London
CNN
—
For two weeks, America’s friends held their tongues. Since his inauguration President Donald Trump had enjoyed a steady stream of warm words — and very little criticism — from leaders in Europe and the Anglosphere who, privately, might bristle at the noise and bombast he brings to the White House.
But that accord was never bound to last, and it shattered this week after Trump unleashed perhaps his most provocative foreign policy idea yet: taking Gaza under American control, relocating its Palestinian population, and redeveloping the enclave into the “Riviera of the Middle East.”
The suggestion seemed to shred in an instant decades of Western policy-making, darting away from a “two-state solution” model that had been long-established, if glaringly elusive in terms of progress.
Nations rushed to reject it. America’s allies in the region reacted with disbelief and concern about the impact the call would have on live diplomatic efforts, particularly the ongoing ceasefire and hostage negotiations between Israel and Hamas. Palestinians have expressed dismay at the prospect of leaving their homeland.
In Europe, where the United States usually enjoys less complicated relationships, leaders varied in tone but were clear in their stance: They do not support this.
Still, Trump has left America’s partners in a difficult spot. Criticizing the US is a last resort for many leaders – doing it so early in a presidential term is fraught with downsides.
“My read is that they’re all gobsmacked. They didn’t see it coming,” Jon B. Alterman said of America’s allies. Alterman, a former US State Department official, is now the director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington-based think tank.
There are wider, more diffuse reverberations too. Trump’s history of haphazard geopolitical interventions has already threatened to ideologically isolate the United States, bit by bit, among its global allies. His remarks on Gaza – whether they represent an idea, a plan, or something inbetween – may accelerate that process.
“This administration has not only an instinct but an appetite to be disruptive,” Alterman said. He predicted “a much deeper soul-searching in Europe, about how it wants to engage with a United States that is much more self-absorbed, and much less committed to supporting a multilateral system.”
Most Western nations are cautious of the unpredictability Trump brings to the White House, but they were more prepared for his second election win than his first.
They expected a test like this. And their responses to Trump’s Gaza plan highlighted how they might more broadly tackle Trump 2.0.
‘There is no plan’: Analyst brushes off Trump’s Gaza plan as nonsensical
The United Nations was robust, its secretary-general warning Trump against “ethnic cleansing.” France said the proposal would constitute “a serious violation of international law.” (The forced removal of a population is prohibited by the Geneva Convention.) Spain’s foreign minister told radio station RNE that “Gazans’ land is Gaza.” In Western Europe, only Dutch far-right figurehead Geert Wilders broke ranks to endorse the plan. “Let Palestinians move to Jordan. Gaza-problem solved!” he wrote on X.
German President Walter Steinmeier said the suggestion was “unacceptable,” and the country’s foreign minister, Annalena Baerbock, said it would “lead to new suffering and new hatred.”
“As a career diplomat, my job was always to explain the interests of the US government in the best light possible. President Trump made that a tougher job,” Eric Nelson, Trump’s former ambassador to Bosnia and later the associate director of the German-American Marshall European Center for Security Studies in Munich, told CNN. “It was very hard to anticipate what he was going to do next.”
“In Germany, the government reaction is as expected: they’re very dismissive,” he noted. An upcoming federal election has increased the incentive for the beleaguered German government to condemn Trump, who is widely unpopular in the country and across Western Europe.
It is a dynamic Trump’s team will be relaxed about. “They’re not going to expect Western capitals to break out in a chorus of ‘me too, sign us up!’,” said Nathan Sales, Trump’s former Coordinator for Counterterrorism. “We don’t have to agree with our friends 100% of the time.”
Besides, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and his government have little incentive to hold back: they likely won’t be in power next month to clear up the mess.
But criticizing the US president is not easy for everyone.
Take Britain. America’s steadfast ally is desperate for a productive relationship with Trump, and early signs indicate that a charm offensive from Prime Minister Keir Starmer is paying off. Trump said this week that Starmer had been “very nice,” and hinted the United Kingdom could avoid the tariffs he has threatened for the European Union. That is a monumental carrot for a British leader looking everywhere for a kickstart to economic growth.
Yet those bridges are built on sand. London is acutely aware that an ill-judged remark could upend months of work to appease Trump. At the same time, Starmer knows the pitfalls of appearing subservient to an American president; it’s exactly what he once launched barbs at Conservative prime ministers for.
That conundrum forces some delicate wordcraft. “On the issue of Gaza, Donald Trump is right,” Starmer’s Foreign Secretary David Lammy told reporters in Ukraine this week, reciting the part of his answer intended for an audience of one. “Looking at those scenes, Palestinians who have been horrendously displaced over so many months of war, it is clear that Gaza is lying in rubble.” The rest was meant for everyone else: “We have always been clear in our view that we must see two states and we must see Palestinians able to live and prosper in their homelands in Gaza.”
A Labour MP told CNN he and his colleagues were “aghast” by Trump’s suggestion. But he said there were too many factors – including a live ceasefire and a key trade relationship – to warrant criticizing the president publicly. The MP said he had “a lot of sympathy with (Starmer)” as he tries to “(keep) the relationship as positive as possible.”
“Hard-balling allies is certainly an odd foreign policy approach,” the lawmaker added of Trump. “Will he do it with enemies?”
As with most of Trump’s more provocative comments, his Gaza proposal was simultaneously derided and analyzed at home and abroad for hints of strategy.
Those familiar with his thinking suggested that tossing out an unpalatable benchmark could – whether by design or not – create an urgency among America’s allies to come up with something better. “He enjoys keeping people in reactive mode,” Nelson said.
“We’ve seen this play from President Trump many times before … this is the art of the deal,” Sales added. “Most Western allies of the US are stuck in a rut when it comes to thinking about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict… in the first term, the Trump administration recognized that that path was a dead end.”
But if unlocking an intractable diplomatic stalemate was the plan, it comes with risks that America’s allies will not welcome. “Sometimes when you unfreeze things, you can unleash forces that are much more negative than you can even begin to contemplate,” Alterman said.
Among them is an American isolation on global issues that would create a vacuum of international leadership. “A number of countries are going to feel that they need a different relationship with Russia and China,” Alterman warned. “Partly so that they don’t rely on the United States, (and) partly because they don’t see the moral benefits of having a close relationship with the United States.”
That danger is heightened in the context of Trump’s moves to sanction, exit or criticize international agencies, and to dismantle the US Agency for International Development (USAID).
“People are confusing USAID with a charity,” Nelson said. “Americans are among the most charitable people in the world. But making strategic investments is an important way for us to support our friends and expand our influence.”
This won’t be the last geopolitical rupture between Trump and Europe. Many are already eyeing possible negotiations to end Russia’s war in Ukraine with interest; Trump has previously suggested ceding Ukrainian land to Moscow, and officials in NATO countries have long feared he may go public with a proposed arrangement that leaves Kyiv and European capitals scrambling.
They will seek to diffuse those fears next week, when several members of Trump’s inner circle – including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Vice President JD Vance and Ukraine-Russia envoy Keith Kellogg – are expected to travel to the Munich Security Conference in Germany.
“I would hope that the administration would pursue a more balanced and calculated approach to Ukraine,” Nelson said. “One hopes that Trump would be very much relying on expert advice” on that conflict, he added.
On more issues than one, Trump’s global honeymoon appears to be over. And if Western countries needed a reminder of the tumult he can inject into global affairs, they have it.
“The Biden administration tried very hard to be reliable and predictable” on the world stage, Alterman said. “The Trump administration has exactly the opposite instinct.”
