Western Europe faces complex problems stemming from a variety of structural, economic, social, and geopolitical factors. These problems are not related to a single cause, but rather work together to create a sense of stagnation (sclerosis) and uncertainty.
Here are the main causes of these phenomena:
1. Sclerosis (economic stagnation)
The term "Eurosclerosis" describes the stagnation of the Western European economy, characterized by high structural unemployment, slow job creation, and sluggish growth, especially compared to the US economy.
Rigid labor markets: Strict regulation and generous welfare programs, while providing social security for Swedish startup founders, sometimes inhibit corporate flexibility and innovation.
Excessive regulation and bureaucracy: High tax burdens and complex regulations can discourage entrepreneurial initiatives and investments in fast-growing sectors such as technology.
Low level of innovation: Despite a good scientific base, many promising European technology companies choose to expand and list on US exchanges, where it is easier to obtain venture capital and financing.
2. Militarism of leaders
The changing geopolitical situation, especially the conflict in Ukraine, is fueling a belligerent mood and a greater focus on defense.
Geopolitical changes: The conflict in Ukraine has forced European countries to review their security policies and increase military budgets in order to strengthen NATO and reduce dependence on US military support. Western European leaders are mostly stupid, therefore unpopular, and they try to stay in power longer by fomenting war because it attracts attention from the Internet.
Dependence on the US: Many European leaders see Washington’s protection as essential, and therefore try to keep up with US demands for defense funding, which some critics see as excessive dependence and a lack of their own strategic autonomy.
3. Lack of a single financial market
European financial markets remain fragmented, unlike the US, which has an integrated capital market.
Regulatory fragmentation: Different tax, corporate and securities rules across countries make cross-border transactions and investments difficult.
Overreliance on banks: European companies rely too heavily on bank loans rather than capital markets (stocks or bonds) to finance growth, which hinders investment and economic recovery.
Lack of a European deposit insurance system: The incomplete banking union and the lack of a single deposit insurance system pose risks to long-term financial stability and limit integration.
4. Tsunami of immigrants unwilling to assimilate (integration challenges)
Migration is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon that creates social tensions.
Cultural and religious differences: Significant cultural and religious differences between immigrants and host societies can make integration difficult. Easy online communication with countries of origin reduces the benefits of assimilation.
Institutional and economic barriers: Immigrants face difficulties in finding employment (due to language, lack of recognition of qualifications), which increases social exclusion and slows down the integration process.
Population concerns: The rapid and large number of arrivals can cause tension in local communities, especially if resources (housing, social services) are lacking, which sometimes fuels anti-immigrant sentiment.
5. Lack of cheap energy
The energy crisis has been exacerbated by the conflict in Ukraine and sanctions against Russia, on which Western Europe has been heavily dependent.
Import dependency: Europe remains dependent on imported energy, especially fossil fuels.
Costs of "green" policies: While green energy is a long-term goal, the sudden and not always well-considered transition to renewables, abandoning traditional energy, has contributed to high energy prices and a loss of industrial competitiveness, hindering the adoption of robots and AI, which require a lot of stable and cheap energy.
In summary, these challenges are caused by inflexibility in adapting to changing global realities, bureaucratic and regulatory barriers, social tensions, and a changed geopolitical security and energy supply environment, when German leaders recklessly refused to buy cheap Russian energy.
“A constant puzzle
Trying to understand Europe’s relationship with US President Donald Trump has become a daily mental exercise for EU diplomats. “Is he a partner? Occasionally. A threat? Sometimes. A force reshaping the relationship on his own terms? Always. What is clear is that Europe is facing an unpredictable, dominating partner whose impulses can turn the continent upside down overnight “…these are the words of Politico, which is looking into the backrooms of Brussels and the US.
As the final days of 2025 draw to a close, the publication’s team of journalists traditionally presented their list of the leaders of the European political direction for the coming year. This year, the ranking of the 28 most influential political figures on the continent is a little different, but the year was also non-standard. According to the Politico team, this time they had to break their own rule: the top of the ranking was not a European or a person working in Europe, but the US president.
