U.S. Strategy Exposes Europe's Fragile Future
The US National Security Strategy Is Correct About European Strategic Weaknesses
The recent publication of the United States National Security Strategy provoked a strong reaction amongst many in the political establishment across Europe, both within and outside the EU. It has been widely seen by critics as proof of a clear and explicit divergence between the United States and Europe. In truth, many of the points raised about Europe’s strategic weaknesses are much more accurate than many of those currently in leadership in Europe are prepared to admit. The response of figures such as British Foreign Minister Yvette Cooper, praising Europe’s “strength”, are little more than bluster and political theatre.
As I have outlined in Europe 2026, a special new report for businesses and investors, there is abundant evidence that a major transformation is coming to Europe in geopolitics, markets, and governance, on a level not seen since the Second World War.
What makes the coming transformation so significant is the fact that a confluence of major shaping factors—including the decline of a raft of supranational institutions from the EU to NATO, mass migration, the looming fiscal crisis and the energy crisis—have struck just as internal political instability appears to be reaching record high levels.
Related: Ukraine Strikes Key Russian Oil Platform in Caspian Sea
Furthermore, the broader historical context appears to indicate that multiple metapolitical processes have run their course. In fact, a whole epoch has ended, and another looks set to begin. For one thing, the era of globalism appears to be in serious decline as the world returns to a more national sovereignty-centric ‘order’. Moreover, it is highly likely that within the next few years a major Western European country will elect a populist nationalist government. If that happens, will other countries follow like dominoes? Certainly, at present, there seems to be a fascinating internal political dynamic at play whereby electoral energy is being sucked away from what has hitherto been considered the political mainstream, and is being diverted towards ‘populists’ of both right and left.
Politicians and bureaucrats in Europe complain that the US is now explicitly pursuing a strategic policy at odds with much of Europe. And while the EU itself is clearly at variance with the new direction of the US, this set-to concerns Europe as a whole, including those states not part of the EU. What appears to be happening is an emergent bifurcation taking place within the West, between those states still committed to the globalist status quo and those aligning with nationalism. This is indicative of the wider process occurring across the entire world. As one major example, the accession of Sanae Takaichi to the premiership of Japan in October 2025 appeared to indicate a definitive return to national-conservatism in Japan after a period of uncertain strategic direction, as well as revisitation of many of the core assumptions of the post-war period.
With the world becoming multipolar once more, Europe’s leaders face a continued strategic dilemma. The apparent trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine war, which will likely come to a conclusion in 2026, and the apparent re-direction of American strategic interest to other domains, such as the return to the two centuries-old Monroe Doctrine, make it clear that the status quo is no longer viable. The global momentum is clearly in favour of the nationalists and ‘populists’. And the US will likely use its influence to nudge Europe in a new direction, or as the US National Security Strategy puts it, “to help Europe correct its strategic trajectory.”
For its part, it is increasingly doubtful whether the EU can even survive many more years, let alone become the global powerhouse that its most fervent supporters are hoping for. One of the major weak points is the fact that powerful forces are pulling in precisely opposite directions. On the one hand, many in the political establishment are pushing ahead for a closer-knit EU, acting politically, economically and militarily as a sovereign entity in its own right. On the other hand, popular pressure is increasingly pushing in the other direction, as levels of distrust in political institutions reach new highs and increasing numbers of voters are attracted to populist and nationalist alternatives. The resulting tension between these opposing forces is likely to cause serious political disturbance and threaten a major rupture altogether.
All this appears set to make Europe a highly volatile environment in the short- to medium-term. For investors and analysts looking for clear and solid answers amid such uncertainty, it is important not to miss the wood for the trees. As the US National Security Strategy correctly identifies, the core issues at stake are indeed civilisational. Thus, a more long-term, historically-aware analytical approach is essential.
It is quite tempting in such times to overplay the importance of day-to-day politics. In reality, much of the change occurring in the world is the result of forces far beyond the control of any individuals or governments. However, at a political and institutional level, it is important to stress that those committed to the status quo are caught in a very difficult dilemma. On the one hand, they can attempt major reforms, but to do so requires an admission that the entire project and the underlying assumptions to which they have been committed for many years were wrong. On the other hand they can double down on the existing course and run the risk of provoking even more opposition, something which will render their position even more fragile. So far, many seem committed to doubling down. But, like King Canute’s apocryphal attempts to hold back the tide, this may well only delay the inevitable. 2026 is shaping up to be a highly significant year.
The full report Europe 2026 is available here.
By Alastair Paynter for Oilprice.com
More Top Reads From Oilprice.com