Imagine for a moment that in 2005, or even in 2015, a publisher received the manuscript of a history such as this one: despite countless detangles with the justice of his country and very suspicious relations with Moscow, an American real estate promoter with a high verb and fragile balance manages to erase all the trials that are brought to him and to fanize a part of the electorate, times President of the United States, installs all the levers of the federal power of crooked entrepreneurs and mafia animators, systematically dismantle American institutions in defiance of all constitutional rules, deals with international relations as real estate transactions and claims to annex Greenland and Canada, to finally ally with a predatory Russia, by repealing eighty years of alliance Transatlantic. Even in the science fiction category, even written by Michel Houellebecq or Amélie Nothomb, this crazy novel would have been very likely to see the light of day …
And yet, this is what the dumbfounded international community attended at the beginning of 2025. Beyond the inevitable indignation accusations, accusations and flogging after such an earthquake, some so far neglected considerations seem to impose itself: on the one hand, it is certain that Donald Trump -who, according to his former Defense Minister James Mattis, “The behavior and the understanding of a kid of ten or eleven, managed to amaze American and European by a totally unprecedented mixture of flagrant lies, abrupt decisions and rough threats; But once the first months of amazement have passed, he will inevitably come up against his country to the judicial institution, the congress, the administration and the press – everything quickly amplified by inevitable sets of accounts within his entourage.
In addition, the upcoming disappointments to come from his baroque rapprochement with the former KGB officer Vladimir Putin, joined to the foreseeable failure of his attempted alliance Russo – American against China, will not fail to create confusion and resistance within the CIA, the Pentagon and the State Department – which the amateurism of their new officials can only act. Finally, its international commercial filibustery companies, with their inevitable deleterious repercussions in the United States, will quickly create a strong dissatisfaction in the country, the effects of which will be felt during the legislative elections in mid-term-and beyond.
A limited Russian-American joint-venture
By virtue of all this, it is not unreasonable to predict a new turnaround of American policy by 2029, with the return to power of a president … “normal”. But in the meantime, it is necessary to expect, for Europe in general and for Ukraine in particular, a period of maximum danger extending over two years at least and at most four years. Especially since during this period, a withdrawal from the American NATO forces – or at least an effective paralysis of the organization – cannot be excluded. If it seems inevitable that a Russian-American economic cooperation strengthens Russia and allows it to rearm itself powerfully for its new predatory businesses in Europe, this seal Connection nature will undoubtedly remain limited: American and multinational societies needing long -term visibility and not knowing what will be the policy of the successors of Donald Trump -while having already known in Russia the mafia practice of taking American citizens to make their government sing -, will undoubtedly venture that carefully on the Russian market. Their reluctance will still be accentuated if Europe decides to close its market to American business shopping with Russia…
If Europeans should therefore not be hypnotized by the claims appearances of the moment, they must necessarily take the greatest account of this unprecedented turnaround since 1945, and completely rethink the organization of their defense as well as their diplomacy – before Vladimir Putin seriously attacks Europe once its forces have been reconstructed. First, given the fact that the United States remains a democracy, nothing prevents Europeans from practicing active lobbying and fueling public opinion in general and the members of the “destroyed” congress in particular-in particular-that is mutatis mutandis What the British had done between 1940 and 1941. After 75 years of America’s voice in Europe, we would therefore know a voice from Europe in America – as long as this Europe starts to speak with one voice. The White House could also benefit, for example if Norway and Sweden discreetly informed Donald Trump that his dream of receiving the Nobel Peace Prize would be fatally compromised if he had to betray Ukraine and Europe for the benefit of the Russian dictator.
Not agree without Europe
Secondly, the last aborted meeting between Trump and Zelensky should at least be used to make Europeans understand that a negotiation leaving Zelensky alone to negotiate with Putin and Trump is no longer conceivable: no serious agreement can be concluded without Europe. Even and especially after a possible ceasefire, Europe will have to continue and develop its assistance to Ukraine, and whatever the decisions made about the sending of land contingents, the absolute minimum will be the total coverage of Ukrainian airspace by European soil-to-air planes and missiles. Finally, even if Ukraine was to temporarily give up part of its territory, it would remain able to maintain subversion in the occupied regions – as it did for almost fifteen years after the Second World War. The prospect of having to face such a movement, supported by a united Europe and in already devastated regions, would have a limited attraction for Russia.
Thirdly, the Foucades of President Trump having shown the dangers of an dependence on American weapons supplies, reinforced inter-European cooperation will be necessary for rationalization and the development of common weapons, on the model of the European Hunter Scaf, the Franco-Italo-German combat chariot MGCS, the A400M military transport aircraft, and above all the ELSA highly-reaching missile initiative- With also a particular emphasis on artificial intelligence, mastery of cyber attacks (and counterattacks) and the production of anti-missile drones and defenses-two areas in which Ukrainians now have unparalleled experience. This would double close cooperation in military production with Pacific countries affected in the short term by the American defection, such as Australia, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan. For Europe, rearmament will necessarily cost very expensive, but it is the price of survival; The 270 billion euros in frozen Russian assets should be assigned to it as a priority, which would have the additional advantage of indicating to Vladimir Putin that Europeans ended up taking the confrontation quite seriously to give up legal finasses …
A more flexible structure than NATO
Finally and above all, the probable abandonment of Europe by the Americans will make a new defense structure sufficiently dissuasive vis-à-vis Russia. The latter respecting only nations with nuclear force, the reorganization must necessarily be done accordingly. We can count on European political and military leaders to provide an adequate response to the problem: it can for example be a set of twenty countries covered by a block bringing together France, Great Britain, Germany and Poland, and guaranteed by the only two European nuclear powers, which already closely coordinate their policy of development and employment of nuclear weapons from the Lancaster House Also put back in production their pre-prone mobile soil missiles (tactical nuclear nuclear), such as the French Hades and the British WE 177, which would discreetly circulate in the immediate vicinity of Moldova and Baltic countries-which would reduce the appetite of Vladimir Putin for a rapid conquest of these nations, after the possible withdrawal of the American nuclear bombs B61 currently stored in six countries NATO.
Three differences with NATO in its current configuration: a flexible structure allowing member countries to leave the organization – or to be excluded from it – in the event of accession to the power of a faction favorable to Russian expansionism; Conversely, a structure making it possible to accommodate countries like Hungary or Slovakia in the event of a political turnaround in a favorable sense to the Alliance, and countries like Canada, which could also join it. Second difference: increased cohesion and reactivity compared to a very heavy structure of 32 members with often divergent geopolitical obligations and interests. Third difference: discretion; Officials of the organization at all levels would avoid pouring out in the public square about their resources, their weaknesses, their disagreements and what they would do or could not do. In this regard -and in this regard only -they would take example from their Russian counterparts …
All these projects will not fail to run up against countless objections, on the part of allies as enemies: we know that the complete inaction always raises less – which is why it is the most often retained option …
*François Kersaudy is a historian and former professor at the universities of Oxford and Paris I. He is notably the author of De Gaulle and Roosevelt And Stalin War Master. His latest work: Ten hidden faces of communism (Perrin)
.