President Trump hasn’t held back in his criticism of the European Union, labeling it everything from “a foe” to an entity “set up to take advantage of the United States.” He’s even gone as far as to claim it’s “worse than China” when it comes to economic competition.
Adding to this tension, Vice President JD Vance has publicly lambasted European democracy. He argues it suffers from deep flaws, pointing to alleged suppression of religious expression and dissent, promotion of uncontrolled migration without public consensus, election cancellations, and censorship of far-right voices, which he believes stifles political debate.
Vance’s involvement in European internal affairs goes even deeper. During Germany’s spring election, he broke diplomatic norms by openly attacking European democratic principles in a Munich speech. This controversial address was followed by a meeting with the leader of the Alternative for Germany, a far-right party widely seen as anti-constitutional and extremist.
Since President Trump’s inauguration, numerous other U.S. administration officials have similarly thrown their weight behind right-wing movements across Europe. Their endorsements have extended to parties in countries like Britain, the Czech Republic, France, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, Slovakia, and Spain, among others.
These European parties, according to Trump officials, embody a “civilizational nationalism.” This ideology champions strong national identity, powerful leadership, Judeo-Christian principles, traditional gender roles, and strict anti-migrant and anti-Islam policies. American conservatives view this as a crucial counter-force to liberalism, which they believe poses a significant threat to Western security.
The recent killing of activist Charlie Kirk and the Trump administration’s subsequent reaction have intensified this ideological conflict. While vocally advocating for free speech on the right, Mr. Trump and his team have simultaneously amplified efforts to suppress what they deem “hate speech” from the left. This includes celebrating the silencing of prominent critics, such as late-night host Jimmy Kimmel, this past week. Brendan Carr, the FCC chairman, even hinted at using regulatory authority against ABC, the network carrying Kimmel’s show, and its affiliated local stations.
This aggressive stance from Trump and his allies has sparked apprehension among some Europeans. They fear that these tactics—particularly silencing liberal criticism through social media-fueled public pressure—could serve as a blueprint for their own burgeoning far-right and populist parties, whose credibility is already being amplified by Washington’s endorsement.
During Poland’s presidential campaign in May, U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem addressed conservatives in Warsaw, stating bluntly, “We do not have the time to dance around the dangers that threaten our societies.” She sharply criticized European leaders as “weak,” accusing them of “destroying our countries” by governing through fear and promoting agendas antithetical to liberty and freedom.
Noem explicitly endorsed Karol Nawrocki, the candidate from a far-right Polish party advocating for a reformed European Union. Trump himself hosted Nawrocki at the White House during the campaign, a visit that coincided with Nawrocki’s eventual victory, and again just this month.
The Trump administration’s relentless critiques of Europe’s liberal establishment highlight a profound clash of cultures, ideologies, and trade policies. This conflict has intensified to such a degree that some European leaders and officials now suspect President Trump’s aides are actively pushing for “regime change” across the continent. They interpret these actions as a concerted effort to replace existing center-left and center-right governments with far-right coalitions that echo their own nationalistic, religious, gender, and cultural values.
Evidence of this alleged interference goes beyond mere electoral incursions. European officials point to a pattern of behavior, including meetings between Trump’s allies and sympathetic European legislators, attempts to undermine EU regulations, U.S. meddling in Greenland (a territory of NATO ally Denmark), and vocal criticism of French and Romanian court decisions that ruled against far-right presidential hopefuls.
While European officials recognize the right of Mr. Trump and his advisors to voice their opinions on worldviews and perceived shortcomings, they draw a clear distinction. Unlike Russia’s clandestine interference, they view the Trump administration’s overt meddling in their domestic politics as a direct breach of established norms among allied nations.
Despite these profound disagreements, senior European officials are keen to maintain a strong alliance with Washington, primarily for security reasons. Publicly, many European leaders may offer flattering remarks to Mr. Trump and Mr. Vance, but privately, their anger over these domestic interventions simmers, according to one high-ranking European official who spoke anonymously.
Robin Niblett, former director of the nonpartisan Chatham House, observes that Vance and his supporters see themselves at the forefront of a revolutionary movement aimed at restoring what they consider a “true Western identity.” This, he explains, is envisioned as a Judeo-Christian West, which they believe is currently being eroded by a “valueless new normality” promoted by self-questioning elites.
“So, yes,” Niblett concludes, “they are after regime change in Europe.”
Luuk van Middelaar, a Dutch historian and former European official, draws a striking parallel, comparing Trump officials to a modern-day, right-wing Comintern—the historical Soviet organization dedicated to spreading world communism.
