Is Donald Trump Inciting War Across Europe?

The FT writes today that – ‘European leaders, generals and intelligence chiefs gathered at the annual Munich Security Conference were anxiously awaiting clarification on vital questions such as how to end Russia’s war on Ukraine, contain Vladimir Putin’s hybrid warfare and beef up the transatlantic alliance. They then found out that US defence secretary Pete Hegseth had already given up on Nato membership for Kyiv and on the country’s territorial integrity before negotiations had even started.’ European leaders were aghast at what they heard. ‘They were not prepared for Trump and his inner circle to attack the foundations of their (EU) political order.’

Shortly after the conference, JD Vance took the unprecedented step of meeting AfD co-leader Alice Weidel, whom the conference organisers had barred from attending. Meanwhile, it transpired that Vance had refused to meet Germany’s Social Democratic chancellor Olaf Scholz. And, as the FT continues its report, it ended with a quote from Robert Habeck, Germany’s Green vice-chancellor, who said Vance’s speech was a “turning point” in the relationship between Europe and the US. The US government had “rhetorically and politically sided with the autocrats” – with Haback going on to say – “throughout the weekend in Munich, the western community of values ​​was terminated here”.

Security chiefs all over Europe are now considering a former worst-case Russia-Ukraine scenario becoming a reality.

The prospect of a full-scale war in Europe now looms as a terrifying possibility should Russia emerge victorious in Ukraine. If such an event were to occur under a Donald Trump presidency where the US refuses to assist and actively prevents NATO from engaging – the geopolitical landscape would be irrevocably altered. The consequences would be catastrophic, reshaping the global order, devastating the European economy, and leaving the US in a position to exploit the turmoil for economic gain. Is this the real reason why Donald Trump and JD Vance have deliberately threatened democratic values in Europe at the Munich Security Conference whilst sidestepping Ukraine and Europe in appeasing Putin’s war in Ukraine?

There seems no doubt in the minds of security experts that a Russian victory in Ukraine would embolden Moscow to push further westward, targeting NATO’s eastern flank. The Baltic states – Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania would be at immediate risk, as would Poland and Moldova. With NATO shackled by American refusal to engage, the alliance would face an existential crisis, unable to uphold its fundamental principle of collective defence. The European Union, too, would struggle with internal divisions over how to respond, particularly as many member states remain heavily reliant on Russian energy.

Europe’s economy would be plunged into chaos. Key industries would collapse as war disrupts trade routes and supply chains. Energy prices would skyrocket due to increased Russian leverage over European markets, and inflation would spiral out of control. Germany, the industrial powerhouse of the continent, would be particularly vulnerable due to its dependence on exports and stable economic conditions. Countries like France and Italy would struggle with the arrival of the mass displacement of populations as millions flee from advancing Russian forces. The financial sector would see dramatic volatility, with European stock markets plummeting and investor confidence evaporating.

While the US, under Trump’s leadership, would refuse to engage militarily, it would undoubtedly reap huge economic benefits from a European war. The arms industry would experience a boom as European nations desperate for weapons turn to American defence contractors for supply. With European economies in freefall, capital flight would send vast wealth into American markets, strengthening Wall Street and reinforcing the US dollar as the global safe-haven currency. Energy exports, particularly liquefied natural gas (LNG), would further enrich American corporations as Europe scrambles to replace Russian supplies.

Despite its departure from the EU, Britain would be thrust into the centre of the crisis. With its close ties to Eastern European allies and historical commitment to resisting continental threats, the UK would likely be forced to act – either unilaterally or alongside a coalition of willing nations. London would face immense pressure to bolster its military presence in Eastern Europe and provide direct military support to besieged nations. However, Britain’s defence capabilities, already stretched thin due to years of budget constraints, would struggle to sustain a prolonged engagement against a reinvigorated Russian war machine.

The long-term consequences of a European war would extend beyond the continent. With Europe shattered and NATO effectively dismantled, the global balance of power would shift dramatically. Russia would cement its influence over former Soviet territories, while China would further its geopolitical ambitions, possibly moving against Taiwan while the West remains paralyzed. The United States, despite its short-term economic gains, would ultimately face a world where its former allies are severely weakened, its reputation in tatters, and its ability to project power wholly diminished.

A full-scale European war, precipitated by a Russian victory in Ukraine and American disengagement, would be one of the most devastating conflicts in modern history. The destruction of European economies, the disintegration of NATO, and the emergence of a new global power dynamic favouring authoritarian regimes would mark the end of Western dominance. While some in the US may see financial opportunities in the chaos, such as Donald Trump and his billionaire backers, the long-term damage to global stability and democracy would far outweigh any short-term economic benefits. Preventing such a scenario requires an unwavering commitment to European security and recognising that isolationism only accelerates global conflict.

Donald Trump says he wants to make America great again. It is no longer a stretch to think a man like Trump, aided by billionaire sycophants, would worry too much about any outcome as long as it benefitted themselves.

 

WAR: Making America Great Again

After WW2, America emerged as the world’s dominant economic and political superpower. The destruction in Europe and Asia left the US in a unique position to benefit from both the war itself and its aftermath.

Before officially entering the war, US banks and financial institutions, including J.P. Morgan and Chase Bank, lent significant sums to both the Allies and Axis powers (to Germany via American corporate interests). The US also traded resources like oil and steel with Germany before 1941. These financial entanglements meant that regardless of the war’s outcome, the US would have economic leverage.

In addition, the war drastically boosted US industrial production, which became known as the “Arsenal of Democracy” – mass-producing weapons, vehicles, and supplies. It is only when considering what America produced and billed its allies for that the scale becomes mindboggling. The US produced 297,000 aircraft, 88,000 tanks, 2.3 million trucks, and 6,500 naval vessels.

American factories, which had struggled during the Great Depression, ran at full capacity, creating millions of jobs and lifting the country out of economic stagnation.

After the war, most of Europe was financially crippled, but the US had become the world’s primary creditor. European nations, particularly Britain and France, had borrowed billions from the US under the Lend-Lease Act. After the war, America negotiated repayment agreements, although in some cases (like Britain), the debts were paid off over decades.

Then there was another massive benefit that came America’s way. The US dollar became the dominant global currency. The Bretton Woods Conference established the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency, backed by gold. What this did was hand the US financial dominance over the global economy, which exists to this day.

The Marshall Plan funnelled $13 billion (nearly $250 billion today) into Western Europe to help rebuild economies. However, much of this money was spent on American goods, including steel, machinery, and food, ensuring that US industries thrived and profited.

The US ended the war as the world’s most powerful nation, possessing the only nuclear weapons and the most advanced military technology. With Europe weakened and the Soviet Union as the only significant rival, the US positioned itself as the leader of the “free world.”  With Britain and France severely weakened, and Germany economically flattened, the US-dominated global markets, American companies expanded worldwide, and US economic policies shaped global trade.

It is, as previously said, not hard to think that Trump would like all these economic benefits. But if only there was some sort of playbook that would give a useful guide to such riches and make America great again! The Art Of The Deal, Trump’s own playbook, would say to position yourself in a win-win position. If Europe takes the bait and pays to arm itself, Trump gets to withdraw weapons, military personnel and financial support to focus on China and the Pacific without the cost of both. That being the case – Europe will be buying American weapons. If Russia attacks Ukraine with expansionist ambitions, America will sell even more weapons to Europe. Either way, it’s a win-win in the land of Trump.

 

 

 

---