// Gage Skidmore; Firdaus Omar / Flickr
Washington wants regulatory carte blanche for technology giants such as Silicon Valley and for investment in Russia. The European Union is an obstacle — and the far right is an ally.
In the face of political and economic attacks from the US president, Donald TrumpOver the past year, European leaders have responded with flattery, royal receptions and promises to buy more weapons and more North American natural gas.
But while many thought they had “discovered the formula” for dealing with Trump, US attacks on Europe have only multiplied over time, says Maja Rugesenior international policy researcher at the European Council on Foreign Relations, in an opinion article in .
Last month, Trump presented a peace proposal for the Russia-Ukraine war, presented without consulting Kiev. Now, the US National Security Strategy states that Europe is in “economic decline” and experiencing “civilizational eradication”, and the European Union.
It’s not about disconnected impulses, he says Maja Ruge. Together, they converge on a strategy designed to achieve the geoeconomic ambitions from the Trump administration: total regulatory freedom for technology of Silicon Valley in Europe and a trade reconfiguration with Russiaat the expense of Ukrainian and European sovereignty.
Both the Trump administration’s desire to open Russia to US investment and the desire to keep Europe open to US technology require the same thing: a structural weakening of the European Union. And in this effort, the European far-right parties are not just ideological allies — they are also a centerpiece of the business plan.
European observers have been alarmed by many aspects of Trump’s proposal to Russia and Ukraine. But there is a new detail that should worry even more. The recently reported that Trump’s negotiators no longer want to use frozen Russian assets to rebuild Ukraine.
Instead, they consider that this money could serve as capital investment for a Russia’s broader economic reintegration. Specifically, this would allow North American companies to acquire assets or enter into partnerships, using funds held in Europe.
According to the WSJ, the plan was hatched in Miami, in a meeting between Trump’s negotiating team and Russian representatives, as part of a discussion on how todestroy the Russian economy, valued at 2 billion dollars (around 1.7 billion euros), “back to active”.
In this context, Trump’s agenda looks less like a diplomatic framework for peace and more a business restructuring plan: reactivate the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, relocate Exxon to the Sakhalin gas project, acquire struggling Russian energy companies such as Lukoil, and develop projects in the Arctic linked to gas and rare earths.
The North American expectation is that a normalization with Russia create commercial space for US companies gain first-mover advantage in sectors from which Europeans were excluded.
But these projects would be much more profitable if Europe opened its markets to Russia again, especially in the field of Russian energy. This means that sanctions would have to be easedlicensing would have to be made more flexible and political resistance within the EU would have to collapse.
In short, Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine is a political instrument to unlock a set of highly profitable businesses. And European governments and EU institutions stand in their way.
How can Europe respond to this attack? The central problem is that, while Russia continues its offensive in Ukraine, European dependency of the United States on security issues gives the Trump administration considerable power to escalate pressure
The Old Continent is negotiate to extinguish a fire in your backyard, while the “firefighter” considers making a deal with the arsonistat the resume of Majda Ruge.
In these circumstances, European leaders must put together a united response and firm. This starts by clarifying what Europe expects from Washington.
A reasonable starting point is demand unwavering respect for red lines European policies on Russia and Ukraine, as well as an end to US interference in European internal politics. To reinforce this position, Europeans must also present your own peace plan to Ukraine.
European leaders cannot afford to be dividednor of being maneuvered into unilateral concessions in negotiations with the United States.
In digital policy, the European Commission has full competence and must exercise this authority assertively.
However, coordinating policy on Ukraine and Russia through formal EU structures is no longer viable, as the Hungary and Slovakia will predictably act as blockers.
At the moment, the EU controls the majority of Russian sovereign assets frozen, as well as the legal mechanisms necessary to utilize the unexpected profits that these assets generate.
The United States cannot operationalize its plan for Russia without European legal decisions and without the financial infrastructure of the continent. Europe therefore hastrue leverage in this dossier — and you have to be prepared to use it.
Furthermore, Europeans should develop a coordinated list of European assets that the United States value and do not want to lose.
Finally, Europe needs a coherent public narrative to counter North American political interference, carried out through support for far-right parties.
O main target audience for this narrative it must be, first and foremost, the Europeans themselves. Instead of engaging in a culture war with Washington or the far right, European leaders should highlight the commercial motivations behind the Trump administration’s attacks on Europe.
A Europa has room for maneuver compared to the United States, but this margin only gains meaning when it is aggregated and applied strategically.
If Europe fails to unite and respond, you will end up seeing your own assets, your own market and your own political institutions used against himselfconcludes Majda Ruge.
