New Features and New Challenges of U.S.-Europe Relations Under Trump 2.0

D an era ofuncertainties and pulled thetransatlantic alliance down to its lowest point in history. The Trump 2.0 tsunami brewed by the 2024 presidentialelectionoftheUnitedStates has plunged the U.S.-Europe relations into more gloomy waters，ushering in a more complex and turbulent period of adjustment.

LEGACYOFTHEU.S.-EUROPERELATIONSINHERITEDFROMTHEBIDEN ADMINISTRATION

During his first term，Donald Trump adopted an oppressive， transactional policy towardsEurope and frequently“withdrewfrominternational treaties and organizations\". Such moves seriously intensified the conflictsbetweentheUnited States and Europe in areas such as security， economy，tradeandglobal governance， dragging the alliance to a historically lowest point and even entering a \"nonallies\"state.

The U.S.-Europe relations embraced a turning point after Biden tookofficeintheWhiteHousein2021. Different from Trump'sdisregard of allies and transactional approach towardstheAtlanticalliance-related affairs， Biden valued diplomacy and wasequipped with relatively mature ideason handling relationswithallies. Bidencriticized that Trump's systematic“withdrawal frominternational treaties and organizations”eroded the global economic and security institutional framework that backed the U.S. leadershipandalienateditsdemocraticalliesthat theU.S.needed the most.Hoping to“ensure America's leadership through international cooperation\"，Bidenemphasizedat the inception ofhis term that“Americais back\"and pledged to repair the relationswithallies.TheBidenadministrationreaffirmedtheUnitedStates' commitment to Article5of the North Atlantic Treaty，sought to improve economicandtraderelationswith Europe and rejoined the Paris Agreement on climate change，all of which have been well received by Europe. It is worth mentioning that some key cabinet members appointed by Biden， whowere proficient in diplomaticaffairs and developed profound relations with Europe， had frequently engaged with European dignitariesin the past fewyears，further tightening the bond between the United States and Europe.

WhiletheUkrainecrisisthatbroke out in 2O22 intensified the geopolitical crisis in Europe， it also provided an importantleverforBidentorevitalize thetransatlanticalliance.TheBiden administration played aleading role in strengtheningdeterrence ofthe North Atlantic Treaty Organization （NATO） against Russia， working with Europe to jointly impose sanctions on Russia and providing aid to Ukraine. The European Union （EU） proposed to establish the EU-U.S. Security and Defense Dialogue， strengthen concertedeffortswiththeUnitedStates onRussia-related issues，and jointlyadvanceagendasoninternationalarms controlanddisarmament.TheEU also strengthened itsrelationship with NATO.With increasing emphasis on theconsistencyandsynergyindefense planningandcapacitybuilding，the EUandNATOexperiencedatrendof \"alliance-oriented\"cooperation.

Against the backdrop of“bloc confrontation”deliberately instigated bytheUnitedStatesandsomeinthe West，boththeUnitedStatesandthe EU view China as a competitor in areas of economy， technology，and strategy and strengthen policy coordination towardsChina.TheUnitedStatesand Europe restarted the U.S.-EU Dialogue on Chinaand launched the“EU-U.S. Trade and Technology Council\"（TTC） with strong elements of competing withChina.TheU.S.-EUcoordination inChina-relatedaffairswasfurther intensifiedaftertheoutbreakoftheUkrainecrisis.In theJointDeclaration onEU-NATOCooperationreleased in 2023，they recognized that the Ukraine crisisposed “the gravest threat”to Euro-Atlantic securityin decades，1ly accusedChina'sresolutepoliciesof presenting“challenges\"thatboththe EUandNATO“needtoaddress\"，and declared that “the two sides would upgradetheirpartnershiptoanewlevel on the basis of their long-standing cooperationandfurtherstrengthen， expand and deepencooperation\".

The Biden administration adopted a relatively proactive and flexible policy towards Europe， pulling the U.S.- Europe relations out of the trough and strengthening cooperation. “Working with Europe to aid Ukraine and against Russia”as well as U.S.- Europe coordination on China-related affairshave become itsmajordiplomatic legacies. But the Biden administration's policy towards Europe also had certain negative impacts on U.S.- Europe relations. Biden largely inherited the trade protectionism from the previous administration. Negotiations helped ease the steel and aluminum tariff dispute with the United States， but failed to resolve this issue left by thepreviousadministrationonceand for all. Even worse， Biden signed into law the discriminatory and protectionist Inflation Reduction Act， which was strongly questioned and opposed by the EU.In the field of security， theBiden administration continued to shift the defense burden to Europe， demanding that Europe make greater contributions to NATO military spending. In addition， the Biden administration abruptly withdrew troops from Afghanistan without communicating with its European alliesand established the AustraliaUK-US （AUKUS） trilateral security partnership.Thesemovesshocked Europe and forced it to reflect on its relationshipwiththeUnitedStates. Such negative legacies limit the space forrepairing theU.S.-Europe relations andalsoindicatemoreuncertainties facing the U.S.-Europe relations under the Trump 2.0.

