Transcription
So, did Friedrick Meritz blow it for Europe by criticizing Donald Trump and the war on Iran? Or did he just say the quiet part out loud, saying what everyone was thinking, and maybe there should be more of it? Mark Carney does it, and he's seen as a leader of the MAGA resistance. Meritz does it, Trump screams that troops might leave Germany, and Europe holds its breath. But how much longer can this cycle go on?
Well, if you're the president of the United States, a while yet. He hit Truth Social with the following reaction: "The Chancellor of Germany should spend more time on ending the war with Russia Ukraine where he has been totally ineffective and fixing his broken country especially immigration and energy and less time on interfering with those that are getting rid of the Iran nuclear threat thereby making the world including Germany a safer place. President DJT."
So, for the record, here is how Meritz described his relationship with the US president two days ago: "As far as I'm concerned, my personal relationship with the American president remains as good as ever. >> I simply had doubts from the very beginning about what was set in motion with the war in Iran and that is why I expressed those doubts. >>"
So, it's not news that he said it. At the developing story, I want to pitch you at home and to our two guests today. Uh, and what I want from you as our audience is the answer to the question, uh, because you have front-row seats to this Trump experience. We all do. Is it time the world gives Donald Trump much more direct feedback? DW's Brussels correspondent Rosie Burchard. Uh, opening thoughts from you from the EU politics, the home of EU politics.
"Over the last year, we've seen European leaders trying to find all sorts of ways to butter Donald Trump up and trying to get some sort of predictability. They didn't necessarily get that predictability and now they seem to be willing to be much more critical and I think that's with their domestic audiences in mind. They are trying to put some political distance between themselves and Donald Trump."
Right, to uh Scott Lucas, professor of American studies at the Clinton Institute, University College of Dublin. A brief uh opening salvo from you.
"It is a historic moment uh for Europe and indeed the world because for the first time since the late 1940s uh there is not a US government alliance with European partners because the Trump camp don't want alliance. Uh and now Europe has to respond to that. They have to respond specifically as Chancellor Meritz does that the Americans don't have an exit strategy in their attempt to triumph in Iran. They have to respond on the specific issue of Russia's invasion of Ukraine when you can't trot on Trump support and they have to respond with a different approach to European security which doesn't put the United States at the center."
Right. Great starting point. Uh, Rosie, I want to come back to you now. Meritz said the quiet part out loud. Aside from the initial shock, uh, are European leaders, do you think, to back to creeping around slowly and hoping somehow that Donald Trump just focuses on something different that this all blows over?
"I remember when I saw that headline first flash up about Meritz saying that he thought that Iran was humiliating the United States. And you know, I may work for a German broadcaster, but you might hear I'm not German. I was asking colleagues, is this a mistranslation? Has Meritz gone over the top here? But in fact, it's not really the first time we've heard European leaders be critical of Donald Trump. Think about Pedro Sanchez in Spain. And we also saw uh Mette Frederiksen, the Danish prime minister, clash with him earlier this year over Greenland. And then even Giorgia Meloni, Italian prime minister, traditionally seen as quite a close Trump ally, clashing with him over his comments on the Pope. So we have seen something of a turning point here. I think European leaders have abandoned this strategy, at least for now, of what some were describing as appeasement, trying to find all sorts of different ways to keep Trump on side. Think about the trade deal that the EU signed up to last year with the United States. That was seen as a really lopsided deal, a bad deal for Europe. The idea that many told me was that that was a kind of price to pay for security, but they don't feel necessarily they're any more secure than they were then thanks to signing up to that deal. In fact, things seem to have deteriorated in many ways."
Right, Scott Lucas. Um, as no matter how small we think the chances might be of this actually happening, I guess we have to play out the scenario. If it does happen, Scott, that Trump pulls troops from Germany. Who stands to lose more at this point?
