By Jorge Liboreiro
That the Western alliance of established democracies is going through a turbulent period in history is something we were, by now, keenly aware of. In less than three months, Donald Trump has managed to single-handedly bulldoze every tenet that has underpinned the mighty coalition, from the staunch defence of open free markets to the principles of territorial integrity and national sovereignty. Case in point: this week, the G7 couldn’t agree on a joint statement denouncing Russia’s devastating attack against the Ukrainian city of Sumy after the US blocked the proposed language. Another case in point: Trump, speaking from the White House, once again blamed Ukraine for starting (sic) the war.
Every day, it seems, there’s a new indication that the Western alliance is being hollowed out from the inside, debased into a sad caricature of what it once was.
Instead of drowning in despair and nostalgia, Ursula von der Leyen suggests it might be better to just let it go. “The West as we knew it no longer exists,” she declared, point blank, in a (surprisingly) long interview with the German newspaper Zeit. It is a remarkable admission from a politician who, in the same interview, describes herself as a “great friend” of America and a “convinced Atlanticist,” but who, a few lines later, refuses to say whether the US is a friend, a former friend or an opponent.
“The world has become a globe also geopolitically, and today our networks of friendship span the globe,” she explains, boasting about the many phone calls she’s recently had with other world leaders in reaction to Trump’s go-for-broke policies.
The directory of conversations combines members of the (former?) Western alliance, such as Canada, Norway and New Zealand, with representatives from countries with distinctly different values, like the United Arab Emirates and China.
Her exchange with Chinese Premier Li Qian was particularly eye-catching, given that von der Leyen, as you might remember, was the most vocal proponent of the “de-risking” strategy to deal with the Asian giant. The phone call immediately fuelled speculation of an imminent rapprochement between Brussels and Beijing, despite the formidable obstacles that stand in the way.
It would be premature to conclude this diplomatic outreach is a prelude to the emergence of a new West, or rather, a post-West order. The conversations are primarily driven by sheer pragmatism to cope with the chaos unleashed by the Trump administration. Think of it as a temporary truce for the sake of survival.
After all, every government, be it democratic or autocratic, seeks to ensure steady growth and prosperity. Trump’s tariffs threaten to bring long-lasting, and perfectly avoidable, economic pain upon all corners of the globe. Faced with an unnecessary recession, leaders are more prone to call each other up and say: “Let’s bury the hatchet and focus on the machete.” But the economy isn’t the only driver behind the swift realignment. Leaders are making new accords based on many other considerations, from personal affection (“We like each other”) to ideological affinity (“We dislike the same things”).
Take Slovakia’s prime minister, Robert Fico, who has most gladly accepted an invitation to attend the military parade that Moscow will host on 9 May. By contrast, Friedrich Merz, who will soon become Germany’s new chancellor, is reportedly planning to spend the same day in another capital: Kyiv. In visual terms, this means that as Fico stands next to Putin celebrating Victory Day, Merz will be alongside Volodymyr Zelenskyy honouring Europe Day.
That split screen alone will be reason enough to validate von der Leyen’s remark that the West, as we once knew it, as we grew used to relying on it, taking it for granted, believing it was eternal and unbreakable, might no longer exist.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment