“The US is a rehearsal field: political ideas that worked in America are now rooting in Europe, including in Portugal”

Interview || “Trumpism has inaugurated a new era of republican politics,” but along with it is in progress a “new right-wing cultural change” that is “very young, very masculine, very white” and from which American vice president JD Vance, “is very representative, but even his driver.” In Lisbon for a conference on “The Trumpian Shock in Europe and the World”, at the end of May, Rachel Rizzo, a researcher at Atlantic Council, sat with CNN for a conversation about the future of the alliance, nuclear dissuasion and one of the biggest challenges Europe is currently faces

Nato’s “Europeanization” was a theme he had already dedicated after the election of Donald Trump. He also said that we finally have a “Germany in a voice.” When he announced the coalition with the SPD, Friedrich Merz said the NATO may be dead soon and that Europe should find an alternative security alliance. Was, in the background, a reference to this “Europeanization” of the NATO?

I never thought Trump was going to remove the United States from NATO, above all because you don’t really need to do it. It is a political headache, creates complications in Congress, you need to spend a lot of political capital to do something like this.

In the sense that you need the support of at least two thirds of the Senate?

Yes. There were steps that were taken after Trump’s first term to prevent him from unilaterally removing the US from NATO. There, right? The problem is that, in fact, it is not necessary to remove the United States from NATO to undermine the alliance. You can do this through rhetoric, you can do this questioning Article 5, you can do this by saying that we will not help countries that do not spend the intended amount, as Trump is doing. But, on the other hand, we also have statements and visits by high employees of Trump, as [o secretário de Estado] Marco Rubio, who at a ministerial meeting of the NATO. Therefore, this administration is not as anti-nenade as it looks like. They are negotiators.

Transactional…

Yes, Trump likes to be with the laurels of Europe to have spent the necessary amount in defense and Europe has increased his defense expense. If he wants to be laurelized, that’s fine, especially if it makes him more committed to defending Europe and defending the NATO. So no, I do not think this is the death of the born. I do not think that the born will give it to the United States. I just think that this administration has a different approach to allies and wants a reconfiguration of their relationship with certain allies in Europe, which makes people worry about what this means for the founding document of NATO.

Still, the posture of this administration, and candidate Trump during the presidential race, scared many on this side of the Atlantic, and we are now watching things that we once thought unthinkable, for example, having France to propose as a “nuclear umbrella” in Europe. What do you think about this conversation started by Emmanuel Macron?

I do not concrete so much in the nuclear aspect, I do not want Europe to be overly nuclearized. I don’t want to see European states looking for nuclear weapons. Okay, we need to have a conversation with the United Kingdom and France at the center of the issue, about the look of a European nuclear dissuasion or a nuclear umbrella, because it has always been under the United States, especially with regard to NATO’s alliance. And I don’t think this will change. I think this is a very solid part of the security relationship between the United States and Europe, and even if Trump decides to reconfigure it, I don’t think the look of the nuclear umbrella is part of this reconfiguration.

Still, it never hurts to be prepared and it is never a waste to have conversations of great importance like this. I would like to see a conference, with France and the United Kingdom in the center, in which the meaning of the French nuclear dissuasion was debated, not only to France, but to Europe itself, and the same with the United Kingdom. Perhaps if it came to a new framing for what this deterrent could be.

He drew attention to an interesting question by distinguishing between trumps and vancismo. , he says we just have to hold her up and later, in 2028, the US will have a more progressive president again. But the country may be on the route to have a president vance, the author of a speech about Europe that will be forever recorded in our memories, given this year in Munich. What can we expect? Should we prepare for even worse administration under JD Vance?

It’s very funny because Vance gave this speech and a few months later, when the Munich security conference opened a Washington office, he went-I even said ‘I never thought you were going to invite me again’-and talked about the importance of Europe. It was a deviation from what he had said in Munich. This, he wanted to take action and take the head of the Europeans. And certainly feed it.

