Although he left his post as European commissioner in September, Thierry Breton nonetheless remains concerned about the destiny of the EU. Two days before the presidential election in the United States – a country he knows well, having taught at Harvard -, he returned to La Tribune Sunday on the impact that this election will have on the Twenty-Seven.
LA TRIBUNE SUNDAY — What does this election say about the United States?
THIERRY BRETON — It is a continuation of what we have observed for years: the United States remains a fundamentally divided country, fractured into two blocs which no longer speak to each other, no longer understand each other. If a winner does not emerge very quickly, we can worry about what this polarization will cause. Afterwards, it also has a lot to do with the personality of Donald Trump, who intellectualized this divide during his campaign with the method we know from him.
How Washington is preparing to avoid reliving January 6, 2021
Joe Biden, who promised to reconcile the country, has therefore failed?
When he arrived at the White House, his priority was the reindustrialization of America. Behind it, there was the idea of reconquering the Rust Belt and its “declassed” electorate who vote for Donald Trump. It is clear that this electorate continues to prefer the Republican. Obviously, on this point, Joe Biden has not succeeded.
Yet all indicators show that the American economy has never been in better shape…
Yes, and that’s the paradox. The inflation that followed the Covid period still plays a crucial role for many Americans, particularly the middle class, who are still cruelly feeling its effects. The cost of access to financing and debt to which they resort massively has not yet fallen sufficiently. This is one of the determining elements.
Is the Trump of 2024 the same as the Trump of 2020 or 2016?
He seems even more determined. If he is elected, he will undoubtedly be operational more quickly than in 2016, in particular to constitute his administration. He is very close to the Heritage Foundation, known for its very right-wing theses. She is working on a list of personalities likely to immediately make up her entourage.
Should we fear, if he is elected, an authoritarian drift, a remodeling of American democracy?
We know that this remodeling had already begun during his first mandate, in particular by the appointment to the Supreme Court of judges very close to his theses.
But during this mandate, the administration had managed to circumvent some of its decisions. He has already warned that this time he won't let her do it…
He says he's here to make a difference. No doubt he will keep his word. This is also a quality that many Americans recognize in him. The election of a president in the United States, the leading economic and military power in the world, is obviously also the expression of leadership. And, like it or not, Trump is expressing that leadership. He is in tune with a large part of the American population, more than a third of whom explicitly agree with his theses, his attitudes, his statements, including the most excessive.
Wall Street and Silicon Valley have also changed their minds about it. How to explain it?
It's true, the business community is much less worried than in 2016 about a possible victory for the Republican candidate. Her economic program is perhaps more articulate, simpler and clearer than that of her Democratic rival, who has not detailed hers in much detail. One thing is certain, the economy will once again play a major role in this election.
Are there other points of convergence between Trump and Harris?
The fight against illegal immigration, more massive than what we know in Europe, is one. This is a major subject for both candidates. Another common point is China and the shift of the epicenter of the White House's concerns to Southeast Asia. Whoever is elected, we will inevitably see a hardening of relations between the two powers.
Do American bosses vote Republican or Democratic?
How will this translate?
By tightening transfers of key technologies or by a significant increase in customs duties, like those already applied to Chinese cars imported into the United States at 100%. But China has, for its part, implemented circumvention strategies, for example by setting up factories in Mexico, on the way to becoming America's leading trading partner ahead of Europe. Moreover, the two candidates also agree on the vision they have of Europe.
And what is it?
We must face the facts: we are no longer a priority for the United States. Kamala Harris did not mention Europe once during her campaign. As for Trump, he speaks about it in less than pleasant terms, announcing that he is preparing to introduce all-out customs duties with Europe. He describes it as a “mini-China”, believing that it is using the United States and is not a reliable partner. For both candidates, Europe is no more than a regional power. It is up to us to demonstrate the opposite.
Comment ?
We must get out of our naivety, put an end to the myth according to which the United States of today is still that of the 1990s. America has refocused a lot on itself. Whether with Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, Europe will therefore have to be more and more strategic, more and more autonomous, in terms of technology, industry or defense.
