Politics
Some European Allies Fear Trump Is Out to Destroy Them
During his first term in office, President Trump described the European Union “as a foe,” established “to hurt the United States on trade.”
He repeated the charge at a cabinet meeting on Wednesday, but in more vulgar terms: “The European Union was formed in order to screw the United States. That’s the purpose of it, and they’ve done a good job of it.”
Then he said he was preparing to hit Europe with 25 percent tariffs on cars and other goods.
After Mr. Trump’s embrace of Russia and his warnings that Europe had better fend for itself, the president’s latest attack added to the increasing view of European leaders and analysts that he and his team of loyalists consider America’s traditional allies in Europe as adversaries not just on trade, but on nearly everything.
Some officials and analysts see the Trump administration as merely indifferent to Europe; others see open hostility. But there is a common view that the fundamental relationship has changed and that America is a less reliable and predictable ally.
Mr. Trump has rebuffed NATO and aligned himself with the longstanding, principal threat to the alliance: Russia. Vice President JD Vance has attacked European democracy while calling for the door to be opened to far-right parties. Elon Musk, the billionaire Trump aide, has heaped contempt on European leaders and openly endorsed an extremist party in Germany.
Equally shocking to European leaders, the United States this week refused to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at the United Nations. It instead broke from its allies and voted with Russia, Belarus and North Korea, all authoritarian governments.
European leaders are scrambling to assess and mitigate the damage. The prime minister of Britain, Keir Starmer, arrives at the White House on Thursday — the second such visit this week, after President Emmanuel Macron of France — still hoping to persuade Mr. Trump not to abandon Ukraine and to remain engaged in Europe. But Mr. Trump describes himself as a disrupter, and Mr. Macron got little for his attempt at seduction.
Friedrich Merz, 69, the conservative politician likely to be Germany’s next chancellor, has expressed strong doubts about the trans-Atlantic relationship he and his country have been committed to for decades.
On Sunday evening, after his party won the most votes in the German election, Mr. Merz said that after listening to Mr. Trump, “it is clear that the Americans, at least this part of the Americans, this administration, are largely indifferent to the fate of Europe.”
He wondered whether the American nuclear umbrella over NATO would remain — and even whether the alliance itself would continue to exist.
“My absolute priority will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the USA,” he said.
His comments were a remarkable measure of the dismay felt by European leaders over the American reversal of policy on Ukraine and, perhaps more so, for its outright backing of far-right parties that despise European governments and support Russia.
Mr. Merz’s remarks were reminiscent of a 2017 statement by Angela Merkel, then the German chancellor, after contentious alliance meetings with Mr. Trump. “The times in which we could rely fully on others — they are somewhat over,” she said. She encouraged Europeans to “take our fate into our own hands.”
Her comments were considered a potentially seismic shift, but a real reorientation of European security policy never materialized. Matters are more serious now, said Claudia Major, who directs security policy at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs.
“In Munich, Vance declared a culture war and said: ‘Join us or not. We have the right values and you have it wrong,’” she said. His speech, she added, made it clear that “the country that brought us back our freedom and our democracy is turning against us.”
She is not alone in the assessment. Several analysts said the Trump administration’s actions showed that it was not merely indifferent to Europe, but was out to undo it. The distinction holds real consequences for how Europe can respond.
“There is no question the intention is there to destroy Europe, starting with Ukraine,” said Nathalie Tocci, director of Italy’s Institute of International Affairs. “The empowering of the far right is instrumental to the goal of destroying the European Union.”
The reason, she said, is that the Trump administration sees Europe not merely as a competitor, but also as an economic and even ideological threat. It wants to undermine the power of the European Union to regulate trade, competition and hate speech. The latter is a major topic for Mr. Vance, as he criticized what he called news media censorship and political correctness.
The European Union is the largest trading bloc in the world, capable of striking back against Washington economically and in tariff terms, representing the “economic foe” Mr. Trump railed against in his first term.
That power is being used against high-tech and social media companies whose leaders surround and subsidize Mr. Trump, like Mr. Musk, who owns the social media platform X. They, too, have an interest in weakening “the Brussels Effect,” as Anu Bradford of Columbia University Law School called it.
