The month of June is that of Western and particularly European memory. June 6, which we have just celebrated for the 82nd time (already the time of a lifetime), obviously recalls the Allied Landing in Normandy to counter Nazi Germany and the beginning of the liberation of our territory. The coming June 18 celebrates the appeal of General de Gaulle in 1940, the founding act of the French Resistance against the Pétain regime, but also the symbolic date of the reconquest of our sovereignty.
In both cases, these two dates ultimately tell the same story: that of a continent which would probably never have regained its freedom without the courage of European resistance fighters but also without the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American soldiers who came to die on our soil. Michel Sardou sang it so well and his text must remain for posterity so that we do not forget, even in times of turmoil in the transatlantic relationship, the vital importance that America plays for Europe: “If the Ricans weren’t here, you would all be in Germany. »
Commemorating them again today obviously does not prohibit criticizing the United States of today or certain decisions of Donald Trump. But they should at least protect us from a form of historical ingratitude which, at a time when Europe is going through one of the deepest power crises in its contemporary history, is also becoming a strategic mistake. Because what we criticize the United States today is a bit easy: we want to make them pay the high price for our dependence on them, a comfortable cocoon in which we have curled up for decades to build the rest of our power and speak on the world stage. But what if we remove the American crutch? Everything is falling apart.
Because Europe today seems to live more in the celebration of its past than in the preparation of its future: this time of the splendor of empires and power that our enemies seek to rediscover but which we are unable to resurrect. It continues to present itself as a great power even though it no longer possesses the fundamental attributes of sovereignty. It does not have real military autonomy, remaining largely dependent on the American umbrella through NATO. It does not control its energy sovereignty either, as the war in Ukraine has brutally reminded us. As for its digital sovereignty, it is almost a fantasy: social networks are American, the major players in artificial intelligence are American or Chinese, strategic digital infrastructures largely escape European control and the most advanced semiconductors are produced in Asia.
Each statement by the American president provokes indignation, comments and permanent condemnations
Meanwhile, Brussels continues to believe that by multiplying regulations, standards and directives, it still exercises a form of power. However, a power is not measured by the number of texts it adopts but by its capacity to impose its interests, to produce the technologies of the future and to influence the major international balance of power. We have become a normative power, therefore a power of paralysis and slowness in the face of major contemporary issues which move very quickly.
A world of competition
Some European leaders seem to have found their main adversary and their obsession: Donald Trump. Every morning, Europeans wake up in front of the mirror and ask who is the most beautiful. It’s not Trump who’s going to brush them off. Trump is the mirror, certainly sometimes in bad faith, but who pushes us to improve and above all not to depend on anyone.
Each statement by the American president provokes indignation, comments and permanent condemnations. He’s crazy, he’s sick, we’ve heard everything for months. However, the real subject is elsewhere. Donald Trump did not create the geopolitical shift that we are violently experiencing today: he is not the explosive, he is the spark. Everything was already there, the rise of China, the defiance of countries like Russia and Iran to the dominant Western order. He has simply accepted it and is trying to get into the dance to regain control. The United States has understood for several years that its future now lies in its confrontation with China and, more broadly, with the new emerging powers. They have no time to waste with the Europeans who regulate and defend international law that, unfortunately, almost no one respects anymore. This development will not disappear with Trump. It will survive its mandate because it responds to a profound strategic reality.
The world has become a competitive world again. China is investing heavily in disruptive technologies, infrastructure, critical minerals, artificial intelligence and military capabilities. India is gradually asserting its strategic autonomy. The BRICS are patiently building an economic and financial alternative to the Western order. The Gulf monarchies are diversifying their economies and becoming major diplomatic players.
Meanwhile, the European Union continues to devote considerable energy to producing disempowering/protective frameworks that often end up penalizing its own businesses and citizens first. We remain a power of attraction because we are perhaps more reassuring than other continents in this great global chaos, but are we competitive geopolitically? We have become a regulatory power (which obviously hinders everyone who tries to enter) in a world which now rewards industrial, technological and military powers (which are obviously almost everywhere, as a result, except in Europe).
Wanting to distance oneself from Washington is less a strategy of emancipation than a headlong flight
This is probably where the analytical error of many European officials lies. They still think that international law, multilateral institutions and norms will be enough to structure international relations. However, the return of war in Europe, the Sino-American rivalry, tensions in the Middle East and the fragmentation of the world economy demonstrate exactly the opposite. This is the era of low blows, of the battle for resources. We are not fighting, not even for our sovereignty. But we criticize the United States, the Gulf countries, China, who are fighting for this, for them but ultimately for us. Because where would we be without them?
Rediscovering sovereignty rather than cultivating resentment
In this context, wanting to distance oneself from Washington is less a strategy of emancipation than a headlong flight. It’s a planned suicide. Europe today has neither the military means, nor the industrial capacities, nor the technological power which would allow it to sustainably do without its American partner. This does not mean that it must give up building its own sovereignty. Quite the contrary. But this sovereignty is not decreed in speeches. It is built through investment, through reindustrialization, through research, through innovation, through a coherent energy policy and through a real ambition for power.
The Americans, let us remember, are above all Europeans who left to build a new world. For nearly two and a half centuries, they have looked to the future with a capacity for innovation, conquest and risk-taking that continues to impress. The major recent technological revolutions, from Silicon Valley to generative artificial intelligence, bear witness to this permanent dynamic. Europe sometimes gives the opposite feeling: that of a continent that looks more in the rearview mirror than through the windshield. It celebrates its history, its heritage and its values with talent, but struggles to write the story of its future power. Does it exist? Democracies place us in the short term and our enemies plan for the long term.
A few weeks before the 250th anniversary of the United States, on July 4, this difference is worth pondering. Behind the popular formula of Michel Sardou’s song lies a historical truth that we sometimes forget a little quickly. Without the United States, Europe would probably not have regained its freedom in the conditions we know today. This reality does not require either blissful admiration or systematic alignment, but it deserves more attention.
General de Gaulle never confused independence and isolation
The demand for sovereignty and independence should not be likened to an adolescent crisis: how can we not draw a parallel between spoiled and rotten children who blame everything on their parents who nevertheless hold the purse strings and their future? An alliance has never prohibited disagreement. But making anti-Americanism a political or strategic project is a major error at the very moment when the world’s center of gravity is shifting towards Asia.
General de Gaulle constantly spoke of sovereignty. But he never confused independence with isolation. He knew that power was not based on declarations of intent but on concrete capabilities. This is undoubtedly the main lesson that June 6 and June 18 should remind us. Nations that stop investing in their power always end up living on their memories. Europe is today at this tipping point. It can continue to regulate a world that it no longer rules, or finally decide to rebuild the foundations of its sovereignty. History will not wait.
*Sébastien Boussois is a doctor in political science, media consultant, researcher in international relations associated with the CNAM Paris (Defense Security Team) and the Geostrategic Observatory of Geneva (Switzerland) and director of the European Geopolitical Institute (IGE).
