Europe vs. the United States: The Return of Power or the End of Illusions?
Géostratégie Magazine
April 2025
Written by Roula Merhej
In Plato's « Republic » , politics was reserved for a certain elite: the "philosopher-kings." They were deemed capable of governing the city through their wisdom. This enlightened minority, detached from personal interests, was meant to be guided above all by Reason and knowledge. This Platonic ideal has never truly materialized neither in Europe nor elsewhere. Europe, born of former kingdoms, persists as if it had.
America, by contrast, was built as a project-nation. It was born of a revolution inspired by the Enlightenment, developed through conquest, and imposed itself through the narrative of its own exceptionalism. Its expansionist policy (entirely at odds with its Founding Fathers) came at the cost of slavery, the genocide of Indigenous peoples, or, more radically in modern history, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Today, the era of acquired advantages is over, as is that of historical allies.
The new American president claims to have signed 100 executive orders since taking office in January 2025. Surprising? Absolutely not. Shocking? No more so. The world had already had a taste of the Trump style, but the geopolitical dynamics of his first term were different, and the businessman had not yet survived two assassination attempts, events that have positioned him more than ever as a providential figure. Donald Trump is now carrying out his campaign promises with a clear roadmap: "Project 2025." Developed by conservative think tanks, this plan aims to fundamentally reshape the federal administration, strengthen presidential authority, and pursue an ultra-protectionist policy. It is easy to see this as an authoritarian drift, but one must acknowledge that, however divisive and brutal it may be, the strategy is remarkably well structured.
Donald Trump's ambition to restore America's wealth and greatness takes precedence over all other considerations. It destabilizes the post-1945 world order and raises fears of a genuine implosion within the country itself, an implosion that may well stem from the growing malaise of the American middle class. Rising costs for food, housing, and healthcare are squeezing ordinary households. Will there be reindustrialization? Price stability? Purchasing power? Only time will tell.
But what if this American brutality were, in reality, more lucid than our moralizing comfort? At the very least, it has triggered a global awakening. Like James K. Polk (U.S. president from 1845 to 1849), Donald Trump displays an explicit expansionist will, a strong nationalism, and contempt for international consensus. Unfortunately, the difference lies in the fact that in the nineteenth century, the means of domination were far less powerful and technological, and the weight of the United States infinitely smaller. The return of the great American sheriff, embodied by Trump, rests on a belief in a quasi-divine legitimacy to impose order on the world. This imperial posture, brutal in its coherence, both fascinates and alarms. For while it restores the stature of American power, it also revives internal fractures and a logic of confrontation that threatens global stability.
The announcement of his new trade strategy on April 2, 2025, rattled markets and spread panic both worldwide and within the United States. These new customs duties, presented as an act of economic sovereignty, risk intensifying pressure on imported consumer goods. His policy reflects an unprecedented distrust of free trade agreements: 20% tariffs on all European products, 34% on Chinese imports. No partner, ally, or rival is spared. Is this once again his strategy of calculated chaos? Another calibrated provocation designed to force others to negotiate on his terms? A move to mobilize his electoral base? The economic war has begun. Donald Trump knows that the EU and China will retaliate, but this only feeds his persona as the politically incorrect hero fighting alone against an unjust world. He has occupied the media space, but more importantly, he has shaped the narrative, set the terms of the debate, and reinforced his anti-establishment image. The fundamental rift between the United States and Europe is now underway. These two worldviews are irreconcilable: one seeks to coerce, the other to persuade.
European discourse is moralistic; Trump's is transactional. By hypocritically sanctifying human rights principles, clinging to moderation, and dissolving into uniformity, Europeans appear taken aback. Europe is paying a heavy price for its naivety and impotence in the face of leaders who fully embrace a hierarchical vision of power, such as Trump, Putin, or Netanyahu. This ideological contrast reveals a deeper flaw: the vacuum of European leadership, compounded by a loss of influence on the global stage.
This lack of leadership on the old continent, combined with the weakness of Biden's mandate, has opened a breach. Russia, China, and Iran have seized the opportunity, shaking up the twentieth-century international system while freeing themselves from its rules. Add to this generalized governmental failure the rise of extremism, the impotence of institutions such as the UN, and the disconnection of the global political elite, and it becomes clear why today's geopolitical disorder is not a surprise, but a logical consequence.
In Europe, uncontrolled immigration, military and energy dependence, and widening economic inequalities are intensifying. People have lost confidence and seem to be calling for the return of a certain authority. This contemporary Europe, which believed it could enlighten the world through its principles, has fallen into its own trap. Permissive in the name of coexistence or inclusivity, Europe has become a moral veneer masking a political vacuum, everything Donald Trump hates and fights against.
In his analysis of the cycle of political regimes, Plato argues that when democracy dissolves into egalitarianism and permissiveness, the people ultimately reject order and make room for a tyrant. This dynamic is not merely a theoretical memory; it resonates powerfully with our modern world. In our current understanding, where moral righteousness replaces prudence, is a head of state who prioritizes his country necessarily persona non grata? What people today would not want their legitimate leader to place the national interest above all else? Is this not precisely what Europe is suffering from?
It seems to me that nations are waking up. Perhaps too late, they are discovering the real cost of globalization: the loss of sovereignty, memory, and power. Globalization, which was meant to unite peoples, has weakened states and allowed a world of blocs and borders to re-emerge (borders that now demand reaffirmation.) Donald Trump anticipated this return of History not as a disinterested visionary, but because he knows how to play on fears. His method divides, shocks, and unsettles. But that is precisely what makes it so formidable.