After Trump’s victory, a divided Europe braces for its security without the United States

When Donald Trump clinched his first presidential victory in 2016, many European leaders and analysts viewed it as a political deviation. Others, however, were more wary, suggesting that a second Trump term in 2020 would reveal to the world the true identity of the United States. This is the reality Europe woke up to this Wednesday when the news broke that former US President Trump had just won the battleground state of Georgia and then, a few moments later, of Pennsylvania, moving him closer to reclaiming the White House.

Even before the election was called—with 267 of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency and a leading advantage in the key races that were still counting votes—Europe’s leaders raced to congratulate Trump. “Congratulations President Donald Trump. Ready to work together as we have done for four years,” French President Emmanuel Macron wrote (in French) on the social media site X (formerly Twitter), adding, “With your convictions and with mine. With respect and ambition. For more peace and prosperity.” Shortly after, Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni also said on X (in Italian), “On behalf of myself and the Italian Government, my most sincere congratulations to the President-elect of the United States, Donald Trump.”

Meloni, however, was careful not to speak on behalf of the Italian people. According to the most recent polls, should Italians—and French—have had the right to vote in the US presidential election, they would have overwhelmingly elected Trump’s Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris, by a margin of about 60 percentage points (80 percent to 20 percent). But these polls also revealed a deeply divided Europe, with Trump being the preferred candidate in most Eastern European countries.

First among European leaders to react to the results of the US presidential election, right-wing Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, warmly congratulated Trump (in English) for “the biggest comeback in US political history” and “a much needed victory for the World!” (Trump is only the second president in US history to come back and win a second term after losing a bid. The first one was Grover Cleveland who served in 1885-1889 and 1893-1897.)

In facing a scenario they had not anticipated as much as a win for Harris, some European leaders tried to be more practical.

In a statement on social media, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky congratulated (in English) Trump for his “impressive election victory,” but reminded the president-elect of their September meeting, during which Zelensly says they “discussed in detail the Ukraine-US strategic partnership, [Zelensky’s] Victory Plan, and ways to put an end to Russian aggression against Ukraine.”

Zelensky has serious reasons to worry.

During the presidential campaign, Trump repeatedly said he could settle the war in Ukraine in 24 hours, a proposal that even the Russian ambassador to the UN said was unrealistic. Still, with Trump to enter the White House in January, Ukraine now fears it will be forced into settling on a peace deal with the Kremlin, which could mean ceding Crimea and parts of the Donbas to Russia—or else lose US military aid.

Because Ukraine cannot sustain its war effort against Russia without US military support, pressure would mount for European countries to step up their support of the embattled country. But it’s not clear whether Europe has enough political will to answer the call. “No European leader is in a position to speak for Europe alone. Only a strong and coordinated message (also involving EU and NATO leadership) of a Europe taking its responsibilities could make a difference,” Camille Grand, a former French diplomat and former Assistant Secretary General of NATO, said.

In an already divided Europe, diplomats worry that a sharp turn in US policy in Ukraine could tear Europe apart. Yet, the alternative scenario is no better. A Russian military victory in Ukraine—even if more than two years in the making and at bewilderedly high human, economic, and diplomatic costs for Russia—would lead the European bloc into a deep crisis over the security of its members.

European officials and security experts on Wednesday were scrambling for solutions.

“The UK immediately needs to increase defence spending rapidly, focus its military strategy on deterring Russian aggression in Europe, and work with European allies to defend Europe under a NATO that doesn’t have US support,” Mike Martin, a UK member of Parliament and member of the Defence Select Committee and the Joint Committee on the National Security Strategy, said. “Anything less would be a government dereliction of duty.”

In recent months, Europe started to quietly debate its nuclear future without the United States. But with now a second Trump presidency in view, analysts were quick to become more vocal about it. One of them revived the idea that France could extend its nuclear umbrella to all of Europe, despite experts questioning whether this is even doable. Anticipating a possible drop in US investment in NATO, another analyst half-jokingly asked whether French nuclear missiles could fit into UK submarines.

Even as European leaders and pundits still debate how to best support Ukraine, a new reality sets in. “Some Ukrainians say, OK, if the United States chooses Donald Trump, let’s hope for the best. Maybe he will shake things up,” NPR correspondent Joanna Kakissis reported from Kyiv on the eve of the US presidential election. “They are so exhausted with this war and its bloodshed. They are desperate for it to be over, even with the help of someone unpredictable like Trump.”

“Hard times for Ukraine,” another security expert wrote in a post that probably best captures the meaning of the moment. “It’s not just the loss of US support, it’s also the cascading effect on terrified Europeans.”