Donald Trump will be inaugurated as the 47th President of the United States, marking the beginning of a second term that promises to be as contentious as his first. Across Europe, policymakers and analysts are bracing for potential shifts in U.S. foreign policy, particularly concerning NATO, European security, and the war in Ukraine.
Trump’s past rhetoric and campaign promises have reignited concerns about the durability of America’s commitment to its European allies and the global order. His approach may herald significant changes, including a minimized U.S. role in NATO, troop withdrawals from Europe, and a possible push for a peace settlement in Ukraine that involves territorial concessions and neutrality.
As European leaders await the formation of Trump’s foreign policy cabinet, the stakes are high. Observers agree that the selection of key advisors will provide critical insights into the administration’s likely trajectory. Personnel decisions, they argue, will be pivotal, reflecting Trump’s intentions and the potential internal battles among competing factions within the Republican foreign policy spectrum.
Foreign Policy Tribes: Primacists, Prioritisers, and Restrainers
Understanding the ideological divisions within the Republican Party is essential to interpreting Trump’s cabinet picks. Broadly, three foreign policy “tribes” influence the GOP:
- Primacists: The traditional foreign policy elite, who advocate for continued U.S. global leadership, including robust support for NATO and Ukraine. They view America’s global dominance as essential to national security and strategic interests.
- Prioritisers: A growing faction that seeks to shift U.S. focus to the Indo-Pacific, citing the rising threat of China. Prioritisers argue for reallocating resources from Europe and other regions to address this strategic priority.
- Restrainers: Advocates for scaling back U.S. military involvement abroad to focus on domestic challenges, including securing the southern border and reducing overseas commitments. Restrainers want Europe to assume primary responsibility for its own defense.
Trump has historically criticized primacists, blaming them for undermining his first-term agenda. In his view, the “deep state,” composed of globalists and interventionists, thwarted his attempts to recalibrate U.S. foreign policy. This sentiment has shaped his approach to forming a second-term cabinet, with a notable exclusion of prominent primacists like Mike Pompeo and Nikki Haley.
Appointments
Trump’s initial cabinet appointments suggest a dominance of prioritisers and restrainers, signaling a possible pivot in U.S. foreign policy. However, his choices also reflect a pragmatic balance, incorporating individuals with overlapping but distinct views.
Michael Waltz – National Security Advisor
Michael Waltz, a former advisor in the George W. Bush administration and a staunch China hawk, has been tapped as National Security Advisor. Waltz, once aligned with primacist ideals, has evolved into a prioritiser. He has criticized the open-ended U.S. support for Ukraine, advocating for European nations—especially France, Germany, and the UK—to shoulder greater responsibility. Waltz has also voiced opposition to Ukraine’s NATO membership, emphasizing the need for burden-sharing in European security.
Marco Rubio – Secretary of State
Senator Marco Rubio, another prominent China hawk, reflects a similar shift from primacism to prioritization. Rubio has increasingly argued for recalibrating U.S. foreign policy to counter China, describing the competition with Beijing as America’s most pressing challenge. While supportive of European allies, Rubio has called for trade-offs that would see the U.S. reduce its focus on Russia and Europe in favor of the Indo-Pacific.
Elise Stefanik – Ambassador to the UN
Elise Stefanik’s appointment as UN Ambassador highlights Trump’s preference for loyalists. Stefanik, who once displayed primacist leanings by defending NATO and opposing peace talks with the Taliban, has become a staunch supporter of Trump’s agenda. Her role will likely resemble that of Nikki Haley in Trump’s first term, focusing on advocating for Israel and defending the administration’s skepticism toward international institutions.
Ukraine and NATO
The composition of Trump’s cabinet suggests that the prioritisers and restrainers will drive policy on Ukraine. Key objectives include:
- Opposing Ukraine’s NATO Membership: Trump’s administration appears set to block Ukraine’s bid for NATO membership, aligning with Waltz and Rubio’s stance that Ukraine’s defense should be Europe’s responsibility.
- Brokered Peace Deal: A Trump-led initiative could pressure Ukraine to accept territorial concessions to Russia and adopt a position of military neutrality. Such a deal would likely face resistance from European allies but reflects the administration’s desire to end the conflict quickly and pivot to other priorities.
- Increased European Responsibility: The administration is expected to push European nations to provide security guarantees for Ukraine, reducing U.S. involvement in the region.
These positions have sparked concerns among NATO members, particularly in Eastern Europe, where fears of Russian aggression remain high. Trump’s approach could strain transatlantic relations, testing the alliance’s cohesion.
Middle East Policy
While Trump’s second-term agenda on Europe appears relatively clear, his approach to the Middle East is less predictable. Diverging views among key cabinet members could lead to internal conflicts:
- Pro-Israel Primacism: Waltz and Rubio maintain strong primacist instincts regarding Israel and Iran. They are likely to support Israeli military actions against Iran, viewing Tehran as a major threat to regional stability.
- Restraint from Escalation: Incoming Vice President JD Vance represents a restrainer perspective, opposing military strikes on Iran and advocating for a reduced U.S. footprint in the region. This stance could clash with Waltz and Rubio’s more hawkish views.
These tensions highlight the challenges of aligning Trump’s foreign policy with the competing priorities within his administration.
Foreign Policy Wildcards
Trump’s administration is also likely to feature significant input from influential figures outside traditional foreign policy circles, including Elon Musk, Jared Kushner, and Richard Grenell. Their business interests and personal agendas could shape policy in unexpected ways:
- China: Musk’s extensive business ties to China may conflict with the hardline stance of prioritisers like Waltz and Rubio. Managing this tension will be a key challenge for the administration.
- Middle East: Kushner’s deep involvement in the region, particularly through the Abraham Accords, may push for policies that differ from the restrainers’ preference for disengagement.
- Western Balkans: Grenell’s role in regional diplomacy during Trump’s first term suggests he could exert significant influence on U.S. policy in the Balkans, an area of less focus for prioritisers and restrainers.
Europe Preparing for the Unpredictable
For European leaders, Trump’s return to the White House represents a potential turning point in transatlantic relations. His unpredictable nature and the ideological diversity within his cabinet add layers of complexity to forecasting U.S. policy.
- Strengthening European Defense: Many European nations are likely to accelerate efforts to build their own defense capabilities, anticipating a reduced U.S. role in NATO.
- Diplomatic Engagement: European capitals may seek closer ties with Waltz and Rubio, whose prioritiser outlook could provide opportunities for collaboration on burden-sharing and security guarantees.
- Contingency Planning: Recognizing Trump’s erratic decision-making, European governments must prepare for sudden shifts in U.S. policy, including potential troop withdrawals or demands for increased defense spending.
New Chapter in U.S.-Europe Relations
As Trump’s second term begins, the world is watching to see how his administration navigates the complex web of competing priorities and personalities. For Europe, the stakes could not be higher. The contours of U.S. foreign policy under Trump 2.0 will likely be shaped by the interplay of prioritisers, restrainers, and the president’s own unpredictable instincts. While his first term was marked by controversy and division, his second term has the potential to reshape America’s role on the global stage and redefine its relationship with its European allies.
