Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
How will the Trump presidency influence elections in Europe?
Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden and co-chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations, shares his perspective on European politics from Stockholm, Sweden.
How do you believe that the Trump presidency will influence elections in Europe?
Well, of course we don't know. But what we've seen during the last week with important elections in Canada and Australia, not Europe, but fairly similar in other ways, is that the Trump factor has been very important. It has boosted the incumbent governments. It has boosted the center-left. It has boosted those who are seen as standing up to American pressure, and thus produced results both in Canada, primarily in Canada, but also in Australia. Very different from what practically everyone expected a couple of months ago.
Europe, different place. But still we have two important elections coming up, within slightly more than 10 days. We have the first round of the presidential election in Poland. That's very important for the future possibilities of the Tusk government to continue reforming that particular country. And we have the second round of the presidential election in Romania. An important country often forgotten. But there of course, we had gross interference from Russia and TikTok, and a candidate was banned. In both of these cases, we see the Trump presidency acting. They received, in the White House the other day, the opposition candidate. The extreme right nationalist opposition candidate the other day. And they've been making distinct noises in favor of the same political alternative in Romania. Will this backfire in the way it did in Canada, Australia? Remains to be seen. Very important elections both of them. Watch this space.
Sign seen at a liquor store in B.C., Canada earlier this year.
How are major economies bracing for the impact of Trump tariffs?
As the world reels from Donald Trump's on-again off-again "Liberation Day" tariffs, nations are lining up to make deals – but also scrambling to shield their economies from the fallout.
The EU has proposed a "zero-for-zero" tariff agreement on industrial goods. But the bloc is prepared to enact a 25% tariff on US products if negotiations falter, and is also considering deploying its new anti-coercion instrument, which enables a range of retaliatory measures including export controls, intellectual property restrictions, and foreign investment limits.
North of the US border, Canada enacted 25% counter-tariffs on US vehicles. The revenue is earmarked to support Canadian auto workers harmed by the US tariffs. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Trump had also previously agreed that trade negotiations will take place after the Canadian election, scheduled for April 28.
Interest rate cuts. Countries including India, New Zealand and the Philippines slashed interest rates to cushion their economies, and South Korea unveiled a $2 billion aid package for its auto sector. Many countries, including Australia, Spain and Canada, are also urging consumers to buy domestic products rather than American goods.
China strikes back. China, for its part, countered the 145% US tariff with a 125% levy on American goods. Beijing is also looking to bolster domestic consumption through initiatives like Chinese e-commerce company JD.com's $27 billion procurement deal from Chinese firms. So far, however, Beijing has not moved to devalue its currency to support exports, as some expected it might.EU and Chinese flags in an illustration.
The EU extends a hand toward China
European leaders have much to worry about when it comes to trade and economic growth. In March, Donald Trump imposed 25% tariffs on steel, aluminum, and cars coming from Europe. Last week, he added a 20% tariff on virtually everything else that Europe exports to the US. On Wednesday, the EU responded by announcing tariffs on a broad range of US-exported products that could affect about $23 billion worth of goods. Then, later on Wednesday, Trump suddenly included the EU among those who would see tariff rates fall back to 10%. The whiplash from Washington continues.
But European leaders are also concerned about China, which continues to flood the EU with goods, particularly electric vehicles, that undercut European manufacturers on price. That’s a problem that could get worse quickly if Chinese goods normally destined for the US are diverted by Trump tariffs toward Europe – a problem that looked even more serious after Trump’s Wednesday announcement that he would raise the “tariff charged to China by the United States of America to 125%, effective immediately.”
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen held a call with Premier Li Qiang earlier this week and said afterward that EU and Chinese leaders should work together toward a “negotiated resolution” to any trade conflicts between them and provide “stability and predictability” for the global economy.
There is also an opportunity here for President Xi Jinping. China has a strategic interest in helping to divide the US from Europe. Demonstrating to European leaders that China can become a force for economic stability at a time when Trump is waging a trade war on allies and rivals alike would further that goal.Demonstrators rally against President Donald Trump and his adviser Elon Musk during a Hands Off! protest on the Washington Monument grounds in Washington, DC, on April 5, 2025.
Trump’s tariffs trigger aftershocks at home and abroad
US President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs have been met with anger, outrage, and disbelief in every corner of the world – including islands inhabited solely by penguins. At last count, at least 50 countries want to talk trade with Washington, while in the US, opposition to Trump’s presidency is getting organized. Here’s a look at this weekend’s reactions.
