Sliding doors: One Trump crisis, two possible futures for Europe

Summary — “Sliding doors: One Trump crisis, two possible futures for Europe” (ECFR, Nevada Joan Lee, 15 June 2026)

This policy brief uses a fictional but research-grounded scenario — an American challenge to Norwegian sovereignty over Svalbard — to model two divergent European responses to Trump-era coercion. In the “appease, delay, distract” path, European states manage the crisis individually, avoid confrontation and hope restraint preserves the alliance; the result is a “hollow victory” where formal institutions survive but Washington learns that pressure, sanctions and wedge tactics reliably fracture European resolve. In the “consciously uncoupled” path, Norway and allied states (via the NB8, then a wider coalition) name the coercion early, coordinate economic, regulatory, technological and diplomatic leverage, and accept short-term costs (tariffs, a bruised transatlantic relationship, a 0.4% GDP hit) in exchange for emerging “wounded, but stronger” with real leverage intact. The paper draws three lessons for policymakers: beware Washington’s wedge strategy of picking off individual states; build coalitions around shared interest rather than forcing EU27-wide unity (citing NB8, Weimar Triangle, E3/E5 as models); and map economic, industrial and security leverage across a coalition before a crisis hits, rather than improvising once Washington has set the terms.

The next Trump crisis will come. European governments facing American pressure will need to weigh the costs and benefits of their responses. Here are two scenarios to show what resistance costs, and why those costs are lower than they appear

Source: ECFR Publications · June 15, 2026