"Well, first of all, if I had a dollar or a euro for every time since 2017 that Donald Trump said he would pull American troops from Germany, >> okay, >> I'd be out in the Caribbean and I wouldn't be talking to you right now. Uh, fact of the matter is this is Trump's standard threat because he always has a crack at Germany over economic, military, political issues. He did it in the Meritz years. He's doing it in the Meritz years now. I think if the Trump administration was to follow through with this, and there are those in the Trump administration who want to undermine the EU and put hard-right governments in, the immediate effect would be to hurt American security because the US needs these bases as part of its global military footprint. Indeed, part of the reason why they're angry with Spain and Italy is because Spain and Italy have denied the use of their bases or overflights. >> So, it would be in a sense cutting off their nose despite their face, but it would force Germany to retrench both in terms of looking more at a European security framework and not the Americans. And let's be honest, in places like Ramstein, there would have to be an economic retrenchment given the importance of American bases to the economy there. Uh, Rosie, back to you uh in in Brussels and to the question of how much longer does Europe uh feel that they have to fear Trump at his full power? Are they, if they're playing the waiting game, are they just, are they looking from now until two and a half years in the future until the end of this Trump term? Is that the distance that they're playing?"
"Okay, there's a couple of different distances in mind here. The first is the midterm elections, right? Because we've already seen that if we had a different political mathematics in the United States, then there may be some sort of checks on Trump's uh power in some way or another. Then they're also looking at, of course, the end of his term. But beyond that, there's this big thought of, okay, when and how could Europe actually become independent from the United States with regards to its defense? Because that is really at the heart of so many of these issues. The reason that European leaders have been at some points really hesitant to lash out whether it was on trade, whether it was on other political issues, foreign policy, on tech, remember it's another big bone of contention between the EU and the US. It boils down to that core issue of defense. That Europeans have long been relying on the US for their security and collective defense through NATO and through the the the US troops that are stationed here and all sorts of weapons purchases. Experts generally say that it would take something like 10 years of very intense work for European countries to be actually moved away from dependence on the United States militarily. That is if they really unlocked a lot of spending straight away and made a true kind of moving on. What we are seeing is something though that's much more like in the middle. While we have seen massive spending increases from a lot of European countries when it comes to their defenses, of course, they are still spending a lot on US weapons. That's something the United States wants them to do. They are buying US weapons for themselves, buying them for Ukraine. And actually, in the context of this Iran war, there are some European countries which have been left waiting on orders of US weapons. So, if some, some are calling for a really strategic rethink here to say, okay, stop buying these US arms if you really want to be independent. But the fact is, for now, there are not that many alternatives and there are plenty of European countries which say, we want to keep this transatlantic alliance strong. We don't want to close the door on it."
Okay. So Rosie, you put a couple of milestones on the horizon for us. I want to go back to to Scott and focus in on the midterms. Um, can the midterms coming up really put a stranglehold on how much Donald Trump can hurt and threaten people, particularly Europe?
"Well, it can put a a vise in terms of the way that the Trump camp uh are trying to conduct their foreign policy. This aggressive bullying foreign policy if the domestic response, which I think will be led by the economy, has said, look, your foreign policy is hurting us on a day-to-day basis at home. Begin with that marker of energy prices, for example. >> But I don't think it moves the needle that much on Trump's aggression for two reasons. One is Trump will always be Trump. And secondly, that what Rosie has laid out very, very well. It's the issue of JD Vance. I mean, JD Vance and his camp are behind the national security strategy from last December that has this vision that they want a very different Europe with hard-right parties in power, even arguing that Europe is overrun by immigrants and civilizational decline. That does not disappear with the midterms. It doesn't disappear uh until Vance is defeated in his own presidential run in 2028. So I think no, Europe has to retrench over the next two and a half years. But I would add to what Rosie laid out brilliantly. It's not a full detachment from the United States. While you detach a bit from the Trump camp, you still have to remember you've got your links with the Americans through NATO. You've got your links through the career officials in the military, in the intelligence services, in the economic services, and you keep those attempts at links going, even if some of those officials are at risk of being purged by some of the hard-right Trumpists."
Right. You lead me both beautifully because I want to talk about the man setting the tone uh in terms of dealing uh with Trump. Rosie, I'll come back to you shortly after we hear from the uh PM of Canada, Mark Carney.