In America: Protests, pleas, and pride
From San Francisco to Tulsa to DC, protesters took to the streets on Saturday in over 1,400 demonstrations across all 50 states, demanding that Trump and his “billionaire friends” take their “Hands Off” programs like Medicare and Social Security. While the protests were not specifically aimed at the tariffs, many demonstrators denounced their impact on consumers and retirees, who feared for the future of their investments in the wake of tariff-induced market turmoil.
Meanwhile, top tech and finance leaders — including reps from Apple, Goldman Sachs, and Meta — reportedly plan to fly to Mar-a-Lago to urge Trump to reconsider his tariff plans. Their message: Tariffs are tanking investor confidence and threatening America’s innovation edge.
In the Midwest, it’s a different story. In Iowa, Ohio, and the Dakotas, many in Trump’s base are cheering. Farmers, small manufacturers, and assembly line workers, angry at the impact of offshoring, say the tariffs finally put America first. As a candy store manager in small-town Ohio told the BBC, “If tariffs bring companies and business back to hardworking American people like the ones who live here, then it’s worth it.”
Overseas: Calls for unity, calculated countermeasures
Abroad, in the words of UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, the consensus is that “the world as we knew it has gone.” The EU is promising a coordinated response in the coming days with retaliatory tariffs on a host of American goods, including diamonds, meat, cereals, wine, wood, clothing, chewing gum, dental floss, vacuum cleaners, and toilet paper. (In a curious twist, Trump adviser Elon Musk suggested on Saturday to a far-right Italian party that the US and Europe form a zero-tariff free trade zone, saying that this “has certainly been my advice to the president.” We’ll see whether Trump takes it.)
In Asia, responses have been mixed. Indonesia and Taiwan’s governments have opted not to retaliate, while Vietnam’s President To Lam has already been on the phone with Trump, proposing a deal to eliminate tariffs entirely between the two nations. In contrast, China is digging in its heels, placing export restrictions on rare earths in addition to reciprocal tariffs of 34% on US goods. Both measures were announced on Friday after two days of stock market meltdowns, which continued into Monday, as the Nikkei plunged 7.8%, while two other Asian indexes had record losses for a single day. Wall Street is also set for another week of turmoil after Dow Jones futures fell 1,500 points (over 3.5%) late Sunday.
Responding to the continued market downturn, Trump said Sunday night that “sometimes you have to take medicine to fix something.”
Volkswagen export cars are seen at the port of Emden, Germany, beside a VW plant.
Trump hits global auto sector hard with new tariffs
On Wednesday, ahead of what Donald Trump is calling “Liberation Day,” when the administration plans to unveil a series of “reciprocal” tariffs, the president signed an executive order levying 25% tariffs on automobiles and auto parts made outside the United States. The tariffs will come into effect on April 2.
The new tariffs will be applied on top of existing duties on materials such as steel. For Canada and Mexico, which are party to a free trade deal with the US and whose auto manufacturing industries are intimately connected to their American partners, the tariff will only be applied to the non-US content of a vehicle or its parts. Economist Jim Stanford points out, however, that this means every consumer car and truck in the US will be tariffed since no vehicle is uniquely and entirely made in America.
Trump says his goal is to permanently shift auto manufacturing to the US. But countries affected by the tariffs are pushing back. After the announcement, Canada, the European Union, Japan, China, the United Kingdom, and Germany decried the move. Japan says it’s “putting all options on the table” in response, and the German economy minister is promising “a firm response” from the EU.
In Canada, Prime Minister Mark Carney, who is on the campaign trail, called the tariffs a “direct attack” and said the country will defend its workers and industry, which accounts for over 600,000 direct and indirect domestic jobs. Carney canceled a Thursday campaign event to return to Ottawa to convene a meeting of his Cabinet Committee on Canada-US Relations. Earlier in the day, he promised that a reelected Liberal government would create a CA$2 billion fund to protect workers in the industry and to boost domestic manufacturing capacity, creating a “made-in-Canada” supply chain as the future of the continental auto industry remains in doubt.The end of the transatlantic relationship as we know it
Donald Trump’s second term is having considerably more impact on the global stage than his first. Trump may have been a largely transactional president last time around, when he was more constrained at home and faced relatively more powerful counterparts abroad. But the first two months of Trump 2.0 have shattered the illusion of continuity. No American ally faces a ruder awakening than Europe, whose relationship with the United States is now fundamentally damaged.
