Q&A with Tara Varma
In their recent article in Survival, "Alliance of Revisionists: A New Era for the Transatlantic Relationship," Tara Varma and Sophia Besch argue that the reelection of Donald Trump and the growing influence of nationalist parties across Europe could lead to a different kind of trans-Atlantic alliance. Varma breaks down the trans-Atlantic ties between nationalist actors and what Trump and his allies' approach to Europe could mean for the future of U.S.-European relations.
In this piece, you highlight areas of interest to both the Make America Great Again (MAGA) movement and European revisionists. Where is the greatest convergence and divergence between these political groups?
Revisionists on both sides of the Atlantic now share a domestic ideology: they are in favor of more border and migration controls and rail against climate change and any form of regulation which they believe hampers business interests. Some of them also share a vision of international politics and they have identified the liberal international elite as the common enemy, both in their own countries and in multilateral institutions like the European Union.
The links between the MAGA movement in the United States and revisionist parties in Europe are extensive. American and European revisionists are inspiring one another in the goals they adopt and in how they implement them. Most prominently, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni have both asserted their ideological affinities with the MAGA movement.
However, Trump’s “America First” nationalism is likely to clash with the populist agenda in Europe. Both European and American revisionists have vowed to defend the interests of European workers and farmers, and EU-U.S. trade employs more than 16 million people. Tariffs risk harming workers on both sides of the Atlantic and could lead to strife between leaders who have pledged to boost employment and economic opportunities for their more vulnerable populations. Also, the EU’s stance toward China, already a contentious issue during Trump’s first term, looks set to remain a point of tension.
How might this nationalist trend change the NATO alliance, and to what extent might divisions over Russia cause rifts in this "alliance of revisionists"?
While the EU may be a universal target among revisionists, there is less consensus on NATO. Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine has made some European revisionists much more pro-NATO, with the alliance understood as the institutionalization of U.S. security guarantees. The Nordic and eastern European countries perceive a significant threat from Russia. One right-wing party in Sweden, the Sweden Democrats, renounced its traditional opposition to NATO membership following Russia’s aggression (its stance was contingent on Finland’s concurrent accession).
Further to the west, the picture is different. The Alternative for Germany, Freedom Party of Austria, and Orbán’s Fidesz stand out as three European parties that maintain close connections to Russia. They have repeatedly lambasted NATO as a tool of American influence in Europe, accusing it of inciting Russia and intensifying the conflict in Ukraine. At the same time, some western European parties have made concessions to public sentiment consistent with European and U.S. support for Ukraine. In France, for example, the National Rally has said it favors exiting NATO’s integrated command only after the Ukrainian conflict concludes. Similarly, Meloni’s Brothers of Italy severed its strong connections with Russia post-invasion.
A United States that considers Russia a peer power and dismisses Europe and Ukraine as bit players is the most worrying scenario for NATO. It remains to be seen whether Donald Trump would want NATO to serve as a convenient platform to project his worldview alongside leaders like Meloni and Orbán.
How can Europe best respond to the revisionist movements amidst the context of a Trump-led United States?
The pressure from MAGA and European revisionists may be mounting, but the EU is not without recourse. Given that the world is a much different place than it was when the trans-Atlantic relationship was conceived, and that the U.S. appears to be withdrawing from global leadership, the EU must step up its leadership role in combatting climate change and advocating for multilateralism and a rules-based international order.
It has already armed itself with mechanisms to wield its economic clout strategically, and has begun scrutinizing X for fostering hate speech, disinformation, and other harmful content. Europeans can and should work together to strengthen NATO and make it more resilient against American indifference and pro-Russian actors in Europe. European integration was able to thrive only under the U.S. security umbrella. The EU will not survive without a collective European defense and a sense of European solidarity against security threats.
The EU’s regulatory framework matters. Revisionists denounce the intricate and cumbersome nature of the EU system and would like to do away with it. But this system was devised precisely to prevent individuals from making tyrannical or arbitrary decisions.
The European project cannot succeed if it pre-emptively bows to pressure, including from within its own ranks.