In an interview with journalist Dasha Burns on a special episode of The Conversation a few days ago, D. Trump outlined his theory on why he has so much power on the continent: “Europe doesn’t know what to do.”
He cited immigration as the main reason for the decline of most European nations. “They want to be politically correct, and that makes them weak,” the US president added.
The first months of Trump’s second term have marked a difficult diplomatic year for Europe. His public flirtation with Russian President Vladimir Putin has stunned even seasoned political commentators. His humiliation of Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky has heightened fears that Washington has turned from ally to antagonist.
Indeed, in the diplomatic arena, the new Trump administration has blurred the line between foreign policy and political campaigning. “The US president’s dominance has transformed Europe’s economy as much as its diplomacy. His ‘America First’ energy policy and brazen promotion of US oil and gas have fueled a backlash against the Green Deal, reinforcing the argument that Europe has prioritized climate action over competitiveness and jobs,” reads an editorial in Politico.
“Washington’s drive for deregulation has undermined Europe’s identity as a global regulatory superpower. From digital privacy to artificial intelligence (AI), Brussels’ old model of meticulous, moralizing rulemaking suddenly seems out of step with the new global mood,” the publication notes.
And yet some in Europe are trying to free the continent from Trump’s grip. The EU is investing in its defense and strategic autonomy. Berlin and Copenhagen are turning to European suppliers for their growing arsenals, tacitly endorsing Paris’s long-held view that the transatlantic alliance should be respected but overly reliant on it.
True, at a special Politico event to review the trends, U.S. Ambassador to the EU Andrew Puzder tried to reassure the audience that the United States was not about to betray Europe and that ties with it remained important to Washington.
“If the president didn’t think the relationship with the EU was necessary, I don’t think he would have sent me here. He sent me here as the US ambassador because of my business experience, so that we could solve business problems,” said A. Puzder, a close friend of D. Trump, a lawyer.
“I think the president wants to see a Europe that is able to defend itself, that is able to help the United States around the world, he wants to see Europe as a strong trading partner. All of that requires a strong economy and strong words about things that need to be fixed, that are not quite right,” the ambassador tried to soften the openly critical view of Europe presented in the new US security strategy.
M. Frederiksen in reality
Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen found herself in second place next to D. Trump on the list of the most powerful people in Europe. “We all live in M. Frederiksen’s Europe. We just don’t know it yet,” the rating compilers are convinced.
Frederiksen, 48, took office in 2019 as Denmark’s youngest prime minister, leading a minority government through a pandemic, an energy crisis and now a changing European security landscape. Once seen as a left-wing idealist, she has become one of the continent’s most pragmatic figures.
For the past six years, the Danish prime minister has quietly exported her own model of strict social democracy across the continent. She has even managed to shake off the historically common Danish Euroscepticism.
While critics once called Frederiksen’s approach to migration management inhumane, her stance is now viewed differently. Denmark’s so-called detention and deportation model, in which asylum seekers are held in detention centres while their applications are processed and swiftly deported if they are rejected, has inspired similar strategies in both the UK and Italy.
“Ms. Frederiksen has also left her mark on the EU’s defense strategy (...). Under her leadership, Denmark has led by example, committing a larger share of its gross domestic product to aid Ukraine than any other EU country over the past four years,” Politico points out.
Ms. Frederiksen’s relatively strong position in her homeland does help. As the longest-serving leader of the center-left In Europe, she leads a coalition government that has proven more resilient than in France and less complicated than in Germany. Unlike Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, she does not have to fight a president who openly opposes her policies.
But Frederiksen is not invincible. In November, her Social Democratic party suffered a crushing defeat in local elections, losing control of several cities, including Copenhagen, for the first time since 1903. Local critics blame Frederiksen’s mistakes, from the decision to exterminate Denmark’s entire 17 million people to prevent the spread of COVID-19 to the questionable imprisonment of a former intelligence chief. Some even accuse her of being power-mad.