"The world, as I said earlier, is more dangerous and divided. The US has fundamentally changed its approach to trade, raising its tariffs to levels last seen during the Great Depression. Many of our former strengths based on our close ties to America have become our weaknesses. Weaknesses that we must correct."
Right, Rosie? Back to you under the the premise or the question of uh why can't more people take on Trump? Why doesn't the EU take him on more at this point? Is there, are we on the verge of it happening? We touched on it to begin with. Uh, is there something in the winds here?
"Well, let me tell you first of all to watch this space. Mark Carney, Canadian Prime Minister, has been invited to a meeting of something called the European Political Community that's happening in the next few days. It's traditionally supposed to be a Europe-only club. He is a special guest there. What do you think they might be talking about? I would bet they're going to be talking about this. How do we deal with Donald Trump? Should more of them be kind of copying what Mark Carney is doing and how he's approaching it? I think we've had this, you know, this traditional dependence on the United States in Europe which has been driving a lot of this reticence to come forward. But there has also been now I think with the Iran war, something else which has been exposed, which is that the US also still needs Europe, right? It simply could not be waging war in the Middle East without access to bases here. And I think that's why when we hear these threats of withdrawing troops from Europe with US troops, that there are some kind of eyebrows raised rather than jaws hitting the floor here, right? Because they know and there has been something shown through this recent war that there is actually there are many other ways that the US still does rely on Europe."
Yeah. And and back to you I guess Scott under the banner of why not unleash hell more against Trump? Is there a school of thought that why not fire back? Politicians are drawn to what makes them popular and Trump bashing is popular. I guess if you could throw together your thoughts of Mark Carney and that question at the same time.
"Because I think you get beyond Trump to talk about, remember I talked about a historic moment about historic realignments. Let's start with Canada. Uh, of course, Mark Carney uh in terms of that great rhetoric, you know, elbows up, that great American, Canadian ice hockey phrase, in terms of not being pushed around by Trump. But beyond that, what the Canadians have done with, you know, historically having this, you know, almost complete dependence on the US for economic ties, is that they're realigning. Think about the Canada-EU trade agreement. Think about Canada establishing further trade relations not only with Europe but other areas of the world. But go beyond what Mark Carney is doing. Think about the EU in terms of its trade agreement with India and think about India then with other trade agreements it struck with the UK. And then think about other countries looking at their relationships with the Gulf States, some of whom may be moving away from the United States after feeling betrayed in recent weeks. So, in other words, in terms of economic and political realignments, this idea of a US at the center of the international system since 1945, that might not be the case. So bring it back to Europe. Rather than just directly bash Trump, listen not only to Friedrich Meritz, listen to Emmanuel Macron, listen, I think find very interesting the Finnish president Alexander Stubb as well as Canada's Carney, who are talking about middle powers and talking about blocks now establishing their own relationships and partnerships. And in that sense, it is not just simply a case of the US leads and they follow. It will be a process that takes time. There will be quite a bit of adjustment to it. So you don't try to alienate Trump while you do it, but you're not treating him as your number one priority all the time."
I want to give you uh both one more hit before we leave, but just some context before we do. Germany hosts the largest US military presence in Europe and the second largest worldwide after Japan, with around 50,000 military civilian personnel. Germany acts as a vital logistics and staging hub for US operations in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Key sites including Ramstein Air Base, Spangdahlem Air Base, Grafenwoehr training area, and Büchel, where several US nuclear warheads are believed to be stored. The US has never confirmed this. Germany is also home to key command structures like the US European Command, which is headquartered in Stuttgart. At street level, this matters in Germany. The American presence here is large. It's obvious. And so we wanted to get the thoughts of those who live right near these massive installations like Ramstein on the threats of Trump withdrawing troops.
"He needs Ramstein. It's the largest air base outside the US and it's strategically important to him. It just won't happen. If he were to do that, it wouldn't bode well for our region. Lots of jobs and so on. But as I said, Mr. Trump comes up with new ideas every day."
"They've invested so much and are still investing. So I don't believe it."
