Following the win of former president Donald Trump in the recent United States presidential election, deep divisions and shifting national sentiments were brought to the forefront of American politics. With Trump’s victory, the US is set to undergo drastic changes to its domestic and foreign policies compared to those under the current Biden administration, and opponent Kamala Harris’ campaign platform. While many around the world were surprised by Trump’s victory, many others argue that it was to be expected. Cameron Munter, Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council credited Trump’s victory to his focus on cultural and domestic issues that immediately affect Americans, and correctly predicted that he would win all seven battleground states.  One of the most advantageous factors for the Republican party was economic policy. They had a much clearer plan than the Democratic party, which is crucial given how the economy is consistently a top concern among the American public.

Perhaps the biggest change for transatlantic relations as a whole, is going to be the return of more independent policies that Trump favored in his first term, focusing on “America First” and being more confrontational in his approaches.“The language that they will use in talking about tariffs, in talking about the future of security, is going to be different language. It’s going to be, as many people have said, very transactional. It’s going to be very hard nose.” (Munter), which will translate into several sectors; the economy, security and foreign policy chief among them. Weston Stacey, Executive Director of the American Chamber of Commerce in the Czech Republic discussed the economic implications further, arguing that “the strongest relationship that the US has in terms of creating an economic future is with the EU,” especially when it comes to advanced technology, and the EU convincing the Trump administration of the importance and benefits of investing in and collaborating on climate change prevention. He also added that Trump will aim to reduce the US-EU trade surplus, and that Europe will also need to try and reduce it in a way beneficial to their economy.

Regarding foreign policy, the new administration is sure to put pressure on Europe to act more independently and formulate clearer strategies. This will prove to be difficult, considering certain actors such as China, have not necessarily been a priority of the Europe. But European Parliament member Ondřej Kovařik stated that that pressure could be a good thing for the EU, and that “it’s actually time to think out of the box as well. And I think that’s a sometimes a problem, that’s why we so much struggle in crisis.” He presumes that a more pragmatic approach to foreign policy regarding actors such as China will strengthen the EU, reduce their struggle in times of crisis and make their action more effective. An area in which this agency and unification will almost certainly be needed is the war in Ukraine. American voters did not consider it a priority, given that “It’s not on its borders, it’s not a direct security threat to anyone living in America. And most Americans view it as Europe’s problem, right? And America is there to help, but it’s not primarily [the] US’s problem” (Stacey). Trump promised to end the war within an unspecified 24-hour period, but all of the speakers agree that doing so would essentially be impossible given the complexity of the conflict and what each country involved has at stake.

Other points of concern raised included the possibility of American withdrawal and/or decreased support from international agreements and organizations, as well as the ongoing conflict within the Middle East. All three speakers pointed out that lack of unity, within both the US and the EU, could thwart plans of either party in all of those areas. The decentralization of the US puts Trump at a slight disadvantage, given that he will likely be met with resistance from both parties in several branches of government if he tries to withdraw entirely from too many agreements too quickly. For the EU, on the other hand, action on the Israel/Palestine conflict has been challenging given the different opinions among each member state. The Czech Republic, for instance, has a very pro-Israel stance, as does Trump, which could open the door for bilateral action and agreements rather than a multilateral approach. Kovařik raised the point of Trump’s preference to meeting with leaders individually, which could be beneficial in this scenario because of the lack of unity within Europe, but once again called on the EU to find their ground in this situation.

While nobody can say for certain what will happen when the new Trump administration takes office, there are sure to be significant shifts in the working relationship between Europe and the US. Promises to return the US to more isolationist foreign policy means that the EU will need to take more agency and initiative in charting clearer courses of action. That being said, these shifts are not one-sided. Changes occurring in Europe, such as the EU Council presidency transfer to Poland this coming January, are also sure to have an impact on this relationship.