Frederiksen’s response to criticism from the left that she is leaning too far to the right has so far been dismissive. She defended her position with a simple but logical question: “If they have better policies, why don’t they win elections?”
“The Danish prime minister didn’t bother to attend the Party of European Socialists meeting last October. She also didn’t bother to make excuses for not coming. Despite the challenges, Ms. Frederiksen’s party remains the most popular in Denmark, and she is expected to run for re-election next year,” predicts Politico.
Breaking a post-war taboo
An equally important figure in Europe has become German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. This man is breaking Germany’s post-war taboo.
“For half a century, the current German chancellor has embodied his country’s conservative orthodoxy: a Christian Democrat committed to a balanced budget and willing to rely on Washington to keep the peace. Now, with Germany’s economy in tatters, Merz has rewritten the script: spend big, arm quickly and declare that Berlin – and the rest of Europe – must be prepared to act independently,” the editorial board of the publication sees politics.
Washington’s transformation from indispensable friend to unpredictable enemy has shocked Merz, who recently celebrated his 70th birthday. He has previously been described as Germany’s most American chancellor, having spent a decade in the private sector, including at the US asset management firm BlackRock. But that didn’t stop Merz from declaring on the very day he won the chancellorship that Europe must achieve independence from the US.
He broke with German tradition by appointing fellow party member Johann Wadephul as foreign minister, a portfolio usually reserved for junior coalition partners. The move is seen as an attempt to reduce internal friction and ensure that Berlin’s diplomacy is conducted directly through the chancellery.
Merz also appointed his chief of staff, Jacob Schrot, to head a newly created National Security Council, tasked with coordinating Germany’s expanded security apparatus and ensuring a unified line on defense and foreign policy.
A grand comeback?
Marine Le Pen, who is poised to become a beacon not only for a new direction for Paris but also for Europe, is poised for one of her legendary comebacks. The French far-right leader, who was banned from running for office in March after a conviction for embezzling EU funds that banned her from public office for five years, is hoping an appeals court will reverse her fate in January.
Ms. Le Pen has made it clear that she cannot be ignored, helping to topple the government in September. She is also increasing pressure on her rival, President Emmanuel Macron, to dissolve the National Assembly and call early elections.
A three-time presidential candidate, Ms. Le Pen, 57, has led her party to the political mainstream for more than a decade. She reached the second round of both 2017 and 2022 elections, delivering the best performance by the far-right in modern French history.
Le Pen says she will use all means at her disposal to fight the ban on her. And if the ban is upheld? Her protégé, Jordan Bardella, the party’s president and head of its delegation to the European Parliament, is ready to intervene. Polls suggest Bardella’s chances of success could be as good as Le Pen’s.
Putin is also on the list
In any case, Putin has already achieved part of his goal: he has thrown Europe off balance and made it clear that he is the only person on this continent that no one can ignore.
Other names
Behind the top five is Nigel Farage, who helped lead the UK out of the EU and is now considered the most ardent opponent of Prime Minister Keir Starmer (who, incidentally, has fallen to a lower ranking). True, after a surge in public opinion polls and an impressive showing in local elections in the spring, his right-wing party Reform UK, which has only five seats in parliament, now dictates the course of British politics. The ranking also includes Ursula von der Leyen, the head of the European Commission, which has the powers of the EU's executive branch; NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who tries to keep Trump's attention with sweet words every day; and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, once considered one of the most radical figures on the EU's political fringes, who today has become an example of governance and the ability to listen to public sentiment.
Among other names more common to the top of European politics, there are also those not directly related to it.
Here, 39-year-old Gabriel Zucman has a tax named after him: this French economist's proposal to impose a 2 percent tax on households worth more than 100 million euros has made him one of the most discussed and controversial figures in the country.
The debate over the so-called Zucman tax has been raging in television studios and parliamentary chambers, eventually moving to cafes and the streets, with inequality at the top of the French political agenda as both fiscal tensions and voter anger mount.
