The End of Pax Americana Under Trump 2.0

For decades, Germany and many other European and Western countries have based their relationship with the United States on the concept of “Pax Americana.” This concept is centered on the idea that American power and strength have significantly contributed to the security of Western countries and to international stability more broadly. This notion has also been very powerful in the United States, as reflected in Donald Trump’s slogan, “Peace through Strength.”

However, “Pax Americana” is based on much more than just military and economic might. Rather, it is the specific exercise of American power that contributes to international security: military power embedded in alliance structures and backed by economic openness and liberal-democratic values. This understanding of U.S. power has formed the basis of the NATO alliance. The three pillars of “Pax Americana” – military, economic, and normative – have been eroding for years, even decades. Under the second Trump administration, they may finally crash down for good.

With regard to military power, the credibility of U.S. security assurances within its vast alliance system has diminished. One reason for this lies in domestic U.S. politics. The increasingly toxic political polarization between Democrats and Republicans has made Washington a much more difficult and unpredictable partner. President Trump's transactional approach to alliances has further eroded America’s international credibility. Another reason lies in international power shifts, especially China's enhanced military posture and capabilities. However, other countries, such as Russia and North Korea, have also found ways to undermine the credibility of U.S. military power.

In economic terms, the concept of “Pax Americana” has been based on the idea that America's economic openness has been essential not only to stabilize the international economic system, but also to promote peace. After 1945, protectionist sentiments and policies declined in the U.S., and Washington was credited with promoting free trade. Although protectionism has never been completely absent, and U.S. economic leadership was undermined in the 1970s by the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, the prevailing paradigm in Washington has remained that openness to goods, capital, technology, and labor is beneficial for all. However, the first Trump administration (2017–2021) was a turning point in that economic openness was increasingly seen as a liability and a risk to national security. This geo-economic paradigm has since become dominant under both the Biden and second Trump administrations.

Finally, in terms of values, “Pax Americana” implies that the spread of democracy after 1945 and 1989, as well as U.S./Western support for liberal democratic values worldwide, would contribute to international peace and stability. This view is based on social science research into the “democratic peace,” which empirically suggests that democracies rarely go to war with each other. However, the idea that democracies fight fewer wars and act more peacefully is more debatable. In retrospect, we now know that the spread of democracy did not lead to the “End of History.” Rather, values have become a central battleground in their own right, with not only democracies, but also autocracies, often quite successfully, fighting to restructure the regional and international system in their image.

The rise of illiberalism and the erosion of democratic norms in the United States during the second Trump administration pose significant challenges for America’s democratic allies, particularly those in Europe. Firstly, the weakening of checks and balances in the U.S. is likely to lead to more unrestrained foreign and security behavior within alliances such as NATO. Indeed, this is already evident under “Trump 2.0.” Secondly, the European Union is fundamentally based on liberal democratic norms. Since the establishment of the European Communities, these norms have been the indispensable “glue” holding the Union together. The big question is whether the United States can continue to act as the ultimate security guarantor if it becomes less democratic and more authoritarian.

For Germany and other European countries, the end of Pax Americana means they must fundamentally reconsider their relationship with the United States. Firstly, they must abandon cherished assumptions about the transatlantic relationship, such as the idea that the U.S. will always be a democratic and benign hegemon with an “enlightened” and enduring self-interest in remaining politically and militarily engaged in Europe. Instead, Germans and Europeans may have to accept a new reality in which America is becoming more like a “normal great power” and fundamentally reassessing its own interests.

Consequently, Germans and Europeans must find ways to reduce their one-sided economic and military dependency on the United States in a pragmatic and strategic manner. This is imperative in order to prepare for a world in which Europe cannot rely on the United States for security anymore. However, reducing and eventually ending one-sided dependencies would also be necessary to prepare for a much more positive scenario. In this scenario, Europe and the United States would be able to rebuild their relationship on a more equal footing, with Europe taking on a much greater role in ensuring its own security, while both sides would overcome the crisis in their democratic institutions. Unfortunately, it is far from certain that this positive scenario will materialize.