The Brussels Effect is the power of the European Union to establish global rules and norms, and it is particularly important in the realms of climate regulations, digital competition, platform accountability and artificial intelligence.
But if the Trump administration feels it necessary to destroy that threat, then there is little European nations can do to appease the White House, some warned.
If Mr. Trump and his team “are out to push the far right and destroy European democracy, then no amount of European purchasing of American LNG or weapons will matter,” said Ms. Tocci, of Italy’s Institute of International Affairs. By increasing dependency, she added, “it could be a kind of double suicide.”
U.S.-European relations tend to go in cycles, with important strategic debates in the past over Iraq or Afghanistan or even Vietnam. But now the clashes are simultaneously ideological, strategic and economic, said Camille Grand, a former NATO and French official with the European Council on Foreign Relations.
“Facing hostility on all three fronts at once is quite a shock to Europeans,” said Mr. Grand. “Adding all three together you can wonder whether you are no longer a partner but a rival and, perhaps, even an adversary.”
Every country in Europe is doing a reassessment of where it is vis-à-vis Washington, he said. What isn’t clear is whether, as in Mr. Trump’s first term, “you have an unpleasant roller-coaster ride that leaves you sick but you end up where you started, or whether the whole relationship now derails.”
Linas Kojala, director of the Geopolitics and Security Studies Center in Vilnius, Lithuania, urges calm, because “there is no real alternative to the U.S. security guarantee” for a long time to come. “Declaring the trans-Atlantic relationship has collapsed would be like stepping off a ship in the middle of the ocean with no other vessel in sight.”
So for now, he said, “Europe must swallow” the Trump criticism and “do everything possible to keep the relationship intact.”
But it is unlikely to return to where it was, Alex Younger, a former chief of Britain’s foreign intelligence service, MI6, told the BBC last week. “We are in a new era where, by and large, international relations aren’t going to be determined by rules and multilateral institutions,” he said, but “by strongmen and deals.”
Matthew Kroenig, a former defense department official who is now at the Atlantic Council in Washington, calls himself a “normal Republican” and says that “there has been a bit too much hysteria over the past couple of weeks.”
After all, Mr. Kroenig said, the first Trump term was also marked by “a lot of tough rhetoric against allies and a lot of deferential language toward Putin, but in the end, NATO was strengthened.”
Others are less sure.
Mr. Trump has been engaged in “a policy of rapid, unilateral concession of long-held positions on fundamental interests to persuade the aggressor to stop fighting,” said Nigel Gould-Davies of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, speaking of Russia in Ukraine.
“The established name for such a policy,” he said, “is ‘strategic surrender.’”
Whether it will produce the outcome Mr. Trump desires is not clear, he said. What is clear is that it is undermining allied trust in the credibility and common sense of the United States.
It is imperiling old allies in Europe.
And it is “making Russia a more powerful, assertive and attractive ally to America’s adversaries around the world,” he said.
Politics
Byron Donalds cracks down on persistent border blind spot leaving US vulnerable to overstays
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: Florida Republican Rep. Byron Donalds introduced legislation that would require biometric tracking of every entry and exit from the United States, as part of a Republican push to crack down on visa overstays and fraudulent immigration documents.
With illegal crossings down sharply under President Donald Trump’s second term, Republicans are shifting toward the next phase of immigration enforcement — tracking visa overstays and closing documentation loopholes. Donalds’ bill aims to force full nationwide use and federal oversight of the biometric entry-exit system.
Donalds told Fox News Digital exclusively he introduced the legislation on Monday.
“Thanks to President Trump’s decisive actions, our borders are more secure than they have been in decades. We are now moving to finish the job by introducing the Reform Immigration Through Biometrics Act, which provides the oversight needed to ensure every entry and exit is fully verified,” Donalds told Fox News Digital.
FLORIDA SHERIFF SAYS ICE PARTNERSHIP ONLY THE BEGINNING IN ILLEGAL MIGRANT CRACKDOWN
Congressman Byron Donalds is introducing Reform Immigration Through Biometrics Act to tighten immigration enforcement nationwide. (Paul Ratje / AFP via Getty Images)
The bill would close gaps to ensure full coverage at every port, provide system flow updates, and identify what is “slowing” it down by requiring DHS to report to congress. The biometric data system collects fingerprints, facial images, and iris scans.