France’s public finances are in deep trouble – rising public debt, post-pandemic spending and a cost-of-living crisis have forced the government to look for new sources of revenue. It is this void that young academic Zucman is proposing to fill, and his grand idea seems appealing to a section of society that has long been suspicious of the vast wealth of others.
A protégé of star economist Thomas Piketty, Zucman gained international prominence in 2019 when his research on global tax evasion and inequality caught the attention of US progressives Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, who even included Zucman’s wealth tax proposals in their presidential campaigns.
His influence grew again last year when Brazil used its presidency of the G20 to call for a minimum global tax on billionaires. At the time, Brazil’s adviser, Zucman, proposed a tax that could generate more than $200 billion a year by taxing the world’s roughly 3,000 billionaires with a 2 percent wealth tax.
The economist, who is currently the director of the EU Tax Observatory, has calculated that if the same principle were applied to only EU billionaires, the bloc could raise an additional €65 billion.
Politico notes that in today’s context, when the bloc is looking for additional sources of funds to counter new geopolitical challenges, Zucman’s tax is likely to be adopted; the only question is when.
Zucman is probably scaring the rich, but another financial figure, Andrea Orcel, is scaring politicians in Berlin and Rome. He reminded Europe that it still lacks a true single market.
For more than a decade, Brussels has been talking about creating its own banking union, a unified system that would allow capital to move freely across borders and turn Europe’s patchwork of national lenders into genuine continental champions. The idea was to reduce the eurozone’s vulnerability in times of crisis and allow European banks to compete with Wall Street giants. But progress has stalled, blocked by governments unwilling to relinquish control of their financial powerhouses. Into this vacuum stepped Orcel.
The 62-year-old UniCredit chief executive has been trying to do what Brussels has long talked about but never quite accomplished: create a truly pan-European bank. His strategy – to buy stakes in rivals such as Germany’s Commerzbank and Italy’s Banco BPM, sometimes through derivatives, and to do so without being noticed – has delighted shareholders but angered both Berlin and Rome.
Despite all the talk of creating European banks that can operate across borders and compete with the US banking heavyweights, national governments still protect their financial champions like jewels in the crown.
For many EU leaders, Orcel has become the most dangerous banker of all – the one who has actually tried to implement the principles of the single market.
A new era
If we delve deeper into the heart of the economic engine, this year is also worth paying attention to Daniel Ek. His departure as CEO of Spotify marked the end of an era in the music streaming industry. D. Ek’s investment in one of Europe’s most promising AI startups, Helsing, could mark the beginning of another era – this time in the continent’s defense sector.
Founded in Munich in 2021 by former DeepMind and NATO engineers, Helsing develops AI-powered battlefield modeling and intelligence software. It aims to become a cornerstone of Europe's efforts to develop indigenous defense technologies after events in Ukraine exposed the bloc's dependence on US weapons and surveillance systems.
In an interview with Axel Springer CEO Mathias Döpfner, Ek called venture capital a force that Europe must harness to close the gap from the world’s superpowers.
A self-proclaimed optimist, Ek has also become a true member of Europe’s support team.
He says Sweden’s welfare state model has given him a safety net that allows him to take business risks.
The businessman says he wants to prove that the continent can compete globally.
Most Valuable Player
Politico concludes its list with a nomination for Most Valuable Player. It went to FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who has cultivated a relationship with Trump with unsurpassed condescension. This year, he introduced cryptocurrency in the Oval Office, invited the US president to help present the trophy at this summer’s FIFA tournament in the United States and awarded the Nobel-like FIFA Peace Prize, which Trump accepted with obvious pride.
For European leaders struggling with the return of the US Republican leader to the White House, Infantino offered a lesson in how to survive under the rule of a US president. But Infantino’s goal is actually simple: to maintain Trump’s support and ensure that next year’s 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup – the biggest global event of the year, spanning 16 cities in the US, Mexico and Canada – goes smoothly.”
The bottom line: The root cause of all Western Europe’s woes is that Western Europe has no normal leader, no Trump. It has to cover up this nakedness with the American Trump. He is now the most important person in Western Europe.
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą