The end of transatlanticism

Most partnerships — even those that once stood as beacons of harmony and unity to those around them — ultimately find an unceremonious end. As priorities change and plans for the future diverge, parting ways is often the only way forward. The most recent example of a partnership following this familiar pattern: the transatlantic relationship.

Since the end of World War II, the United States and Europe have tightly cooperated in matters of security. Acutely concerned about the future of the continent, Washington became deeply involved in European affairs, seeking to ensure its pro-Western orientation and defend it against the threat of Soviet expansion. The Europeans, for their part, welcomed U.S. patronage with open arms. It helped maintain peace among them and created a fertile environment for economic, political, and cultural recovery. Out of the ashes of the deadliest conflict in world history thus grew an unusually close bond. On both sides of the Atlantic, the transatlantic relationship became a cornerstone of the foreign policy agenda and, for decades, leader after leader remained deeply, and publicly, committed to it.

For the first time in postwar history, however, things are changing: the United States and Europe are ready to rethink the nature of their relationship.

Senior officials in the Trump administration have made no secret of the fact that their military priorities lie elsewhere, especially in East Asia. Consequently, JD Vance, Pete Hegseth, and others have repeatedly emphasised the need for Europe to take care of its own defense. European leaders, meanwhile, have been much more receptive to their new geopolitical reality than many anticipated. In a drastic break with decades-long tradition, even German chancellor Friedrich Merz spoke of the need to “achieve independence” from the United States shortly after his election earlier this year.

These changes in how the two sides conceive of their relationship are not limited to national elites. A new, large-scale public opinion survey —commissioned by the Institute for Global Affairs (IGA) at Eurasia Group and fielded in the United States, Britain, France, and Germany —  confirms that the general public’s attitude towards the transatlantic relationship has shifted decisively as well. 

For one, there is now widespread doubt about the U.S. commitment to Europe. Only 28 per cent of European respondents see the United States as at least a “somewhat reliable” guarantor of European security over the next decade. This represents a hefty 25 percentage point drop compared to last year. Germany is the most skeptical of America’s commitment: more than 75 per cent of German respondents regard the United States as somewhat (49 per cent) or very (27 per cent) unreliable.

Not coincidentally, the European public is increasingly supportive of higher defense spending and the idea that Europe should pursue greater independence from the United States in conducting its foreign policy. In each of the three European countries surveyed, less than 10 per cent believe that the United States should be primarily responsible for Europe’s defense. Approximately one-quarter of respondents even go as far as declaring that Europe should manage its own defence and seek a more neutral relationship with the United States. Perhaps most strikingly, the vast majority of respondents in Britain, France, and Germany (75 per cent) think Europe should pursue its own China policy independent from the United States.

Public opinion in the United States similarly reflects a notable cooling towards the transatlantic partnership. When IGA fielded a similar survey in 2024, one in five Americans thought Europe’s defense was the United States’ responsibility. One year later, only twelve percent thought so. There is also increasing doubt among U.S. respondents about the value of NATO: 51 per cent of Republicans say the United States does not benefit at all, or not much, from NATO membership. Finally, there is growing recognition that the U.S. involvement in Europe comes with important trade-offs. Almost half of Americans agree that the United States should limit expenditures towards Ukraine and instead redirect its attention to priorities at home.

A break-up was long overdue: each side has every reason to move on

Unsurprisingly, many establishment politicians, think-tankers, and public intellectuals lament these developments and now fervently plead for a rekindling of the transatlantic relationship. Yet, a closer look at the costs and benefits reveals that a break-up was long overdue: each side has every reason to move on.

For the United States, maintaining an extensive military commitment on the continent lacks a convincing geopolitical rationale. No adversary — no, not even Russia — could plausibly achieve what U.S. troops initially came to prevent, namely, continental domination by a single power. At the same time, the U.S. presence comes at a steep price tag: it locks down U.S. resources that are needed to deal with the very real threat of a rising China in East Asia; and it raises the risks of the United States being dragged into a continental conflict.

For Europe, the transatlantic relationship has long stood in the way of seizing greater strategic autonomy. Although usually framed as a partnership between equals, the stark power imbalance between Europe and the United States has meant that the former frequently had to subordinate its own interests to those of the latter. Yet, on a host of issues — including the Russo-Ukrainian War and international trade policy — the two sides’ priorities are starting to significantly diverge. Europe stands to benefit tremendously from pursuing an independent foreign policy that no longer sacrifices its own interests in the pursuit of those that are called “Western” or “transatlantic” but are, at their heart, American.

After decades of tight cooperation, it is therefore unsurprising that the United States and Europe are finally ready to distance themselves from each other and pursue separate paths. Both sides can appreciate what they once shared while accepting that the time has come to move on.