Core partners in Asia like Japan, South Korea, India, as well as Australia worry about being hit with tariffs and will do what they can to defuse conflict, but they also know their geostrategic position vis-à-vis China means Trump can’t afford to alienate them entirely. Accordingly, their relations with Washington should remain comparatively stable over the next four years.
America’s largest trade partners, Mexico and Canada, are facing more significant trade pressures from the Trump administration, but the imbalance of power is such that they have no credible strategy to push back. Everyone understands they’ll have to accept Trump’s terms eventually; the only question is whether capitulation comes before or after a costly fight. Riding an 85% job approval, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum has enough domestic political space to yield to Trump’s demands to keep Mexico in his good graces, as she is already doing. By contrast, Canadian leaders have a political incentive to put up a bigger fight because Trump’s threats toward Canada’s economy and sovereignty have sharply inflamed nationalist sentiment north of the border in the run-up to the April 28 elections. However, I expect Ottawa will quietly fold shortly after the vote to ensure that ongoing relations with the US remain functional.
Most US allies have no choice but to absorb Trump’s demands and hope for a reset after he’s gone. But Europe is different. It possesses both the collective heft to resist Trump’s demands and the existential imperative to do so.
Three structural forces render the transatlantic rupture permanent.
First, the European Union has the trade competency and market size to punch back against the Trump administration’s aggressive tariff blitz. Unlike most other US trading partners who lack the economic leverage to go toe-to-toe against Washington and have little choice but to fold under pressure, Brussels’ defiance ensures a protracted trade war with no easy resolution.
Second, most Europeans view the Trump administration’s unilateral pursuit of rapprochement with Russia as a direct threat to their national security. While President Trump would still like to end the war in Ukraine as he promised on the campaign trail, he is prepared to do so on the Kremlin’s terms – and he’s even more interested in business deals with Moscow. He won’t be deterred by a collapse of the Ukraine peace talks, even though it’s Vladimir Putin who’s shown no interest in softening his maximalist demands. Nor will Trump care that the Europeans stridently oppose US normalization with their principal enemy. After all, the United States is protected by two oceans from Putin’s army, and Trump’s embrace of Euroskeptic movements reveals their shared aim: a fragmented and weakened Europe that is easier to dominate.
The president’s rhetoric – echoed by the Signal-gate private texts, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff’s recent interview with Tucker Carlson, Vice President JD Vance’s Munich speech, and so many other pieces of evidence – makes clear that the current administration sees Europeans not as allies but as “pathetic freeloaders” who shouldn’t be “bailed out” as a matter of principle. Even if Washington begrudgingly agrees to provide them with transactional security, Europeans now realize that relying on a hostile US for survival is strategic suicide.
Which brings us to the third and final driver of the definitive US-Europe break: common values … or lack thereof. From free trade and collective security to territorial integrity and the rule of law, Europe’s foundational principles are now anathema to Trump’s America. Just look at Trump’s repeated threats to annex Greenland, to say nothing of his willingness to recognize illegally annexed Ukrainian territories as Russian and support Israel’s annexation of parts of the West Bank and Gaza. For an EU built from the ashes of World War II, it's hard to compromise with a worldview in which borders are mere suggestions and might makes right.
After years of complacency, European leaders seem to have finally gotten the message that the United States under Trump is not just an unreliable friend but an actively hostile power. They understand they need to drastically increase Europe’s sovereign military, technological, and economic capabilities – not just to survive without America but also to defend their borders, economies, and democracies against it. Whether they can muster the political mettle to act on this realization, however, is Europe’s greatest test since 1945.
Recent moves – Germany’s historic debt brake reform and Brussels’ fiscal and financial maneuvers to boost defense spending – hint at urgency. Yet half measures won’t suffice. If Europeans refuse to commit troops to guarantee Ukraine’s post-ceasefire security absent an American backstop and continue to balk at seizing Russia’s frozen assets and overriding Hungary’s veto, it will confirm my view that the bloc lacks the nerve to survive in a jungle-ruled world where Trump and Putin refuse to play by any rules.