NEWFEATURESOFU.S.-EUROPE RELATIONSAFTERTRUMP'SRETURN

Amid the tsunami brought by Trump 2.0， the reinforced version of “America First”reshapes theU.S.diplomacyand“agrayrhino bursts into the U.S. foreign policy\". The U.S.-Europe relationship，whichisalreadyunder considerablepressure，showssome newfeatures.

I.PowerImbalanceExacerbates theRisk of Subordination in U.S.- Europe Relations

Thebalance of power is the fundamental factorpushing the transformationofU.S.-Europerelations.We have witnessed an increasingly evident powerimbalance betweenEuropeand the UnitedStatessincethe international financial crisisin 2oo8， in whichyear the GDP of the EU was slightly above thatof the United States.However， in2022，theGDPoftheUnitedStates reached USD 25 trillion， outweighing thecombined GDPof theEUand the UnitedKingdom，which stood at only USD 19.8 trillion. The gap in technologyand militarystrength between the UnitedStatesandEurope hasalso furtherwidened.Suchpowerimbalance upliftedtheUnitedStatestoamore dominantposition in the transatlantic alliance，which ismore obvious to see in the Ukraine crisis.Josep Borrell， the thenHigh Representativeof the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy， pointedoutthatEuropedidnottruly engageinaddressingtheUkrainecrisis. On the contrary， it began a process of subordination.

The power imbalance has equipped Trump2.0 withmore“powerleverage”inhisEuropeanpolicy，further exacerbatingtheriskofsubordination in the U.S.-Europerelations.Onthe onehand， Trump hasshrunk the U.S. interventionintheUkraine crisis，aid toUkraineand input inNATO and the EU，while continuing to pressure the EU with tariffs to gain more benefits. On the other hand，Trump's return has spurred the far-right forces in Europe， who are accelerating their pace of \"seizing power” in countries across Europe，resultinginamorefragmented landscape of political parties in Europe Some EU member states choose to establish closer relations with the Trump administration， while the Trump administration hopes to build close ties with these countries in exchange for their support for policies favorable to theUnitedStateswithintheEU.In Europe，the Trumpadministrationsees far-right forces as its true allies， calling forpolitical partiessuchas theAlternative for Germany to enter government. Onthe eveof the 2025 Munich SecurityConference，U.S.VicePresident Vance directlycalled forEurope to become a larger version of Hungary.

In short， Trump's political instinct to reshape the U.S.-Europe relations， combinedwiththepolarizationeffect incurred by Trump's return on Europe， hasled to a resurgence of the risk of subordination in the U.S.-Europe relations. Although these dynamics do not indicate the long-term development trend of the U.S.-Europe relations， they will be the main mode of interaction betweenthetwosidesintheshort term，which also indicates that Europe still facesanarduous journeyahead to trulyachieve its goal of\"strategic autonomy\".

II.U.S.-Europe Relations Dominatedby\"Transactionalism 2.0⁹

Trump has faith inmercantilism and realism，and adopts transaction and exchange as his ways of handling diplomaticissues.Blatanttransactionalism is the essence of the Trump administration's foreign policy， which remainsunchangedafteritsreturnto power.

Trumpemploys tariffsasa tool for pressure and transaction. On February 13，2025，Trump announced “recipro cal tariffs” on all countries exporting goods to the United States. Trump complainedthattheEUhadadopted multiple restrictive measuresonAmericantechcompaniesandmaintained a large trade surplus with the United States. Trump threatened the EU with tariffhikes，unless it pledged “massive”purchases of oil and gas fromtheUnitedStates.Facedwiththe threat of tariffhikes， the EU sought negotiations to alleviate the pressure. EuropeanCommissionPresidentUrsula vonderLeyenstated thaton the one hand， the EU would be prepared to en gageindifficultnegotiationswiththe UnitedStatesif necessaryandwould firmly uphold its own interests; on the otherhand，ifnegotiationsfailed，the EU would be prepared to use “all trade defensemeasures\"tocopewiththe impacts ofU.S. tariffs.

