As tensions ripple across the Atlantic once again, a question increasingly debated in European capitals is no longer whispered but openly discussed: should Europe simply wait for Donald Trump to leave office to repair relations with the United States? Equally important—and far less examined—is whether Americans themselves believe the same, viewing current frictions as temporary turbulence rather than a lasting rupture.
The debate gained renewed urgency at the Munich Security Conference, where US Secretary of State Marco Rubio sought to reassure anxious European allies, even as the shadow of Donald Trump loomed large over every conversation.
Europe’s Dilemma: Endure or Adapt?
For many European policymakers, the Trump era has been marked by strategic whiplash:
-
Tariffs on allies
-
Open scepticism of NATO
-
Territorial rhetoric, including repeated references to Greenland
-
A confrontational tone that frames Europe as culturally and politically “declining”
While Rubio’s speech in Munich was interpreted as an attempt to calm nerves, it did not erase deeper concerns. His reassurance—that US-European ties may fray but will not break—felt to some like damage control rather than a policy reset.
This has led to a growing school of thought in Europe: why confront Washington head-on when time itself may resolve the problem? The argument suggests that Trump is temporary, and that enduring a few turbulent years may be preferable to structural confrontation with the US.
But this strategy carries risks.
Waiting assumes that Trump is an aberration rather than a symptom. Yet his return to power—backed by a significant plurality of American voters—suggests something more structural within US politics.
“Trump Is Temporary”: The American Reassurance Campaign
At Munich, it was not just Rubio attempting to steady the transatlantic ship. A parade of American governors, senators, and lawmakers—many with national ambitions—made a deliberate effort to tell Europe one thing: this too shall pass.
California Governor Gavin Newsom put it bluntly: Trump, he said, would be gone in three years. Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen echoed this sentiment, stressing that Europe remains indispensable to American interests.
Even Republican Senator Thom Tillis urged European leaders not to confuse campaign rhetoric with long-term US strategy, cautioning against overreacting to what he called the “rhetoric of American politics.”
The underlying message from both parties was clear: Europe should not mistake Trump for America.
But Is Trump Really an Exception—or the New Normal?
Here lies Europe’s real strategic challenge.
Trump’s “America First” doctrine did not emerge in a vacuum. It reflects deeper trends within US society:
-
Growing scepticism toward globalization
-
Fatigue with foreign military commitments
-
Economic nationalism driven by inequality
-
Cultural polarization amplified by election cycles
At Munich, Senator Mark Warner warned that Trump’s domestic agenda—particularly his rhetoric on elections and voting rights—posed unprecedented risks to American democracy itself. His warning underscored a sobering reality for Europe: the US is not merely changing its foreign policy; it is grappling with an internal democratic stress test.
From a European perspective, waiting for Trump to leave does not address the possibility that “Trumpism” outlasts Trump.
Are Americans Thinking the Same Way as Europe?
Interestingly, many Americans—especially Democrats and moderate Republicans—appear to share Europe’s hope that this moment is transitional.
Lawmakers such as Elissa Slotkin and Mark Kelly described the United States as going through something “profound” but ultimately survivable.
Meanwhile, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez linked rising authoritarianism globally to economic inequality at home—arguing that unless democracies deliver tangible benefits to working people, voters will continue to flirt with strongman politics.
Her remarks resonated with a European audience increasingly worried that the US debate over democracy, inequality, and identity politics is no longer peripheral—it shapes Washington’s view of the world.
Europe’s Strategic Crossroads: Waiting vs. Decoupling
The central question for Europe is not whether Trump will leave—but what Europe does while he remains.
Three broad strategies are emerging:
Strategic Patience
Some European leaders advocate riding out the storm, maintaining institutional ties, and avoiding escalation until a more predictable US administration returns.
Risk: This approach may leave Europe strategically vulnerable if US policy shifts become permanent.
Strategic Autonomy
France and others argue that Trump’s unpredictability proves Europe must reduce dependence on Washington—militarily, economically, and technologically.
Risk: Strategic autonomy without American backing may strain European unity and budgets.
Conditional Engagement
Engage the US pragmatically where interests align, while quietly hedging against future shocks through diversified alliances.
Risk: This requires political coordination Europe has often struggled to achieve.
Greenland, Tariffs, and the New Atlantic Reality
Trump’s renewed rhetoric about Greenland—combined with tariff threats and a refocus on the Western Hemisphere—has become symbolic in Europe of a deeper shift: America is redefining its global priorities without consulting allies.
From Europe’s standpoint, this is less about Trump personally and more about the erosion of shared assumptions that once underpinned the transatlantic alliance.
Rubio’s efforts in Munich may have softened the tone, but they did not fully resolve the underlying fear: what if reassurance today gives way to rupture tomorrow?
Waiting Is Not a Strategy
So, should Europe wait for Trump to leave? Perhaps—but only as a short-term tactic, not a long-term plan.
And are Americans thinking the same thing? Many are. But even among Trump’s critics, there is growing recognition that US politics has entered a new phase—one in which volatility may be the rule rather than the exception.
For Europe, the lesson from Munich is clear:
Waiting for personalities to change is not enough. The transatlantic relationship must be rebuilt on resilience, not nostalgia.
Trump may be temporary.
But the forces reshaping Europe–US relations are not.
