By Thobile Jiwulane
As Europe and the United States continue to drift apart, tensions between the two seem to be escalating. This raises the question of whether we are witnessing the beginning of the end of the so-called Western alliance and the start of a new realignment in global politics.
There are several signs that suggest a political realignment since U.S. President Donald Trump won the November 2024 presidential election. In the first 50 days of his administration, Trump has made decisions that have impacted globally. Dr. Abba Omar, the operations director at the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection (Mistra) in Johannesburg, humorously remarked that Trump’s 50 days in office feel like 100 days because his influence is felt worldwide. Omar is right; Trump’s isolationist policy approach, characterized by the widespread imposition of punitive sanctions affecting both allies and adversaries, has made a significant impact. This has prompted countries to consider how to operate without U.S. aid or the consequences of aligning with Washington.
The European Union is taking a stance that contrasts with actions taken by Trump, choosing to strengthen relationships with countries that he has sought to punish, such as South Africa and Canada. This shift may also encourage the EU to align more closely with China as a way to counter the United States. Canada has implemented retaliatory sanctions against the U.S., while the Mexican president has informally suggested an international consumer boycott of American products. Additionally, South Africa’s Minister of Mineral Resources has unofficially proposed redirecting the country’s mineral exports away from the U.S. and towards other markets. As a result of Trump’s actions, new alliances are forming outside of U.S. influence, as countries look for alternatives to American aid and support, including by Europe.
Trump, who had criticized the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) even before his return to the White House, views it as a burden on the United States due to its role as the major financier. He is considering withdrawing from this Cold War-era military alliance. This decision aligns with his goal of avoiding expenditure of U.S. taxpayers’ money on issues that do not directly benefit the country. In his quest to “Make America Great Again,” he prefers to see money flowing into the U.S. rather than being spent abroad.
He accuses Europe of contributing less to NATO while the United States has shouldered the largest share of NATO funding, despite the alliance being primarily focused on Europe and designed to defend the continent rather than the US. Trusted officials of Trump, such as the head of the Department of Government Efficiency, Elon Musk, are at the forefront of attacks on NATO. They have questioned the alliance’s continued existence and have advocated for the US to withdraw from it.
Musk is one of the most influential figures in the Trump administration. It has been shown that what Musk says carries significant weight, influencing Trump’s decisions and actions. He seems to have a free hand to operate as he wishes, with Trump supporting him at every turn. In a recent statement on X, the U.S. President praised his South African-born ally, stating that Musk is doing an excellent job in service of America. He also criticized those who initiated a boycott of Musk’s products, such as Tesla vehicles, and expressed his intention to buy a new Tesla himself in solidarity and support for Musk.
It seems that a break-up of NATO may be on the horizon, and Europe has begun to acknowledge this potential outcome. As a result, the Western alliance could either disintegrate, or Europe will choose to proceed independently, with NATO in its current form or a different one. However, some believe that after the dissolution of the former Eastern bloc’s Warsaw Pact in 1991, NATO’s existence is no longer necessary. There was never war between Warsaw Pact and NATO, but they operated under the Cold War conditions.
The withdrawal of the United States from NATO would significantly weaken the alliance and put its survival at risk. The question of whether NATO can continue to exist without the US is hotly debated in the Western world. Many experts argue that if the US were to leave, the alliance would be doomed and its fate sealed. They contend that Europe alone would not be able to sustain NATO, as it lacks the necessary military and financial resources, exacerbated by its own internal political and economic challenges.
A new and intriguing aspect of the ongoing debate is the potential for the United States and Russia to form some sort of alliance, likely beginning as trade partners before considering any other forms of collaboration. The two countries appear to be drawing closer together, a development driven by Trump’s commitment to end the three-year conflict between Ukraine and Russia. Reports from both traditional and social media in the U.S. indicate that nearly half of Republicans view Russia as a friendly ally, while attitudes in Washington toward Europe seem to be hardening. Elon Musk has been vocal in criticizing Europe through his platform, X, for its excessive dependence on the United States, insisting that this reliance needs to come to an end.
Any alliance between Washington and the Kremlin must start with the end of the deadly war in Ukraine. This week, Ukraine agreed to a US-facilitated ceasefire, which has sparked hope that the conflict may be nearing its conclusion. Russia is expected to announce its response to the ceasefire proposal soon. It is certain that Russia will respond in a specific manner, as discussions had already taken place between Moscow and the US in Saudi Arabia. During these talks, Russia outlined its conditions for accepting the ceasefire and ultimately ending the war.
One of the conditions is that Russia must retain control of the Ukrainian territories it has gained since the start of the special military operation on February 24, 2022, while withdrawing from the remaining parts of Ukraine. Additionally, there should be respect for the existing agreements regarding Ukraine’s neutrality.
If Russia agrees to a ceasefire, it would open the door for direct negotiations between the two countries to fully end the war. With both sides exhausted from the conflict, the possibility of achieving peace is more realistic now than ever. Moscow has indicated to Trump that it is interested in bringing the war to a halt.