“Europeans underestimate the potency of the conservative ecosystem in the U.S.,” van Middelaar warns. “The ideologues are in place and want to use this power to build a new Western order.”
Both the White House and Mr. Vance declined to comment on these accusations. However, Vance’s aides maintain that he has consistently denied any intent to meddle in European elections, emphasizing that he engages with leaders across the political spectrum. They note his meeting with then-German Chancellor Olaf Scholz prior to his controversial Munich speech as an example.
Forging a ‘Civilizational Alliance’
The Trump administration’s true sentiments regarding Europe were inadvertently revealed when private messages from an internal group, accidentally shared with a journalist, came to light. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reportedly branded Europeans “PATHETIC” following a comment from Mr. Vance, who, in reference to strikes in Yemen, declared, “I just hate bailing Europeans out again.”
Yet, Mr. Trump’s aides and supporters are far from secretive about their objectives.
In late May, Samuel D. Samson, a senior advisor for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, published an essay on a State Department-affiliated platform. In it, he advocated for forming politically aligned “civilizational” alliances across Europe.
Samson argued that European governments are engaged in “an aggressive campaign against Western civilization itself,” systematically dismantling its “anchors of nationhood, culture and tradition.” He claimed this erosion “increasingly affects American security,” crediting Mr. Vance as his inspiration.
Trump officials, aligning with European nationalist right leaders, envision a “civilizational alliance,” as Samson described it. This alliance would be “forged in common culture, faith, family ties, mutual assistance in times of strife, and above all, a shared Western civilizational heritage.”
Other administration figures have also vocally opposed actions like the criminal conviction of Marine Le Pen, the head of France’s far-right National Rally. They’ve also fiercely criticized British and other European attempts to regulate hate speech. Notably, Elon Musk, while advising Mr. Trump, publicly urged Germans to reject centrist parties and instead elect the Alternative for Germany.
The February meeting between Mr. Vance and Germany’s Alternative for Germany party significantly boosted its standing. This move privately enraged center-right candidate Friedrich Merz, who ultimately won the election by a narrow margin, according to a senior German official speaking anonymously due to the sensitive nature of the information.
Some European officials speculate that Mr. Vance and his cohort of younger, more conservative and ideologically driven followers are poised to become the future leaders of the Republican Party.
Rem Korteweg, a political analyst from the nonpartisan Clingendael Institute in the Netherlands, highlights that Vance and fellow American conservatives have a clear agenda. Their objectives, he notes, extend beyond mere defense spending or trade balances. They aim to dismantle what “MAGA officials” perceive as a “nefarious, globalist, ‘woke’ project” that they believe undermines American power.
The EU: A Primary Target
The European Union finds itself squarely in the crosshairs of Trump’s supporters. Kevin D. Roberts, president of the influential conservative Heritage Foundation and a close ally of the Trump administration, frequently labels the EU “the most aggressive and dangerous enemy of the nation-state anywhere in the world.” He accuses its leadership of sidestepping democratic governance and intentionally prioritizing welfare and regulation over economic growth.
Nile Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at the Heritage Foundation, describes Trump’s evolving strategy toward Europe as “revolutionary.” He emphasizes that the overarching goal is “the defense of Western civilization itself,” marking this as the first U.S. administration to directly challenge the “European project.”
Gardiner further characterized Mr. Trump as “America’s first Euroskeptic president.”
Trump’s demands for tariffs and his insistence that Europe assume greater responsibility for the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and its future are already taking a toll on European economies. These economies are grappling with high debt and sluggish growth.
Sabine Weyand, an EU trade official, recently revealed that European trade concessions aren’t a product of negotiation but rather fear. This fear stems from the urgent need to preserve security cooperation with the United States amidst Russia’s continued aggression in Ukraine.
“There is a land war on the European continent, and we are entirely dependent on the United States,” she explained to Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung. She noted that member states were unwilling to risk further escalation by implementing European countermeasures.
Weyand’s frustration is palpable, and it echoes a widespread, albeit private, sentiment among European officials who increasingly question America’s reliability as an ally. “The post-1945 economic order is gone forever,” she declared.
Mirroring these efforts, the Heritage Foundation is actively cultivating relationships with like-minded organizations in Europe, such as the Hungarian think tank Mathias Corvinus Collegium.
Pierre Vimont, a former French ambassador to Washington, warns that Europe must abandon its complacency. He argues that European leaders are “losing the chance to mold whatever system replaces the post-1945 order” and stresses the critical need for “a vision that would not lose track of universal rights and values.”