The irony is that Europe has the resources and capacity to stand up for itself, its values, and its fellow Europeans. What’s missing is the collective courage to act like it’s 1938, not 1989. For Ukraine’s sake and its own, that needs to change.
Is Europe finally ready to defend itself?
Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden and co-chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations, shares his perspective on European politics from Tabiano, Italy.
How serious is Europe about really beefing up its defense and rearming?
It is very serious indeed, although it's different in different parts of Europe. If you look at the EU countries, they have been increasing their defense spending over the last few years by roughly a third. That's a hell of a lot of money.
And if you look forward, I think there's a division between, say, Germany, Poland, Nordic Baltic states. You will see substantial further increases in defense spending there. There's more a question mark in the Mediterranean region, Greece support, where there is more hesitancy to do the rapid buildup of forces that is required.
Then, there is the problem of integrating defense industries and integrating command and control efforts. But we are undoubtedly at the new stage when it comes to developing serious integrated European defense capabilities, hopefully, to operate them together with the United States. But, as things are, also have the ability to operate them in the future more independently.
Putin-Trump Ukraine call is a small win for both sides
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: The Putin-Trump call, some 90 minutes long, now over. And I would call this a win for both sides, for the Americans and the Russians, and not horrible for Ukraine and Europe, but kicking the can on what's going to be some big problems down the road and setting out where those challenges are going to be. Why is that?
Well, first of all, Putin said, "No," to the 30-day complete ceasefire, but did give a win to Trump, having accepted a 30-day ceasefire with no conditions with the Ukrainians. The Russians are saying they're prepared to do that, with no gives, as long as it's about targeting energy infrastructure, and in principle, still some discussions around maritime attacks around the Black Sea. Places that frankly the Russians have been irritated with what Ukraine has been able to do with air drones and with sea drones. And also allows the Russians to continue to press for territorial gains over the course of the coming weeks, depleting Ukraine's military capabilities. Plus, the weather's getting warmer, how much damage are you going to do to Ukraine, how miserable you can make them when you're no longer dealing with the freeze is not quite as relevant. So, not a particular loss for the Russians.
The fact that you're going to have less engagement militarily means fewer people will get killed. That's good for everybody involved, frankly. So that's where we are. Did you need 90-minutes to get that going? Not really, because the Russians also want to ensure that they have lots of conversations with the Americans about building business between the two sides, about people-to-people engagement, about finding a way to ensure that there is an ongoing bilateral channel where the Europeans aren't involved, where the Ukrainians aren't involved, that's essential for Putin and that he got. So yes, you have a meaningful, relatively contained ceasefire that maybe you can build on, but you also have a meaningful bilateral channel for broader engagement between the Americans and the Russians that the Ukrainians and the Europeans aren't going to be a part of, and that the Americans have no interest in having the Ukrainians Europeans being a part of.
Now, what Trump has heard from Putin in terms of red lines is that to actually have a comprehensive ceasefire ongoing, that the Russians are demanding, that there is no further intelligence or military support to Ukraine from the United States or Europe. That's obviously a non-starter for the Ukrainians because it means they won't be able to defend themselves as the Russians rebuild. It's a non-starter for the Europeans for similar reasons. Trump might be willing to negotiate that, and if he is, then he and Putin can blame Ukraine and the Europeans for not being able to take a 30-day limited ceasefire and expand it, which is exactly the position that Putin wants to be in. So, Putin giving a little bit in the near-term with the hopes of getting a lot more in the longer-term, getting Trump as it were, a little bit pregnant around a deal so that he's more engaged with the Russians in areas that's going to be more consequential and more costly for Europe and for the Ukrainians.
So that's where we are. We don't know yet whether the Ukrainians are going to accept these limited 30-day terms. I expect they will, because Trump wants them to. And when that happens, the Europeans will be onboard, too. The intention will be to try to use that by the Ukrainians, the Europeans, to try to get a longer, broader ceasefire. But there, the working level conversations between the US and Russia, between the US and Ukraine, are going to be far more difficult and they're probably not going to hold.
It feels a little bit like what we have in Gaza. Relatively easy to get the first iteration of a deal in place where no one's really giving anything up, but as you go into the second phase, you find that the fundamental interests don't actually overlap, and that's why we're fighting again on the ground in Gaza, with the Israelis killing hundreds of people there in the last 24-hours, and it's why I expect ultimately we are not heading towards peace, even though we do get a temporary ceasefire with Ukraine.