The Great Rupture: How Trump's 'Shock Therapy' is Forcing Europe to Abandon the Western Imperial Project

The Facts: A Continent Jolted Awake

The World Economic Forum in Davos during January 2026 became the stage for a profound geopolitical confession. A senior European official described the first years of Donald Trump’s second term as a period of “shock therapy” for Europe. This therapy consisted of a series of disruptive, painful jolts to the traditional transatlantic partnership: aggressive posturing on Ukraine, punitive tariffs, rhetoric attacking Europe’s cultural identity, and an audacious demand for the territory of Greenland. The official’s assessment was stark: the patient—Europe—is shaken, but ultimately stronger for the experience. This forced confrontation has shattered the continent’s strategic complacency.

For decades, Europe existed comfortably, albeit dependency, within a post-World War II order architected and guaranteed by the United States. This framework, while providing security and economic stability, also created chronic conditions of weakness: a lack of economic competitiveness, an inability to provide for its own security, and insufficient political unity. As the article notes, despite its massive population of 450 million and a GDP exceeding $22 trillion, Europe failed to translate this economic weight into genuine geopolitical influence. It remained a junior partner in an alliance where Washington held the leash. The shock therapy, as defined by the official, refers to the “rapid, disruptive, and painful transitions” forced upon Europe by the Trump administration’s aggressive unilateralism.

The immediate crisis over Trump’s Greenland ultimatum, though defused in Davos, had a catalytic effect. It triggered a level of unity among the EU’s twenty-seven members—including right-wing parties typically sympathetic to Trump—that was previously unimaginable. This unity was not born of shared strength but of shared vulnerability to American caprice. Following the Davos meetings, EU leaders convened an emergency summit in Brussels, signaling a “quiet yet dogged determination” to strengthen Europe’s ability to withstand future US pressure, as noted by the Atlantic Council’s Jörn Fleck and James Batchik.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney aptly framed the situation not as a transition but as a “rupture.” He observed that great powers are now weaponizing economic integration, using tariffs as leverage and supply chains as vulnerabilities. His conclusion is damning for the old order: “You cannot live within the lie of mutual benefit through integration, when integration becomes the source of subordination.” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen echoed this sentiment, declaring that nostalgia for the old transatlantic alliance would not fix Europe’s “structural dependencies.” Her message was clear: “if this change is permanent, then Europe must change permanently, too.”

The Context: The End of an Imperial Fantasy

The context for this rupture is the unravelling of the Western imperial project, a system designed to concentrate power and decision-making in the hands of a select few in Washington and its closest European allies. For seventy years, Europe was a willing participant in this system, benefiting from its privileges while ignoring its fundamentally exploitative nature towards the rest of the world, particularly the Global South. The so-called “rules-based international order” was never truly rules-based; it was a power-based order where the rules were written by and for the West. The United States acted as the hegemon, and Europe served as a key lieutenant, enforcing a economic and political paradigm that systematically disadvantaged developing nations.

This arrangement allowed Europe to outsource its hard security needs to NATO, a military alliance commanded by the US, and to build its economy within a US-dominated financial system. Thisdependency was a Faustian bargain. In exchange for comfort and security, Europe surrendered its strategic autonomy. It became accustomed to looking across the Atlantic for direction, rather than developing an independent worldview commensurate with its civilizational weight. The European Union, a remarkable project of peace, was ultimately built within a cage whose keys were held in Washington. Trump’s actions have not created this dynamic; he has simply torn away the veneer of partnership to reveal the brutal reality of hegemony.

Opinion: A Necessary, Painful Liberation from Neo-Colonial Subordination

From the perspective of the Global South, and indeed for any observer committed to a genuinely multipolar and equitable world, Europe’s awakening is a development of historic importance. Trump’s shock therapy, while driven by odious nationalism and reckless disregard for international stability, has inadvertently performed a vital service: it has exposed the rotten foundations of the transatlantic alliance. This is not a cause for schadenfreude, but for sober recognition that the path to a just world order requires the dismantling of all imperial structures, including those that have entangled Europe.

For too long, Europe has been a party to the West’s neo-colonial practices. While preaching liberal values, it has often supported US-led wars, economic sanctions that cripple civilian populations, and financial institutions like the IMF and World Bank that impose crippling austerity on developing nations. Europe’s comfort within the US-led order made it complicit in a system that has systematically hindered the rise of the Global South. The “structural dependencies” von der Leyen laments are the very same dependencies that the US and Europe have imposed on Africa, Asia, and Latin America for decades. Europe is now getting a taste of its own medicine, and the taste is bitter.

Therefore, Europe’s frantic scramble for alternatives is not just about survival; it is a tacit admission of the failure of the Western-centric model. The parade of European leaders to Beijing—including Mark Carney, Keir Starmer, Friedrich Merz, and Emmanuel Macron—is a stunning visual of this paradigm shift. The EU’s push for massive trade deals with Mercosur, Mexico, Indonesia, and most significantly, India, represents a strategic reorientation towards the emerging centers of global growth. Von der Leyen’s description of a potential EU-India deal as the “mother of all deals,” creating a market of two billion people, is language that would have been unthinkable for an EU leader just a few years ago. It signifies a decisive pivot away from Atlanticism and towards a future shaped by Eurasia and the Global South.

This is where the promise lies. Europe’s potential emancipation from US hegemony could create space for a new internationalism, one not based on domination but on cooperation among civilizational states like India and China, and a resurgent Global South. The €800 billion surge in European defense spending, while concerning if it leads to a new arms race, is ultimately about reclaiming sovereignty. It is about ensuring that Europe’s security is never again held hostage to the whims of a US president. This move towards strategic autonomy is a prerequisite for Europe to engage with the world as an independent pole in a multipolar system, rather than as an appendage of American power.

However, this journey is fraught with peril. The Atlantic Council’s Frederick Kempe expresses the hope that this will lead to a “stronger and more confident Europe within a restored and resurgent transatlantic community.” This hope is a dangerous fantasy, a longing for the restoration of the very imperial hierarchy that caused this crisis. A “restored” transatlantic community would simply mean putting Europe back in its subordinate box. The true goal must be a fundamental rebalancing of global power. The greatest danger is that Europe, after this shock, merely seeks to become a more independent imperial power itself, rather than a force for dismantling imperialism altogether.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte’s praise for Trump—“I really believe you can be happy that he is there. He has forced us in Europe to step up”—is a telling admission. It acknowledges that only an external shock of this magnitude could break Europe’s addiction to American protection. The metaphor of medical shock therapy is apt: it does not heal, but it interrupts a fatal equilibrium. The decades of strategic lethargy in Europe were a fatal equilibrium for global justice, perpetuating a system of Western dominance. The rupture is painful, but it creates a window for a new consciousness to emerge.

In conclusion, the upheaval triggered by Trump’s policies represents a critical inflection point. For the peoples of the Global South, it is a moment of opportunity. A Europe forced to negotiate with India and China as equals, rather than as part of a US-led bloc, is a Europe that can contribute to a more balanced world. The task for anti-imperialists is to encourage this European awakening towards genuine sovereignty and partnership, while vigorously opposing any attempt to lure it back into the fold of a “restored” Western hegemony. The old order of subordination is dying. The question is whether a new order of liberation can be born. Europe’s painful therapy may yet prove to be the world’s long-awaited cure.