In addition to imposing extra tariffs，the Trumpadministrationalso attempts to achieve economic and dip lomatic goals by exerting pressure on security.During his first term，Donald Trump threatened onmany occasions toreduceU.S.support forNATO in order topressure Europe into increasingdefense spending.Recent years havewitnessed the inflow of military spending from Europeanalliesto theUnited States，but still-unsatisfied TrumpdemandsthatNATOmembers further raise their defense spending to 5% of their GDP Trump also wants a “thorough repositioning” of NATO， in which scenario his Europeanalliesassume the main NATO combat power whiletheUnitedStatestakesaback seat and provides support onlyin times of crisis. Trump's negative attitude towards NATO poses the risk of diluting theUnited States'security commitmentsto Europe， furtherdraggingthe transatlanticallianceintoturbulence and instability.

III.The United Statesand EuropeEntera New StageofCompetitiononChina-Related Issuesforthe Exchange of Interests

The Trump 2.0 continues the U.S. containment strategy against China andprioritizeseconomicandtechnological competition with China. To enhance its capacity to contain and suppressChina，Trumphasexerted more pressure on the EU，requesting theunion to coordinate with the UnitedStatesitseconomicandtrade policiestowardsChinaandfollowthe United States in restricting or blocking economic and technological exchangeswith China.

Under pressure from the United States， theEUisinanawkward positioninthetrilateralChina-U.S.-EU relationship.The EU'scoordination withtheUnited Stateson issuesrelatingto Chinaisevidentlydouble-sided. On the one hand， the EU iswilling to coordinatewiththeUnited Statesin formulating its Chinapolicy，because of itsown pursuit of“de-risking\"and \"reducing dependence\"on the Chinese economy， aswell as its dependence on the U.S. security guarantee in the context of the Ukraine crisis. On February 20，2025， European Commissioner for Tradeand Economic Security Maros Sefcovicand U.S. Secretary of CommerceHoward Lutnick held adiscussiononhow tojointlyaddressChina's “non-market economybehavior”and “overcapacity\". On the other hand， theEUcannotturnablind eye to the risks of fully leaning towards the U.S. on issues relating to China， as such a position can hardly exchange for the elimination of Trump's hostilityand could even inflict damage on its own interests by deteriorating relations with China.

In short， the basic position of containing and suppressing China by theU.S.will remain unchanged in Trump'ssecondterm，andtheEU's strategic perception of China will be furtherinfluenced orevenreshaped bytheU.S.TheEU'srecentfriendly gestures towards China may showits consideration of pressuringand bargainingwiththeUnitedStates.There exists the possibility of exchange of interestsintherecentU.S.-EUinteraction on issues relating to China. But the EU should also realize thatanypossible transaction-based cooperationwith the U.S.on issues relating to China will onlydeepenitsdependenceon theU.S. and damaging the interestsof China will do itself no good.

NEWCHALLENGESFACINGTHEU.S.-EUROPERELATIONS

Since the inception of the Trump 2.0，the United Statesand Europe have been witnessing widening rifts in terms of security， economy and ideology.The transatlanticpartnershipis heading towardsasplit.

I.\"PeaceEnforcement\"and\"SecurityPeace\"：TheChallengeofthe Ukraine Crisis to the U.S.-Europe Relations

Donald Trump and the American establishment obviously differ in geopolitical strategy towards Europe and policy towards Russia. Trump sought to end the Ukraine crisis since the beginning ofhis new term. On the one hand， taking the U.S.-Russia talks as leverage and a breakthrough，he attempted to gain control over the Russia-Ukraine peace talks.On February 12，2025，without coordinating with his European allies， Trump spoke with Putin on the phone and the two sides agreedto“closelycooperate”toend theUkrainecrisis.On theother hand， the Trump administration has pressured Ukraine and Europe，attempting to coerce them into accepting a ceasefire by significantly reducing and suspending the U.S.aid to Ukraine， while pushing its European allies to shoulder the responsibility of guaranteeingUkraine'ssecurityand defending against Russia. On the eve of the 2025Munich Security Conference， U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegsethsaid thatareturntoUkraine'spre-warborderswasunrealisticandthatUkraine would notbeallowedtojoinNATO. If European troops are to be deployed to Ukraine， they should not be covered bythe collective defense provisions of NATO's treaty and would not be part of aNATO mission. It is not hard to see thattheUnited Stateswantstoend theUkraine crisis by means of\"peace enforcement\"， but doesnotwant to shoulder the joint responsibility for the“Russia-Ukraine peace\"，believing itisaresponsibility for Europe to take.

