WASHINGTON (AP) — This week, President Donald Trump is engaging in discussions with French President Emmanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, amidst significant uncertainty regarding transatlantic relations. Trump is reshaping American foreign policy while largely dismissing European leadership, as he aims to swiftly conclude Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Trump is also insisting on territorial claims — including Greenland, Canada, Gaza, and the Panama Canal — alongside demands for valuable rare earth minerals from Ukraine. Now just over a month into his second term, this “America First” president has cast a significant shadow over what seasoned U.S. diplomats and former officials once viewed as America’s stabilizing global influence.
Despite some prominent setbacks, the military, economic, and moral power of the United States has dominated the post-World War II era, especially following the Cold War’s conclusion with the fall of the Soviet Union. Concerns are rising that these achievements may be jeopardized if Trump succeeds in shifting U.S. policy away from the foundational principles of the United Nations and various international organizations.
“The only conclusion to draw is that 80 years of policies designed to counter aggressors have just been disregarded without any discussion or thought,” remarked Ian Kelly, a former U.S. ambassador to Georgia during the Obama and first Trump administrations, and currently a professor at Northwestern University.
“I feel discouraged for multiple reasons, including the initial hope I had from the concept of ‘peace through strength,’” Kelly continued. “What we’re witnessing isn’t peace through strength — it’s peace through surrender.”
Visits coincide with anniversary of Ukraine war
Trump is slated to welcome Macron on Monday, marking three years since the onset of the war in Ukraine, followed by Starmer’s visit to the White House on Thursday.
These visits come after Trump unsettled Europe with ongoing criticisms of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, accusing him of failing to negotiate an end to the conflict and resisting a deal that would allow the U.S. access to Ukraine’s rare earth minerals, crucial for American aerospace, medical, and technology sectors.
Furthermore, European leaders expressed frustration over Trump’s choice to send senior aides for preliminary discussions with Russian officials in Saudi Arabia, excluding Ukrainian or European representatives from the dialogue.
Another confrontation is expected at the U.N. on Monday, following the U.S. putting forward a rival resolution that does not echo the demands from Ukraine and the European Union for an immediate withdrawal of Russian forces from the country.
Regarding the minerals deal, Zelenskyy initially expressed concern about the lack of security guarantees for Ukraine. He noted on Sunday via X that “we are achieving substantial progress” but emphasized the need for a solid economic deal integrated into a genuine security assurance framework for Ukraine.
Officials from Trump’s administration anticipate finalizing an agreement this week intending to strengthen the economic ties between the U.S. and Ukraine — an outcome that runs counter to Russian interests.
This follows a public rift where Trump labeled Zelenskyy a “dictator” and incorrectly accused Kyiv of initiating the war. Russia, in reality, invaded Ukraine in February 2022, which was militarily less equipped.
Zelenskyy stated on Sunday, when asked if he would trade his presidency for peace or NATO membership, that Trump was operating in a Russian-crafted “disinformation space.” Analysts suggest that facing Trump might not be the most advantageous strategy.
“The appropriate response to President Trump’s actions isn’t immediate retaliation. That typically elicits these kinds of reactions,” observed retired Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery, a former foreign policy advisor to the late Sen. John McCain and now a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.
He further commented, “This reflects a broader issue where I believe the administration characterizes itself as disruptors. A more accurate term might be destabilizers. Unfortunately, this destabilization can sometimes stem from our own actions and those of our allies.”
This complicated situation adds to the challenges faced by Macron and Starmer, leaders of two of America’s closest allies, as they seek to navigate their discussions with Trump.
High-stakes discussions among European and U.S. leaders
Macron has indicated he plans to inform Trump that it’s in the mutual interest of both Americans and Europeans to show strength against Putin during U.S.-led negotiations to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. Additionally, he is poised to argue that Trump’s approach to Putin could have significant implications for U.S. relations with China, its most significant economic and military rival.
“You can’t appear weak in front of President Putin. This isn’t about you; it’s contrary to your interests,” Macron articulated on social media. “How can you maintain credibility with China if you show weakness towards Putin?”
However, Trump has demonstrated considerable admiration for the Russian leader. This month, he expressed a desire for Russia to rejoin what is now the G7 major economies, noting that Russia was suspended from the G8 following its annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea in 2014.
Trump downplayed Zelenskyy’s grievances regarding the lack of Ukrainian and European participation in initial U.S.-Russia negotiations, claiming he had been negotiating “with no leverage, and it becomes tiresome.”
Trump argued that Putin is eager to reach an agreement, on the other hand. “He doesn’t need to rush into a deal. If he wanted, he could seize the entire country,” Trump remarked.
This deference to Putin has caused concern among seasoned diplomats.
“The administration ought to consider changing its course, as this approach isn’t yielding results,” stated Robert Wood, a retired career diplomat who has served in both Republican and Democratic administrations, most recently as deputy U.S. ambassador to the United Nations until December. “Let’s be clear: Russia initiated this conflict, and attempting to alter the narrative will not serve the best interests of the U.S. or its allies.”
