlanticists may take comfort in knowing that European views of the United States have plunged severely before — notably in the final years of the George W. Bush administration, due the Iraq war and Great Recession — only to recover under a new administration. But it’s worth asking whether Europeans will be so forgiving in the future. After at least two decades of such flagrant conduct abroad, Europeans may be less willing to separate their views of U.S. presidents from their views of the country itself.

In light of this, supporters of a strong U.S.-European relationship should be mindful of the problems with this alliance beyond Trump, which have become more apparent in the context of the global pandemic.

Despite Trump’s rhetoric, his administration has kept the structure of the transatlantic military alliance basically intact. Even with its latest controversial move to pull U.S. troops from Germany, the administration has chosen to relocate them to Poland rather than withdraw them entirely. Yet the Coronavirus pandemic has revealed the essential outdatedness of this structure in a world in which the existential threats the United States and Europe hold in common are largely non-military in nature — most notably, climate change and pandemic disease.

In the face of threats like these, the Cold War military alliance has served little purpose. It need not be scrapped entirely, but the U.S.-European relationship at a minimum should be restructured to center mutual cooperation against pandemics, climate change, and their secondary effects. The ECFR’s report suggests that such a change would be welcomed by Europeans, who during this crisis have become more supportive of both strengthening European institutions and of international efforts to address climate change.

The Trump administration and the COVID-19 pandemic have exposed deep fissures in the transatlantic alliance. It is probable that, should Trump lose the presidential election this fall, his likely successor Joe Biden will bring a rebound in global attitudes toward the U.S. simply by not being Trump. But his administration should not see this as an invite to return to the status quo. Deeper problems in the U.S.-European relationship, and in U.S. foreign policy more broadly, must be addressed, or we may well find ourselves in the same place a decade from now.

Thanks to our readers and supporters, Responsible Statecraft has had a tremendous year. A complete website overhaul made possible in part by generous contributions to RS, along with amazing writing by staff and outside contributors, has helped to increase our monthly page views by 133%! In continuing to provide independent and sharp analysis on the major conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, as well as the tumult of Washington politics, RS has become a go-to for readers looking for alternatives and change in the foreign policy conversation. 

 

We hope you will consider a tax-exempt donation to RS for your end-of-the-year giving, as we plan for new ways to expand our coverage and reach in 2025. Please enjoy your holidays, and here is to a dynamic year ahead!

A member of the health staff team loading a coronavirus patient in an ambulance in Madrid, Spain, April 7, 2020 (Chirag Nagpal / Shutterstock.com)
Analysis | Washington Politics
Neville Chamberlain
Top image credit: Everett Collection via shutterstock.com

It's time to retire the Munich analogy

Global Crises

Contemporary neoconservatism is, in its guiding precepts and policy manifestations, a profoundly ahistorical ideology. It is a millenarian project that not just eschews but explicitly rejects much of the inheritance of pre-1991 American statecraft and many generations of accumulated civilizational wisdom from Thucydides to Kissinger in its bid to remake the world.

It stands as one of the enduring ironies of the post-Cold War era that this revolutionary and decidedly presentist creed has to shore up its legitimacy by continually resorting to that venerable fixture of World War II historicism, the 1938 Munich analogy. The premise is simple, and, for that reason, widely resonant: British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, in his “lust for peace,” made war inevitable by enabling Adolf Hitler’s irredentist ambitions until they could no longer be contained by any means short of direct confrontation between the great powers.

keep readingShow less
ukraine war

Diplomacy Watch: Will Assad’s fall prolong conflict in Ukraine?

QiOSK

Vladimir Putin has been humiliated in Syria and now he has to make up for it in Ukraine.

That’s what pro-war Russian commentators are advising the president to do in response to the sudden collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s regime, according to the New York Times this week. That sentiment has potential to derail any momentum toward negotiating an end to the war that had been gaining at least some semblance of steam over the past weeks and months.

keep readingShow less
Romania's election canceled amid claims of Russian interference
Top photo credit: Candidate for the presidency of Romania, Calin Georgescu, and his wife, Cristela, arrive at a polling station for parliamentary elections, Dec. 1, 2024 in Mogosoaia, Romania. Georgescu one the first round in the Nov. 24 presidential elections but those elections results have been canceled (Shutterstock/LCV)

Romania's election canceled amid claims of Russian interference

QiOSK

The Romanian Constitutional Court’s unprecedented decision to annul the first round results in the country’s Nov. 24 presidential election and restart the contest from scratch raises somber questions about Romanian democracy at a time when the European Union is being swept by populist, eurosceptic waves.

The court, citing declassified intelligence reports, ruled that candidate Călin Georgescu unlawfully benefitted from a foreign-backed social media campaign that propelled him from an obscure outsider to the frontrunner by a comfortable margin. Romanian intelligence has identified the foreign backer as Russia. Authorities claim that Georgescu’s popularity was artificially inflated by tens of thousands of TikTok accounts that promoted his candidacy in violation of Romanian election laws.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.