The Trump administration's sharp turn in its stance on the Ukraine crisis has deeply unsettled Europe and forced the latter to respond accordingly. After the phone call between the U.S. and Russian leaders，Europe was so concerned about being excluded from theRussia-Ukraine peace talksprocess that they urgently discussed countermeasures. Then German Chancellor Olaf Scholz expressed his unwillingness to “conduct peace enforcement operations in Ukraine\". EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas condemned Trump's phone call with Putin as an act of “appeasement’and emphasized that any peace agreement regarding Ukraine must involve Europeans and Ukrainians to be effective. After the failed talk between the United States andUkraineintheWhiteHouse，leaders from multiple European countries， Ukraine and Canada held the London Summit to discuss the Ukraine crisisand European defense issues. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced a plan to support Ukraine after the summit， including continuing the flow of aid to Ukraine， guaranteeing Ukraine's sovereignty and security， and engaging Ukraine in the peace process. All these actions indicate that Europeans do not want to be marginalized in the Russia-Ukraine peace talks and hope to defend Ukraine's independence and Europe's long-term security interests while maintaining the Europe-U.S.alliance.

OnApril4，2025，inBrussels，Belgium， theNATOForeignMinisters'Meeting concluded，andNATO Secretary GeneralRutteheldapressconference.

The“Ukrainecrisis”intheU.S.- Europe relationsreflectsa harsh reality，thatis，the twosides'differencesin security interestshave become increasinglyirreconcilable due to Trump's “America First” policy. With a greater focus on containing and suppressing China， the Trump administration aspires to reduce its military spending in Europe and prioritize the deployment ofitsresourcesto the“Indo-Pacific\" region.In Trump'sview， theUkraine crisis does not pose a direct threat to theU.S.security，butrather，acertain degree of confrontation between Europe and Russia has provided the U.S.with space for maneuvering， with which the U.S.could manipulate and benefit from the situation in Europe. However，inEU'sview，theUkraine crisis poses an existential challenge to theEUand Trump'sshiftinattitude towardsRussiafurtherexacerbates Europeans'sense of insecurity. The EU is pessimistic about the prospects of Europe-Russiarelationsand viewsRussia asthe main challenge to Europe's securityin the foreseeable future. The EUalso believesin the importance oftheEurope-U.S.allianceand has the sober realization that it is not only extremely dangerous but also increasinglyunreliabletofullydependon anincreasingly inward-looking U.S. to protectEurope'ssecurity.The transatlanticallianceandNATOwill continue toexistaftertheendoftheUkraine crisis，but Europe will have to assume moreresponsibilityto handleitsown defense issues.In March 2025， the EU launchedan8oobillioneuro“ReArm Europe”plan aimed at building“a se cureand resilient Europe\".However， duetomultipleconstraints，theEUis unable to completely break free from itsdependenceontheU.S.intheshort tomediumterm.The United States， with its strength，will continue todominate the increasingly loose transatlantic alliance and seek more geopolitical benefits by controlling Europe.

II.Intensified Rivalry in Multiple Fields Challenges the Resilienceof theU.S.-Europe Relations

Firstly，therivalrybetween the United Statesand Europe in the fields of economy， trade and technology hasintensified.Americanlarge-scale high-techcompaniesdominatethe European digital market and take up monopoly positionsin thefieldof digital technology in Europe. The EU has introduced the Digital Services Actto strengthenitsdominance inthe digital market and restrict the very largeonlineplatforms from outside the EU （mainly U.S. tech companies） from generating excessive profits. Trumpcriticized theEU'simposition of a digital service tax as an act of tradeprotectionismandaccused that the“technological sovereignty\"and restrictive measures pursued by the EUhaveweakenedU.S.competitive advantage in the global tech field. During his address at the 2025Mu. nichSecurityConference，U.S.Vice PresidentJ.D.VancecriticizedEurope's regulatorymeasures against large technology companies; the United States also refused to sign the Declaration of the Artificial Intelligence Action Summitin Paris.Thesemoves haveresultedinmorefrictionbetween the United Statesand Europe in the fields of digital technology and governance. Some EUofficials have accused the United States of using freedom of speech asan argument to pressure the EU into relaxing itsregulation oftechnology platforms.

