European Council President Antonio Costa has sharply criticized a new US National Security Strategy, arguing it represents an unacceptable attempt to interfere in European politics and undermines the transatlantic relationship. The rebuke, delivered in multiple public statements this week, signals a growing divergence in views between Washington and Brussels, particularly regarding economic policy and the appropriate level of state intervention.
The core of the dispute lies in the US strategy document, released last week by the Trump administration, which reportedly criticizes Europe’s regulatory environment and expresses concern over potential “civilizational erasure” through immigration. More pointedly, the document suggests the US will actively “cultivate resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations.”
“What we cannot accept is the threat to interfere in European politics,” Costa stated at a conference in Brussels on . “The United States cannot replace European citizens in choosing which parties are good and which are bad.” This direct challenge underscores a rising frustration within the EU regarding perceived overreach from Washington, particularly as the bloc seeks to forge its own path on issues ranging from digital regulation to industrial policy.
The criticism extends beyond political interference. Costa also took issue with the US strategy’s apparent disapproval of the EU’s efforts to hold US tech giants accountable for the spread of disinformation and hate speech online. “The United States cannot replace Europe in what its vision is of freedom of expression,” he argued. “There cannot be freedom of speech without freedom of information. There would be no freedom of speech if citizens’ freedom of information is sacrificed to defend the techno oligarchs in the United States.” This highlights a fundamental disagreement over the balance between free speech and the need to regulate online platforms, a debate that has intensified in recent years.
The German government has echoed Costa’s concerns, further amplifying the EU’s unified response. The US National Security Strategy is described as painting Europe as a “troubled, declining power” and questioning the long-term viability of the transatlantic security alliance. This assessment comes at a sensitive time, as Washington continues to pressure European allies to increase their financial and military support for Ukraine.
The timing of this transatlantic friction is particularly noteworthy. Costa emphasized the need for Europe to recognize that the “relationships between allies and the post-World War II alliances have changed.” This acknowledgement suggests a shift in the EU’s approach to its relationship with the US, moving away from a traditionally deferential stance towards a more assertive pursuit of its own interests.
Despite the sharp criticism, Costa indicated a willingness to engage with the new US administration to find common ground. Speaking in , he expressed a desire to work closely with Washington to advance “a positive and fair economic cooperation” and to collaborate on shared priorities. However, he also stressed the importance of “protecting our own interests” and establishing a “stable, balanced and predictable trade relationship.”
This desire for a balanced relationship was further underscored in , when Costa cautioned against creating economic uncertainty through trade tensions. He argued that Europe and the United States should instead focus on how the EU can take greater responsibility for its own defense, rather than engaging in trade disputes. This suggests a prioritization of European strategic autonomy and a desire to reduce reliance on the US for security.
The EU’s response to the US National Security Strategy also reflects a broader ambition to strengthen its own competitiveness on the global stage. Costa has repeatedly emphasized the need for Europe to close the innovation gap with its competitors, foster decarbonization, and enhance economic resilience. The EU’s “Competitiveness Compass” is intended to serve as a roadmap for achieving these goals.
Costa has highlighted the importance of EU enlargement as a “geopolitical investment for peace and security.” He reaffirmed the EU’s commitment to supporting Ukraine’s eventual accession to the bloc, stating that peace must be “chosen by Ukraine and by Ukrainians.” This commitment to enlargement underscores the EU’s belief in its own model of integration as a force for stability and prosperity in Europe.
The current situation represents a significant shift in the transatlantic dynamic. While the US remains a crucial ally for Europe, the EU is increasingly asserting its own agency and pursuing its own strategic priorities. The coming months will be critical in determining whether the two sides can navigate these differences and forge a new, more equitable relationship.