Is she taking the path?
Our European institutions, the Council, the Commission, the Parliament, have not yet decided on the position to adopt towards the United States after November 5. In fact, it is almost a taboo subject. At the last Council, and while we were three weeks before the major turning point of the election, the question was not raised.
A Trump victory “will raise fundamental and strategic questions in Europe”
For what reason?
For fear of divisions spreading. After the election, some member states may be tempted to directly negotiate security or other agreements with Washington. We also know the relations between the Hungarian Prime Minister and Donald Trump. When the latter asks questions about the EU, it is Viktor Orbán that he first calls and not the President of the Commission or that of the European Parliament. We may regret it but that's how it is. With Donald Trump, this is a dimension that we will have to integrate to position ourselves for the future. With Kamala Harris, institutional relations between our continents will have a more standardized and conventional character. In all cases, Europe will have to display real leadership of power and strategic autonomy, boldly imposing its priorities and its issues. This is how she will move forward. And not by seeking some weak consensus, or even by praying for the election – or non-election – of this or that candidate.
Is it not incomprehensible to see Europe awaiting this election with the same anxiety as four or eight years ago? We have already experienced a Trump mandate and know what to expect…
Coincidentally, this American election comes at a time when the European institutions themselves are being renewed. That doesn't make things any easier. Depending on the candidate elected, we may have to ask ourselves whether the structure and organization of our institutions, which we are in the process of finalizing, are adapted to the new transatlantic reality. It will be up to the co-legislators to say so.
On Ukraine, can Europe compensate for a possible cessation of American aid?
This question will very quickly occupy us: whether it is Kamala Harris or Donald Trump, we must prepare ourselves for an evolution in American support, certainly different for one or the other, but definitely an evolution, even a cessation. One thing is certain, it will be a test for us Europeans. However, I observe a certain weariness of public opinion in a growing number of Member States regarding our support for Ukraine. It's worrying. This will require, for our three institutions, a determination to maintain the cohesion of all Europeans, and I mean all Europeans, in a decisive period.
Would a return of Trump to the White House mean the end of multilateralism?
It is only Europe that is pushing for multilateralism as we knew it in the 2000s. We see it at the World Trade Organization. Let's not be the last of the Mohicans. China and the United States have not respected WTO rules for a long time.
Is this part of this European naivety that you describe?
I don't know if it's naivety or a form of outdated ideology. We are, in some ways, a herbivorous dinosaur surrounded by tyrannosaurs. Of course, our market must remain open. But on our terms. Firmness is essential to achieve reciprocity. We proved that we were capable of it when, together, we led a tough fight to build an unprecedented European architecture for digital regulation. In the same spirit, and as we have undertaken for semiconductors, the defense industry and vaccines, we will need to increase our production capacity in all strategic sectors by partly co-financing the green and digital transition. In this, we must follow all of the recommendations of the Draghi and Letta reports. I mean the entirety. In particular, the joint mobilization of massive innovative financing: 800 billion euros per year, Mario Draghi tells us, to restore our competitiveness.
United States: these gray eminences who frame Donald Trump
We're still a long way away…
The United States does not deprive itself of this. They are at more than 1,000 billion in subsidies for the IRA (Inflation Reduction Act) alone when China itself is massively injecting capital to revive its economy. We find ourselves at a crossroads. Either Europe accelerates its strategic autonomy programs, and it has a chance of maintaining its place. Either she procrastinates, and she will definitely let the train pass.
How to finance these projects?
Through private but also public investment, as recommended by Mario Draghi. This therefore undoubtedly involves common debt. The mobilization of the Union budget alone is illusory. I know that this does not please some Member States. But, after the Covid crisis, we managed to implement the Next Generation EU plan despite reluctance. Germany, the Netherlands, some of the so-called “frugal” countries may balk. But we were able to overcome the opposition. The American elections are putting us against the wall. After the pandemic and the war in Ukraine, it is a new existential moment. Harris or Trump: more than ever, Europe faces its destiny alone.