Secondly， theUnitedStatesand Europe have diverging values， which isobvious to see in the political field. The Munich Security Conference， since its launch in1963，hasbeenservingasa critical platform for Europe and the U.S. to discuss global security affairs.However， on this veryplatform，J.D.Vancepubliclylambasted Europe's democracy and immigration policies，claimed the biggest threat facing Europeis from inside，accused Europe of deviating from its basic valuesand questioned whether the European valueswere worth defending bytheU.S.Vance'sremarkssparked a strong backlash from European countriesandwereseenas“anattackon European ideology\".However， Trump praised Vance'sspeechasbrilliant. The GuardianoftheUKcommentedon thisandpointedoutthattheUnitedStatesand Europenotonlyhelddifferent views on Russia， but also had significant differences on more profound issues such as values and democracy.

Lastly， in the field of global governance and multilateral affairs， Trump 2.O once again staged a drama of“withdrawing from international treatiesand organizations\"and lessened support forsuch multilateral institutionsasthe United Nations and the World Trade Organization. On his very first day in office， Trump announced theU.S.withdrawal from theWorld Health Organization and the Paris Agreement on climate change.Later， he also announced the withdrawal fromtheUnitedNations Human Rights Council （UNHRC） and permanent cessation of the fundingtotheUnitedNationsRelief andWorksAgencyfor Palestinian Refugees in the Near East （UNRWA）. Inaddition，Trump also announced planstoclawbackthe“GreenNew Deal\"andabandonedtheeffortsto promote clean energy investment in emerging and developing countries. TheEUisdeeply dissatisfied with the unilateral and selfish practicesof the Trumpadministration.Asheopened the2025 Munich Security Conference，GermanPresidentFrank-Walter Steinmeier said that the new Trump （Photo/ICPhoto） A 梵身慶 administrationactedrecklesslyand had no regard for the long established international rules.AstheU.S.and Europe held opposing positions on manyissuesoftheconference，the differencesbetweenthetwosidesin the fields of global governance and multilateralaffairswereexacerbated and imposed serious impacts on the bilateral relations.European public opinion generallybelieves thatthe current differences between Europe and the U.S.are not only reflected in their policy positions， but also deeply rootedintheirdifferentunderstandingsof the international order and global governance models.

III.TheRising“TrustDeficit\" Erodes the Foundationof U.S.-Europe Relations

The changes in the post-Cold War internationalenvironmentandthe growingunilateralismintheU.S.have resulted in the emergingand ever expanding“trustdeficit”intheU.S.- Europe relations. Since Trump's first term， Europeans have developed a growing sense of distrust of the United States，believing thatthedriving force behind “Trumpism”is the declining credibility of the U.S. government andinstitutions.Therefore，theUnited States， the countryasawhole， is no longer trustworthy.

The Trump 2.O tsunami has further aggravated Europe's distrust of theU.S.The“election dictatorship led by Trump”wasbelievedto haveundermined the American democracy andfrustratedbelieversin“liberal democracy\".WhatworriesEuropeans even more is that， given the core positionof the United States in European security and economic affairs， Trump's “dictatorship rule”mayalso harm the governanceofEuropeandthefuture of the continent asa democraticentity.The Munich Security Report 2025 publicly stated that Europedoes not perceiveWashingtonas“ananchor ofstability\"，butratherasarisk tobe hedgedagainst.TheFinancialTimesof theUK publishedanarticleon itswebsite on February26，2025，stating that theUnitedStateshasnowbecomean \"enemy\"of theWest.Insummary， the accelerating rise of the“trust deficit” willinevitablyundermine the founda tion of the U.S.-Europe relations.

CONCLUSION

salient feature of the contemporary world political development. The intensified rivalry between the U.S. and the EU amid the Ukraine crisis is a microcosm of the rift in transatlantic relations. Europe， swept up by the Trump 2.O tsunami， is standing at a historical crossroads and in astateof painstaking adaptation. The continent has to make earnest endeavors to explore and adapt to a new model of transatlantic security cooperation characterized by growing self-protection and diminishing U.S. protection， while constantly adapting to the complex situation of increasing friction and competition with the U.S. in multiple fields.The EU also faces more intense pressure to navigate through China， the U.S.and Russia to well handle its relationship with major countries. The rift in the U.S.- Europe relations is both a challenge and an opportunity for Europe. It forces Europe to face its own security predicament， accelerate its pace in pursuit of “strategic autonomy” and reduce its dependence on the U.S. In an era full of uncertainties， how Europe maintains its autonomy in the major-country rivalry has become a focus of attention and its strategic choices will profoundly affect the direction of the evolution of the world order.For China， it should stabilize the overall situation of China-Europe relations on the basis of grasping the trends of changes and features of the U.S.-Europe relations， while exploring to create a new model of trilateral interaction among China， the U.S. and Europe，and steering the trilateral relations towards relative balance and overall stability.