topics
The first executive orders, signed by the president, Donald Trump, have been very demonstrative. For the moment, Trump's axe has fallen on two neighboring countries, Mexico and Canada, but also on China. For the time being, Europe has not been touched, but it undoubtedly will be. The Old Continent - in an ideological sense, but to a large extent also in a geopolitical sense - remains alone, abandoned.
After Trump’s first decisions, Europe – in an ideological, but to a large extent also geopolitical sense – remains alone. The question facing European states and peoples today is: what next?
Trump has arrived. With Trump came the decisions that he promptly signs. Although European politicians emphasized that they were ready for Trump’s arrival, it turned out that they were absolutely unprepared for his decisions. Trump is trying to quickly and radically change the character of the current American policy, established and implemented for three decades. The problem for the Brussels eurobureaucracy and all European politicians who support the Brussels eurobureaucracy is that this automatically leads to questions about the character of European policy. Because, hidden behind the concept of transatlantic partnership for three decades, the Brussels eurobureaucracy has also established and implemented the same principles as the American deep state. This was reflected on the ideological level, the dominance of topics about gender equality and LGBT rights being the best examples of this, but also in specific strategies that are more about geopolitics and less about ideology.
The most obvious strategic issue is related to Ukraine, or rather to the continuous attempts to contain Russia by provoking conflicts on its borders, which was a joint venture of Washington and Brussels. Hence the desperate moves of Vladimir Zelensky, who, in agreement with Great Britain and France (and, of course, the outgoing administration of Joseph Biden), tried to provoke an escalation of the armed conflict with Russia, by firing incoming and “approved” missiles at targets deep in the Russian interior. Having failed to do so, the president of Ukraine, whose term of office has long expired, wanted to radicalize by stopping the further distribution of Russian energy resources through old (Soviet) pipelines to European countries. According to his calculations, by causing an energy crisis in Europe, pressure could be exerted on the “disobedient members” of the EU – Hungary and Slovakia – in order to prevent further blockades of aid (political, economic, military) for Ukraine. Although Zelensky’s tactics are understandable (under pressure and with the debacle on the ground growing by the day, he doesn’t have much choice), it must be noted that, viewed from a broader context, they are completely stupid. Trump has arrived, and now a lot is changing on the strategic level, tactical operations can have little impact on that. Especially if they are undertaken under pressure. By the way, together with Viktor Orbán, Robert Fico warned about the disastrous policy of the EU even before Donald Trump arrived and was critical of the Brussels eurobureaucracy.
The victory of a non-systemic candidate in the first round of the presidential elections in Romania (which were later annulled by the Constitutional Court with ridiculous justifications), the electoral agony in Bulgaria (which has lasted almost three years), but also the events in Serbia and Georgia – all show that Orbán and Fico are not “isolated cases.” Eastern Europe is becoming a place of birth of resistance to the ideology and strategy of the transatlantic community. True, this resistance is still unorganized and unsystematic, but it is obvious. With his actions, Zelensky will only cause a counter-effect, create even greater resistance. Because after Trump’s first decisions, Europe – in an ideological, but to a large extent also geopolitical sense – remains alone. The question facing European states and peoples today is: what next?
Where is Europe going – the question is about the character of our European policy, our commitments and aspirations, culture and values.
The Brussels eurobureaucracy will, without a doubt, try to “take up the banner” of the neoliberal world, present itself as the sole protector of gender equality and the LGBT community in the entire world, continue with the story of containing Russia, imitate the American deep state, and, in agreement with it, try to cushion the effects of the blow that Trump is inflicting on the neoliberals. To some extent, this is logical, since the EU has invested too much in all these narratives to give up on them so easily now. However, it is very questionable how much strength the EU has for such a thing? After all, within the EU, among European peoples and societies, there has never been clear and unambiguous majority support for such ideologies and strategies. Donald Trump’s turn, ideological and strategic, regardless of the fact that it is at this moment unspoken, and in some elements confusing, is manifesting itself in Europe through the actualization of the question of what to do next and the affirmation of all those forces that until yesterday were declared anti-systemic and purposefully pushed to the margins.
Europe is facing a fierce conflict, which may remain only political, but may also develop into something much worse. At the heart of this conflict are different views on the character of the past and therefore the future of European politics. Behind these ideological disputes are also opposing views on the formation of specific strategies concerning geopolitics, energy security, international relations… On the one hand, there is the Brussels eurobureaucracy and “systemic” political groups that will explain how Europe should take up the “transatlantic banner” and defend neoliberal values on the global stage even stronger and more often. On the other hand, there are various groups of sovereigntists, traditionalists, some “orthodox” communists, and other “fighters against the deep state,” who are of the opinion that the changes taking place in the US cannot bypass Europe and that broad and comprehensive reforms of continental proportions are necessary. Already in January, in just two weeks (immediately before and after the inauguration of Donald Trump), it became clear that 2025 will be a very tense and uncertain year for European politics. With a hint that the following years will be even more tense and uncertain.
Fundamental issues are being discussed, and those who challenged neoliberal values and everything that stems from such an ideological concept are no longer marginal or without allies. On the contrary, they seem to be bursting with self-confidence and preparing for a long and widespread offensive towards Brussels. Each for their own reasons and each from their own direction. That is why the question posed in the title of this article is primarily a question of principle. That is why it concerns as much ideological commitments as strategic aspirations. That is why any tactical operations will not have any major impact on the development of events. Where is Europe going – the question is about the character of our European policy, our commitments and aspirations, culture and values.