What I said at this conference is that Trumpiso inaugurated this new age of republican politics, very centered on the American worker-something that Democrats would also say from their own party, but Republicans have now focused more on working class Americans. They focused on revitalizing the US industrial sector, bringing back jobs from Europe to the US, and then we have Trump’s discussions and statements about how the whole world is sanding America. It is this feeling that America is at the center of this global plan to Minar, right? Through the World Trade Organization, through the European Union … and he wants to enter and correct it. But at the same time, we are also watching this new right -wing cultural change in America.

More represented by vance?

Yes. It is a very young culture, very masculine, very white – and very representative. And Jd Vance is very representative of this, but even his driver, because he was able to name it. He emerged to talk about the excesses of culture, the excesses of immigration, diversity, equity, inclusion, ‘wokism’ … all these words that are in fashion and which today hear that are part of the American lexicon have started a little by Trump, but actually pushed into the republicans’ throat, especially young republicans, by JD Vance. And this is where the cultural aspect of all this comes in, because we have this whole wing of American politics that has been informed that the excesses of the Democratic Party are harming them and harm the family, that the family idea is falling apart, that religion is falling apart, and that it is the representative responsible for bringing these things back. It is difficult to see how it relates to Europe, but culture and religious aspect play a role in this.

I can give you the example of Portugal. We recently had early legislative elections, following a scandal involving our Prime Minister. And what happened was that the far-right populist has become the second largest parliamentary force, unheard of, almost never talking about the case that led us to the polls or even about the problem of corruption in general. Campaign rhetoric was much more focused on these cultural issues, immigration, family values ​​like conservatives see it, the role of men and the role of women in society…

And that is what we see happening everywhere at this time. This is not just an exclusive US issue, but I would say that the US is a kind of thermometer. We are an essay field for ideas that European political parties want to know if they work or not. We have a number of political ideas that have been tested in the US and worked and now we are seeing these same political ideas root in Europe, including in Portugal, but also in Spain, Germany, France, everywhere.

And in this context, I think we are also facing groups that will be able to create new alliances and reshape the relationship in a way that is based on values ​​very different from those of the past. Thus, if there are right -wing political parties that really gain strength in European countries, not only as part of the opposition in Parliament, second, as AFD, but being effectively able to rule in a way that defends new values, we can see the emergence of a very different transatlantic relationship.

How?

I don’t know what this relationship will look like, we may only be making intellectual games, trying to imagine what it can be, but it is never known.

When he was in Munich a few months ago to say what he said, Vance also met with German far-right leader Alice Weidel. Days of the second lap of the presidential in Poland, one to support the conservative nationalist candidate and officially [Karol Nawrocki, que, dias depois desta entrevista, ]. Are we facing a declared US agenda to change the course of Europe?

We have very slightly addressed the interference of the Trump administration here in Europe at this conference, but it is indeed to happen. There are no lines, no limits. And this is what we are learning: that the political lines with which everyone agreed, which have been drawn over the years, are being erased. The idea of ​​not intervening in foreign elections is no longer important.

Trump administration has no problem supporting a party like AFD or other European far-right parties, because they are aligned with their vision. And we should ask us real questions about what this means not only to the EU’s internal policy, but also to how the United States acts on the world scene. I have always been a critique of US primacy and the way they exercise their power. And it concerns me that the way the US exerts its power is eventually different and perhaps more insidious than in the past.

My last question is about the white book for the defense, presented by the European Commission. Is the EU going in the right direction in terms of defense and security?

Yes, in the Treaty of Lisbon there is a mutual security clause, a mutual defense clause, and therefore I would also like to see the European Union to support this clause, because when it comes to defense and mutual security, when values ​​begin to diverge, especially between the United States and Europe, what does it mean, that is the United States to come in defense of Europe? I am not concerned about Article 5 at this time, but I think Europe needs to find out what this mutual defense will be like. And this is something where I would like to see them concentrate.

But for that it takes money …

Yes. We may have these discussions about the mobilization of $ 800 billion or perhaps on joint loan contraction and the granting of loans to European countries and the creation of coalitions of interested parties who will acquire or create together. All this is positive. But it is also necessary to have political will, which comes from popular support. It is difficult to see how political leaders will be willing to spend a lot of political capital on something that is unpopular among the general population, which means we have a long way ahead. The EU is on the good way, but this will not be a short term project and it won’t be easy.

Is it a project that is just starting?

Precisely. We are just starting.