Transition to a wartime economy! Will Trump's candidacy secure Europe's position? On March 4, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled like a hammer of sound, stating that U.S. states cannot disqualify candidate Trump from running for federal office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. That crumbled Colorado's ruling on the former Trump primary ban, opening a window of hope for Trump.
This verdict, like a shining light, illuminates Trump's path to the United States in 2024. The victories, which had turned him away from Colorado, Maine and Illinois, were tied to a "major victory" for Mr. Trump, clearing the legal hurdles and paving the red carpet to the White House. Mr. Trump embraced the accolade, calling it a "great victory for America."
On March 5, 2024, the European Commission, at a meeting to urgently respond to the crisis caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, proposed a magnificent plan to revitalize the European defense industry, trying to lead the European arms industry into a new model of "war economy".
The ambitious package includes the allocation of 500 million euros from the EU budget to strengthen Europe's ammunition production capacity; carefully formulate a set of foreign arms sales strategies with European characteristics; and giving the EU the authority to pressure European** producers to prioritize European orders in times of crisis. EU Internal Market Commissioner Breton said passionately that the current EU defense industry must bravely move towards a wartime economic model to defend Europe's security and enhance its own capabilities.
Like a pre-arranged script, two seemingly unrelated events were staged every other day, arousing the attention and reverie of the outside world. Is there some mysterious connection between Trump's candidacy and the European Union's declaration of a wartime economy?
First, there is no direct causal link between Trump's candidacy and the EU's declaration of wartime economy. In other words, the EU's declaration of a wartime economy did not stem from Trump's candidacy or attempt to thwart Trump's re-election. The occurrence of these two major events is affected by their respective internal logic and external environment.
If this scenario is likened to a theatrical stage, the fate of Trump and the European Union is intertwined, like two threads unfolding in different scenes. Although there is no direct interaction with each other, the indirect relationship is like the controlling hand behind the stage, quietly influencing their respective directions. Trump's candidacy is like a storm, stirring up waves on the European continent; The EU's wartime economic statement, on the other hand, is like a bombshell, causing an uproar in the international political arena.
In the midst of the turmoil, the indirect relationship between each other has become closer and closer. The interweaving of internal and external factors pushes this drama forward. Trump's campaign trail is like a bumpy road, with twists and turns; The EU's economic decision-making is like a giant machine, roaring into operation. There is no direct causal relationship between the two, but there is an indirect connection.
Trump embarked on the campaign trail thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on his appeal that states do not have the right to disqualify candidates under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The article clearly states: "No person who has participated in an insurrection or rebellion against the United States** shall hold federal or state office." But the Supreme Court found that Trump was not in compliance with the resolution.
Therefore, we can infer that there is no causal relationship between Trump's candidacy and the EU's wartime economic statement, but based on Trump's past confrontations with the EU, there is a corresponding connection.
Trump's candidacy could spark instability and anxiety in the European Union, given his repeated conflicts with the EU over security issues during his tenure, and his doubts about the EU's partnership and multilateralism. If Trump succeeds, the EU will likely face greater difficulties and pressures in dealing with challenges from Russia and China.
Trump's presidency was the lowest point in relations between the United States and the European Union, and the biggest divergence between the two. During his time in office, Trump has taken the following measures against the European Union:
Withdrawing or threatening to withdraw from a number of multilateral agreements and organizations, such as the Paris Climate Agreement, the Iran Nuclear Deal, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, UNESCO, the World Health Organization, etc., has undermined the cooperation and leadership of the United States and the European Union in global affairs.
Launching or threatening to launch a first-class war, imposing or raising tariffs on the EU, such as steel and aluminum tariffs, automobile tariffs, aircraft subsidy tariffs, etc., has triggered ** friction and disputes between the United States and the European Union.
Questioning or undermining NATO's unity and effectiveness, demanding that EU countries increase military spending, otherwise the United States will reduce its military protection of Europe, and even threaten to withdraw from NATO, weakening the coordination and trust between the United States and the EU in European security.
Supporting or interfering in political and social movements within Europe, such as Brexit, the French Yellow Vests, the German far right, etc., undermines the integration and stability of the European Union, and provokes public opinion and values between the United States and the European Union.
It is also worth mentioning the NATO bloc. NATO and the EU may be more inclined to support Biden than Trump in this US **, because Biden has shown a more pro-European and multilateral stance and policy during his election campaign, which is more in line with the interests and values of NATO and the EU.
Trump has said frankly that he will "inspire" Russia to launch attacks on NATO members that fail to meet their financial responsibilities. This declaration, like a spark falling into the paste, triggered a fierce rebuttal from NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg. In a statement, he lamented that any rhetoric that suggests that allies cannot defend each other will undoubtedly pose a threat to our security, including that of the United States, and in turn put American and European fighters at greater risk.
Trump's candidacy and the European Union's declaration of a wartime economy may seem incompatible, but they are closely linked at unexpected moments, raising all sorts of speculation and concerns about the future. It is worth mentioning that on the issue of the European Union, he once predicted: If Trump ascends to the throne, then the EU and NATO may face the dilemma of self-defense. The reason is that Trump has openly declared: If he is elected, he will end the Russia-Ukraine conflict and achieve world peace in one day.
Considering Trump's past campaign rhetoric, Europeans can't help but feel anxious. After all, in recent years, a large amount of European military spending has been spent on supporting Ukraine's conflict with Russia. In addition, the shortage of gunpowder has also become increasingly serious recently, and the European Union** pointed out that due to the lack of nitrocellulose, a key raw material, they cannot produce enough ** equipment in a short period of time to guarantee and enhance the security of Europe.
What is clear is that the EU is working on two response plans. On the one hand, with the coming to power of Trump, the EU is stepping up production** in an effort to protect itself. On the other hand, if Biden is re-elected, the Russia-Ukraine conflict will continue, and the EU can also use this batch of ** equipment to support Ukraine again. There is a strong link between the two plans, especially after Trump regained his candidacy. So, what do you think about this event?