Immigration reform is a central focus of the second Trump administration, with officials shifting attention toward internal tracking and enforcement gaps, not just border crossings.
The biometric entry-exit system was first introduced a decade ago, following a 2004 recommendation from the 9/11 Commission to strengthen national security through a comprehensive tracking method.
HOUSE GOP BILL COULD TRIGGER SELF-DEPORTATION FOR SOMALI REFUGEES AMID MINNESOTA FRAUD PROBE
Previous administrations failed to fully implement the system across all ports of entry, leaving it incomplete. A final rule issued in December 2025 now mandates a nationwide rollout.
Donalds’ legislation aims to ensure it is fully executed this time by holding DHS accountable.
“The border has been secured, but the work is far from over,” said Donalds in a press release. “Visa overstays and fraudulent documentation remain a large piece of the overall illegal immigration puzzle that needs to be addressed.”
Byron Donalds, a Florida lawmaker and gubernatorial candidate, unveiled legislation cracking down on immigration overstays. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
Data from the Border Patrol cited by Pew Research found there were 237,538 migrant encounters at the Mexican border in 2025. It is the lowest number since Richard Nixon was president in 1970 when 201,780 were encountered.
I REPRESENT A BORDER DISTRICT THAT WAS SWAMPED BY ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. WHAT I’M SEEING NOW MIGHT SURPRISE YOU
Migrants wait in line to turn themselves in for processing to US Customs and Border Protection border patrol agents near the Paso del Norte Port of Entry after crossing the US-Mexico border in El Paso, Texas, on May 9, 2023. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP)
Donalds, candidate for Florida governor to succeed term-limited Gov. Ron DeSantis, said he anticipates “swift passage” of the bill.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
“Republicans are steadfast in our commitment to the mandate entrusted to us by the American people,” he told Fox News Digital.
Fox News Digital reached out to DHS for comment.
Former state Controller Betty Yee dropped out of the governor’s race on Monday, citing low levels of support from voters and donors.
Yee, a Democrat, was part of a sprawling field of politicians vying to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom. But despite the bevy of prominent candidates running to lead the nation’s most populous state and the world’s fourth-largest economy, this year’s governor’s race has lacked a clear front-runner well known by the electorate.
“It was becoming clear that the donors were not going to be there. Even some of my former supporters just felt like they needed to move on as well,” Yee said in a virtual news conference Monday morning, adding that her internal polling showed voters did not prioritize “competence and experience … and that’s really been my wheelhouse in terms of how we grounded this campaign.”
The former two-term state controller did not immediately endorse another candidate and said she would take a few days to assess the field before making an announcement.
The race was upended this month when then-Rep. Eric Swalwell, among the leading Democrats in the contest, was accused of sexual assault and other misconduct. The East Bay Area Democrat, who is facing multiple criminal investigations, promptly ended his gubernatorial bid and resigned from Congress.
Yee said the contest would probably go down as “one of the most unusual, unpredictable and unsettling races in modern California history.”
“I certainly could not have imagined the twists and the disturbing turns that this race has taken,” she said. “But through it all, my values and my vision for California has never wavered.”
“Voters are scared right now, and I think they really are placing a lot of prominence on a fighter in chief against this Trump administration,” she said.
Though she was prepared to be a governor that would push back against the Trump administration, Yee said her calm demeanor did not help her grab attention.
“We are living in like a reality TV era, where to get traction, you have to either be the loudest, you have to have gimmicks. You’ve got to do what you’ve got to do to get attention. I got no gimmicks. I have no scandals,” she said before calling herself “Boring Betty.”
Yee, 68, was well regarded by Democrats during her tenure in Sacramento.
But she never had the financial resources to aggressively compete in a state with many of the most expensive media markets in the nation.
Yee reported raising nearly $583,000 in 2025 for her gubernatorial bid, according to campaign fundraising reports filed with the California secretary of state’s office. Yee’s announcement that she is dropping out of the race came days before the latest financial disclosures will be publicly reported.
Despite being elected to the state Board of Equalization twice and as state controller twice, Yee was not widely known by most Californians. She never cracked double digits in gubernatorial polls.
