A stern warning from the US to Europe seeking to rearm

Most Western Europeans do not want to go to war. Trump knows this. The rearmament of Western Europe benefits Trump only in one case - if Western Europeans spend that extra money buying US weapons developed before the era of drones. If Western Europeans buy European weapons, Trump does not benefit from it at all. Therefore, the pressure is on.

 

This insight aptly captures the current tension in transatlantic relations. Donald Trump views NATO not only through the prism of security, but also through the prism of the trade balance.

Here are some key aspects that complement the “stern warning”:

 

The “Buy American” policy: For the Trump administration (both past and present), armaments are a business. The US pressure to increase defense budgets to 2% or 3% of GDP is directly related to the expectation that orders will be received by US defense giants such as Lockheed Martin or Raytheon.

 

European strategic autonomy: EU leaders, especially Emmanuel Macron, are calling for “strategic autonomy” – that is, developing and purchasing European weapons. From Trump’s point of view, this is nothing more than protectionism that reduces US influence and profits.

 

Technological lag: The “drone era” mentioned here is a critical point. Much of the weapons sold to the US (e.g. F-35 fighter jets) are extremely expensive, traditional projects. If Europe were to invest in cheaper, next-generation technologies (drones, autonomous systems), it would disrupt the old sales model of the US military-industrial complex.

 

Public aversion to war: Research by the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) shows that a large proportion of Western Europeans would prefer diplomatic solutions to direct military conflict. Trump is using this as leverage: “if you don’t want to fight wars yourself, pay us to protect you (and buy our equipment).”

 

Trump is essentially giving Europe an ultimatum: arming without US orders will be treated not as aid to NATO, but as economic hostility.

 

“The administration of US President Donald Trump has threatened European countries with a corresponding response if the European Union, in its efforts to more effectively rearm the continent, gives priority to local weapons manufacturers, reports Politico.

 

The US Department of Defense opposes any efforts by the European Union to restrict US arms manufacturers’ access to the European market and warns that such actions would provoke a corresponding response.

 

The American administration expressed such a tough position, which had not been announced before, during consultations with the European Commission in early February, in response to a request from the European Union executive branch for governments and industry to express their comments on European arms procurement rules.

 

“The United States strongly opposes any changes to the Directive that would limit the ability of U.S. industry to support or otherwise participate in national defense procurement in European Union member states,” the U.S. administration wrote in a statement ahead of planned updates to European Union defense procurement legislation.

 

“Protectionist and restrictive practices that could force powerful American companies out of the market while allowing the largest European defense companies to continue to profit from access to the U.S. market are the wrong path,” the position states.

 

Such comments from Washington highlight a paradox in U.S. strategy in Europe: while the Trump administration repeatedly tells Europeans that it wants them to shoulder the bulk of the continent’s conventional defense burden, Washington would not want this to happen at the expense of American defense companies.

 

Politico previously reported that US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau attacked NATO allies in Europe during a closed-door summit in December for favoring their own defense industries over American weapons manufacturers. The US State Department is one of the authors of Trump’s contribution to the European Commission survey.

 

In recent years, the European Commission, concerned about a potential conflict with Russia, has been trying to increase the share of European weapons in the bloc’s arsenal and public procurement. For decades, Europe has been heavily dependent on American military equipment, from F-35 fighter jets to HIMARS artillery systems and Patriot air defense systems. Practically two-thirds of the bloc’s weapons imports come from the US.

 

Such a harsh response from the Trump administration could put a damper on the European Commission’s broader “Buy European” industrial initiative. The test is how far European countries are prepared to go in increasing their independence from the US, which has become an unpredictable partner under Trump.

 

The European Commission is expected to present a revised version of the 2009 public procurement directive in the third quarter. It is not yet clear whether the revised document will include any solutions that will benefit local producers.

 

The EU provides an advantage to local companies, for example in the €150 billion worth of arms loans under the SAFE program, as well as in arms purchases that Ukraine can make using the recently agreed €90 billion loan. European Union funds can only be used to purchase military equipment if at least 65 percent of the value of the equipment is manufactured in Europe.

 

The Pentagon warns in its commentary that any decision to include a “Buy European” clause in the future procurement directive would incur the wrath of the US.”