So, the people there speaking through the lens of experience with Trump, I guess, Rosie, if Donald Trump's MO is to keep everyone guessing, uh, is Brussels still kind of guessing at what comes next, or do they feel like at this point they have political hurricane Trump under control, or at least in full view?
"It's not under control and I think they are still ultimately have been reduced to something of a reaction factory, right? In terms of the headlines at least, most of what I've been reporting on for the last couple of months is what does Europe say in response to something that Trump has said. Very much what we're doing right now. That being said, I think there is a much more kind of settling of the atmosphere in general. When we've had now so many of these different, I mean, how many times have we said it's a low point in transatlantic relations, another low point? So they know that there may be more low points to come and that there may be other moments when they suddenly start to seem like best friends again. And I think what the, the big question is, what do they do in the background? And I think one really big area to watch for future clashes that may actually erupt further is the area of technology because the EU is the biggest regulator, really seen as worldwide, of US big tech. And big tech is really a key backbone for the United States economy. We've had plenty of threats from the US to really go after the EU over its tech rules. And that's also why I think you'll see sometimes that Trump likes to pick off different European countries and one day he seems to like one of them, the other day he's lambasting the other one. We know from the what has been written on the page from the United States administration, they do not like the European Union as an institution. And therefore, the strategy, some would say, is to go to different capitals. But let's not forget that one of those key capitals which was a a really stronghold for the United States in terms of the MAGA movement and its influence in Europe, Budapest, Hungary, has now swung the other way. Right. So there has been a blow to that kind of MAGA influence in Europe. But I would still say regardless, we might be gearing up for some big battles on big tech in future across the Atlantic."
Yeah, Hungary was seen as a center of of MAGA influence. Uh, Rosie, I want to go to to Scott to finish on the question of influence. Uh, we talk about midterms uh in the middle distance and where that leaves Trump. Uh, what about the access of of Trump and Putin uh as a duo there? There was another phone call from Vladimir to Donald. The communication line is very much still open. It seems. It seems we can assume that Putin would love to see American troops leave Germany. But is there a chance that the tide has turned somewhat on on their collective influence?
"Well, 10 years after Russia uh collaborated with Trump to help him get the presidency, they're still trying to manipulate the Trumpists. So, the immediate reason for that Putin phone call was uh to pass on messages from Iran, but it was also to try to get the Trump guys to sell out Ukraine and allow the Kremlin to seize more territory. And that will be a threat when you have a chaotic Trump in the presidency. But again, I think you have to go beyond Trump here. I think we all need to look beyond Trump. It's a threat because of the vice president, JD Vance, who really has no interest in European and Ukrainian security as it's currently constituted. It's a threat because of Pete Hegseth, a very temperamental, some would say unqualified defense secretary. It's a threat because of their political allies through the administration. So, I think it's no longer a case of Putin simply trying to just directly manipulate Trump, but trying to maneuver that administration. And it just brings it back to Europe. Uh, the reason why Ukraine has not only resisted Russia as we're in the fifth year of the invasion, but as it's moved to strength with counterattacks inside Russia, with the ability to make sure that the front lines are stalemated and the ability not to give in to Russia's diplomatic demands, is because of that vital European support. So the most important thing that happened last week was not that Putin-Trump phone call. It was not anything that Donald Trump put on Truth Social. It is not going to be the May Day uh victory day parade in Moscow next week. The most important thing was that 90 billion euro EU loan to Ukraine to help it through 2027 because not a single penny of that came from Donald Trump."
Scott, we'll leave it there. Scott Lucas, thank you. We know there are no planes on the runway at Ramstein just yet. Service personnel are in their quarters. Uh, Rosie, thanks to you as well as we lead up to midterms. We are, as ever, all eyes and ears on Washington. Really appreciate your time, both of you, as we start the countdown to a fascinating six months. So then, we finish back where we started. Did Meritz really mess up by saying the quiet part out loud? Think about it and let us know. I'm sure you will. Thanks to Rosie Burchard and Scott Lucas. And keep the conversation going in the comments. And don't forget to like and subscribe for DW News. Bye for now.