The ceasefire that Ukraine agreed to is, in fact, a rejection of Europe’s wishes, as many countries in the region wanted it to continue. These countries pledged to support Ukraine both militarily and financially to help it sustain the war effort. However, the duration of that support remains uncertain.
Some individuals fear that if Europe continues to back Ukraine, it could escalate into a Third World War, which is something that Trump aimed to avoid. He told Zelensky in Washington recently that in being reluctant to enter into a ceasefire with Russia, he was actually “playing with World War 3”. During his first term, Trump managed to avoid any ongoing wars and now seeks to facilitate peace to prevent conflicts from escalating into a global war. Additionally, he had a well-publicized interest in accessing Ukraine’s mineral resources in exchange for bringing an end to the conflict.
Currently, the idea of an alliance between Russia and the United States seems distant, but it cannot be entirely dismissed. Reports suggest that some U.S. Republican lawmakers view Moscow in a more favorable light, considering it a friendly country. However, whether this possibility will become a reality remains uncertain at this time. If a U.S.-Russian alliance were to occur, it would represent a significant shift in global politics, as two military superpowers would be joining forces, which could have substantial implications for geopolitics.
Europe would obviously not be willing to enter such an alliance as it continues to view Russia as an enemy, and thus it prefers the Ukrainian-Russian war to endure. However, Zelensky’s decision to return to America for assistance in facilitating a peace deal with Russia is a clear snub of Europe and its influence. Despite their recent public disagreement in the White House, Zelensky’s return to Trump and his commitment to apologize to him indicate his confidence in the U.S., which seems to be pursuing peace, unlike Europe, which appears to be favouring conflict.
It is possible that both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Zelensky have grown weary of the prolonged war. As Jo-Ansie van Wyk, a professor of international relations at the University of South Africa, noted, in a lengthy conflict, when warring parties become exhausted, it often becomes easy for them to begin to consider ways to achieve peace.
Zelensky possibly had realised that if he relied on Europe as a supplier, he would completely lose the war and Ukrained taken over by Russia, as Europe would not be able to sustain the war without the US. To him, the US support had kept him going for three years to battle Russia helping to keep it at bay despite its famous military might.
During their recent heated discussion at the White House, both Trump and Zelensky acknowledged that if Ukraine had been fighting Russia without U.S. support, the war would have concluded within weeks instead of dragging on for three years. Trump suggested it would have taken just two weeks, while Zelensky exaggerated by claiming it would have ended in three days. Additionally, the U.S. President stated that the war would not have occurred at all if he had been in office when it started in 2022.
Amid discussions about peace, Zelensky maintained his desire for Ukraine to join NATO. However, this was a non-starter, as Ukraine’s ambition to become a NATO member was one of the factors that led to Russia’s attack. Moscow insists that the Minsk agreement, which requires Ukraine to remain neutral, be upheld and that NATO should not expand eastward toward its borders, as this is perceived as a security threat to Russia. Therefore, if Zelensky continues to push for NATO membership, the peace efforts are likely to fail.
Also under some pressure from Trump, Europe is quickly distancing itself from the United States. While the U.S. aimed for an end to the Ukrainian war, Europe has supported its continuation. Additionally, as part of American sanctions on South Africa, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently boycotted the recent G20 Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Johannesburg. In contrast, European countries attended the gathering and expressed a strong willingness to cooperate with Pretoria. Furthermore, the European Union supports South Africa in its political, economic, and diplomatic endeavours and disagrees with the rationale behind Trump’s sanctions targeting the country.
Trump claims that the ANC-led government in South Africa mistreated white Afrikaners, alleging that they committed atrocities against them and seized their land, which is not true. Afrikaners are the most privileged group in South Africa, owning 72% of the country’s land while blacks owned a mere 4% although they form 80% of the population.
He proposed granting them refugee status in the U.S. However, his true intentions became clear when he stated that he would offer U.S. citizenship to all white farmers, not just Afrikaners. Knowing that they are skilful farmers, Trump was subtly aiming to attract them from South Africa to the U.S. to help boost the country’s economy and ‘make America great again’.
Europe’s approach to the Ukraine-Russia conflict—seeking to forge a peace deal that favors Ukraine while excluding Russia—would have been ineffective. In fact, it would likely have increased tensions with the United States, which has been negotiating peace with both parties. Moreover, Europe’s actions were not only opportunistic but would have failed to bring an end to the war, instead escalating the situation and undermining U.S. efforts to achieve peace.
In the realignment, the US is moving towards Russia, which it considers a friendly country, while Europe is consolidating itself as a new alliance minus the US. In the process, Europe would attempt to attract as partners all those countries that Trump is abandoning due to his isolationist foreign policy. In this scenario, the US would find itself isolated with few or no European allies.
In this case, America might find a new ally in Russia, and ironically, also in Ukraine, due to the trust that President Zelensky has in Trump’s America rather than in Europe. If Trump were to remain in the White House or if a Republican is elected to succeed him later, Russia and Ukraine could become allies too as they would share a common friend, the US.
An alliance among the US, Russia, and Ukraine would be a formidable combination, both militarily and economically, especially as part of a large trade partnership. Among them, they are highly endowed with a variety of commodities and export products, especially energy, mineral and agricultural products.