Her name will still appear on the ballot. She was among the candidates who rebuffed state Democratic Party leaders’ request this year to reconsider their viability amid fears that the party could be shut out of the November general election because of the state’s unique primary system. The top two vote-getters in the June primary will move on to the November general election, regardless of party affiliation.
Though California’s electorate is overwhelmingly Democratic, the makeup of the gubernatorial field makes it statistically possible for Republicans to win the top two spots if Democratic voters splinter among their party’s candidates. Yee said fear of that scenario playing out “kind of took over” the gubernatorial race.
“Was it possible? Yes. Was it plausible? No, we’re in California. That was not going to happen,” she said, adding that the top-two primary system “has got to go.”
The daughter of Chinese immigrants, Yee said she was disappointed that other Asian American donors and community members did not show up for her as “robustly” as they had in the past.
“We had the opportunity to make history,” she said. “I’m going to want to do a deep dive about … what was it about my campaign that just did not resonate with them.”
Still, Yee was beloved by Democratic Party activists and previously served as the party’s vice chair.
No Democratic candidate reached the necessary threshold to win the party’s official endorsement at its February convention, but Yee came in second with support from 17% of delegates despite calls for her to drop out of the race.
“Every poll shows that this race is wide open, and I know this party,” she said in an interview at the convention. “Frankly, I’ve been in positions where it’s been a crowded field, and we work hard and candidates emerge.”
Yee became emotional Monday as she thanked her supporters and family, including her husband, siblings and mother. “She’s now 103 years old, and her life and voice and wisdom are my compass,” Yee said.
The gubernatorial primary will take place June 2, though voters will start receiving mail ballots in about two weeks.
But while that is a new element in the talks, the cultural divide in how to negotiate is not.
That divide was evident 11 years ago, in the gilded halls of the 160-year-old Beau-Rivage Palace Hotel in Lausanne, Switzerland, where Secretary of State John Kerry and his counterparts from five other countries struggled to close a preliminary agreement with Iran. It was, perhaps, the closest analogue to what is unfolding now in Islamabad.
Every day the American delegation would speak about how many centrifuges had to be disassembled and how much uranium needed to be shipped out of country. Yet when Iranian officials — including Abbas Araghchi, now the Iranian foreign minister — stepped out of the elegant, chandeliered rooms to brief reporters, most of the questions about those details were waved away. The Iranians talked about preserving respect for their rights and Iran’s sovereignty.
“I remember we finally got the parameters agreed upon at the hotel,” Wendy Sherman, the chief U.S. negotiator at the time, said on Monday. “And then a few days later the supreme leader came out and said, ‘Actually, some very different terms were required.’”
Ms. Sherman, who went on to become deputy secretary of state in the Biden administration, would go into these negotiations with a large posse. She often had the C.I.A.’s top Iran expert in the room, or nearby. So was the energy secretary, Ernest Moniz, an expert in nuclear weapons design. Proposals floated by the Iranians would be sent back to the U.S. national laboratories, where weapons are designed and tested, for expert analysis of whether the agreements being discussed would keep Iran at least a year away from a bomb.
But Mr. Trump’s negotiating team travels light, with no entourage of experts and few briefings. Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, the president’s son-in-law and the special envoy, learned their negotiating skills in New York real estate and say a deal is a deal. They say they have immersed themselves in the details of the Iran program, and know it well.
-
Technology11 minutes agoThe Vergecast Vergecast, 2026 edition
-
World17 minutes agoMexico pyramid shooter who took hostages and killed 1 is identified
-
Politics23 minutes agoByron Donalds cracks down on persistent border blind spot leaving US vulnerable to overstays
-
Health29 minutes agoHealthy diets spark lung cancer risk in non-smokers as pesticides loom
-
Sports35 minutes agoPGA Tour signals new era with axing of Hawaii events from schedule
-
Technology41 minutes agoAlexa+ lets you order food like a real conversation
-
Business47 minutes agoNew lawsuit alleges Uber is violating drivers’ rights. Here’s how
-
Entertainment53 minutes agoReview: Trigger warning? ‘For Want of a Horse’ gives new meaning to the term ‘animal lover’