It is not my civilization, undoubtedly, and even writing this feels like overstepping. But it should be self-evident. Because if this is not Europe, then what is? If it isn’t this, why would anyone fight for it? If it isn’t this, what prevents it from becoming merely an extension of another civilization—American, Russian, or Islamic?
By Bret STEPHENS
If Germany were invaded, only 38 percent of its citizens would be willing to fight for their country, according to a recent survey. Fifty-nine percent would not fight. In Italy, another survey found that only 16 percent of those of fighting age would take up arms. In France, General Fabien Mandon, Chief of the Army Staff, said last month at a mayors’ conference that the nation would be “in danger” if it “hesitates, because we are not prepared to accept the loss of our children.” This simple truth sparked a political storm.
In this context, the Trump administration’s new National Security Strategy, published last week, was met with shock in Europe.
The reason is not hard to see. The primary priorities of U.S. foreign policy, according to the document, are now focused on the Western Hemisphere and Asia. The European Union is accused of suppressing political freedom, undermining national sovereignty, hindering economic dynamism, promoting migration policies that may lead to “civilizational unraveling,” and blocking a peaceful resolution of the war in Ukraine. “It is far from clear,” the document warns, “whether some European countries will have economies and militaries strong enough to remain reliable allies.”
These are the views of Europe’s far right. Russia is not treated anywhere as an enemy of the United States, just as Ukraine is not treated as an ally. Instead, the real enemies, in the eyes of the document, are migrants and bureaucrats, who are allegedly set on destroying what remains of an authentic Europe.
It is tempting to dismiss the document as troubling but unserious: it has no legal force, and its tone reads as if it were written by Otto from “A Fish Called Wanda,” the sensitive-yet-dimwitted American bully brilliantly played by Kevin Kline. But, as with many populist arguments on the right or left, the problem is not the lies—it’s the half-truths. It names the essential problems but proposes the worst solutions.
Among the essential problems the document raises are:
- Europe represents an ever-shrinking share of the world economy, especially in the industries of the future: where are the European counterparts to Nvidia, Microsoft, Meta, SpaceX, Amazon, or Apple?
- Migration itself is not the problem; on the contrary, it is a remedy for collapsing birthrates in the wealthy world. But migration without integration is a curse—especially when the values of migrants clash with or reject those of the host country.
- Small armies can grow by shifting budget priorities. But the key ingredient of military success is not money—it is the will to fight. And apart from frontline states like Finland and Estonia, Europe appears to lack this will.
Former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz once said about a papal statement on birth control (in far cruder words): “If you don’t play the game, you can’t make the rules.” This is the position Europe risks finding itself in within a world of ruthless powers.
All of this should serve as a loud alarm bell—especially for parts of Europe’s political class that still believe they are working to fulfill fantasies. They are not. Their task is to keep nightmares at bay. European politics in this century has revolved around growth-killing clichés (“sustainable development”), impotent foreign-policy gestures (recognizing a Palestinian state that does not exist), self-destructive environmental policies (such as Germany’s closure of nuclear power plants), and moralizing stances on mass migration (“We can manage this,” said Angela Merkel), which is a key reason why quasi-fascist parties like AfD are rising in the polls.
What must replace them? Europe needs large-scale rearmament, ending green-energy projects that create dependency and raise costs, a Danish-style migration policy: tougher on who enters, who leaves, and what migrants must do to integrate; a return to the original and noble mission of the EU: open markets and competition—not the endless production of regulations.
Above all, Europe needs a civic revolution—a transformation that convinces younger Europeans that their heritage, culture, and way of life—a fundamentally Christian civilization, softened and improved by Enlightenment values but not erased by them—is worth defending.
It is not my civilization, undoubtedly, and even writing this feels like overstepping. But it should be self-evident. Because if this is not Europe, then what is? If it is not this, why would anyone fight for it? If it is not this, what prevents it from becoming merely an extension of another civilization—American, Russian, or Islamic?
Henry Kissinger once said of Donald Trump that he “may be one of those figures in history who appears from time to time to mark the end of an era and force it to give up its old illusions.” There are good reasons to lament this—especially in Europe. But there is no reason to pretend it is not happening, nor to fail to adapt.