Brussels – US President Donald Trump promised – and threatened – 35 percent tariffs, instead of 15 percent, if the EU does not live up to its commitments to invest $600 billion in the US. It took very little, just nine days, to realize how unreliable the US partner is (can he really be considered a partner at this point?) and how ready he is to bully Europe again. It took just as little to realize how weak and even foolish the EU is in bowing down to a bully who, by definition and as such, sees submission as fertile ground for new acts of intimidation.
Euro-Atlantic trade tensions sum up today’s Europe: confused, divided, submissive, and weak. Subordinate to the great powers, or at least to influential international players, and authoritative – at times even authoritarian – with those who on the global chessboard count a little less. An example of this is the loud stance on Bosnia-Herzegovina; then again, the EU is a ‘wolf’ with Kyrgyzstan, and becomes a little lamb with Israel and the US.
A very small EU in which Ursula von der Leyen plays the role most suited to a Europe that is still strongly confederated, where states prefer to think for themselves and not think big (and, after all, von der Leyen has always been there for this reason, to avoid upsetting capitals). The situation that has emerged is perfect for those who want to delegitimize the European project, blame Europe for what does not work, and claim as their own the merits that come from the Union.
Thus, Germany is attacking the European Commission, accusing it of producing an unsatisfactory agreement and showing “weakness.” At least that’s what German Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil said in his visit to Washington, the first since he took office, during which he briefly took over from the EU executive and started negotiations to eliminate steel tariffs.
The German rift produces friction with Brussels. “We are surprised to hear these statements,” said Olof Gill, EU spokesman for trade. “There was a large majority of member states that asked to avoid a trade war and negotiate, and this agreement is what was requested.”
Olof Gill, spokesman for the European Commission for trade matters [Brussels, February 10, 2025]
The European official is right. Von der Leyen had been asked for an agreement at any cost because an open trade war was not seen as a viable way forward. The Commission produced what the states asked for, with the president of the EU executive, in her submissive spirit, accepting being humiliated to offer an understanding to her masters.
The German finance minister is right: the 27 July agreement is a mess. It is a muddled agreement that has to be better defined and further negotiated. But it is the agreement that was requested. However, “Herr Klingbeil” is wrong to undermine Europe and call it into question. The EU needs the political support of those traditionally pro-European forces, like the SPD, of which the minister is an expression. If you try to respond to Euroscepticism by playing the same game as the anti-Europeans, you end up completely sinking the integration project. This integration, already lost and put to the test by a tariff agreement, is beginning to cost the EU dearly.
English version by the Translation Service of Withub
