A political storm has erupted across Europe following the publication of a leaked document that allegedly outlines a covert U.S. strategy to draw four European Union member states away from the bloc as part of a broader geopolitical recalibration. The report, first published by Defense One, claims that internal discussions within Washington explored encouraging Austria, Italy, Hungary, and Poland to distance themselves from Brussels under what the document refers to as a “Make Europe Great Again” framework.
According to the leaked file, the United States would deepen cooperation with governments and political movements that promote national sovereignty, resist EU centralization, and champion traditional European cultural identities. Such goals, if officially endorsed, would represent a dramatic shift in U.S. engagement with Europe—one that directly challenges the cohesion of the EU and risks redefining the transatlantic partnership that has underpinned Western policy for decades.
The White House, however, forcefully rejected the claims. Speaking to reporters, Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly insisted that no such alternative strategy existed, calling the leak “false, unserious, and inconsistent with President Trump’s clearly stated national security priorities.” Kelly noted that the administration’s publicly released 33-page National Security Strategy, unveiled only days earlier, is the sole official directive guiding U.S. foreign policy.
Nevertheless, the contents of the leaked draft struck a chord across European political institutions, where concern had already been growing over the increasingly sharp tone of the administration’s language toward Europe. The official strategy document itself had warned of “civilizational erasure,” asserted that several European governments were failing to protect their national identities, and suggested it was “far from obvious whether certain European countries will remain reliable allies.”
The leaked version—if genuine—goes far further. According to Defense One, the internal document explicitly identifies Poland, Austria, Hungary, and Italy as states Washington should “work more with… with the goal of pulling them away from the European Union.” The language appears to align with longstanding personal affinities Trump has expressed toward several national-conservative European leaders, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.
Trump has praised Orbán as a model for European governance, describing him as “fantastic” and commending his nationalist policies. Hungary has also received notable concessions from Washington, including exemptions from certain energy-related sanctions. Italy, similarly, has been singled out for praise, with Trump calling Meloni “a fantastic woman” during her visit to Mar-a-Lago earlier this year.
These relationships have fueled speculation—particularly within EU institutions—that the administration prefers to cultivate ties with individual governments over the Brussels leadership, a dynamic reminiscent of geopolitical behavior from earlier eras when great powers sought influence through bilateral alliances rather than multilateral frameworks.
The alleged strategy also urges American support for parties that espouse cultural preservation and sovereignty while maintaining pro-U.S. alignment. Critics in Europe interpreted this as an invitation for Washington to selectively back nationalist parties in upcoming European elections—a notion that triggered intense backlash among EU leaders.
Leslie Vinjamuri of Chatham House characterized the document as “Donald Trump drawing a line in the sand,” arguing that it signals a decisive break from the post–Cold War international order that emphasized integration, multilateralism, and shared institutions.
Reactions across Europe ranged from alarm to outright anger.
António Costa, President of the European Council, delivered a pointed rebuke, saying, “The United States cannot replace European citizens in choosing which are the right parties and which are the wrong parties.” He warned against any U.S. attempt to manipulate internal political dynamics or undermine the sovereignty of EU institutions.
Others adopted a more measured—but still wary—tone. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said that while some concerns raised by the strategy were “understandable,” Europe must dramatically increase its strategic autonomy. Merz also emphasized that Germany and its allies remain committed to cooperation with Washington but cannot rely on the U.S. as unconditionally as in previous decades.
Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, whose government frequently clashes with conservative factions in his own country, attempted to ease tensions by urging unity. Addressing the U.S. directly on X, he wrote: “Europe is your closest ally, not your problem. And we have common enemies. We need to stick to this.” While he rejected the idea of weakening European structures, his message reflected an understanding that U.S.-European relations are entering a more uncertain phase.
Not all European voices condemned the leak. Dutch politician Geert Wilders, leader of the PVV and a long-standing critic of EU migration policies, welcomed the report, calling Trump’s warnings about cultural change “the truth.” He said Europe risked “cultural erasure” without decisive action.
The controversy emerged against a backdrop of escalating tensions between Trump and several European governments over issues including defense spending, migration, and the war in Ukraine. In a televised Politico interview earlier in the week, Trump sharply criticized European leaders for what he described as “politically correct” migration policies that had “destroyed” parts of the continent. He accused governments of undermining their own sovereignty and failing to confront demographic and cultural challenges.
The president has also expressed frustration with Ukraine’s leadership. Following high-level calls with European leaders—including Germany’s Friedrich Merz, Britain’s Keir Starmer, and France’s Emmanuel Macron—Trump said “strong words” were exchanged over Ukraine strategy. He later chastised President Volodymyr Zelensky for not yet reviewing an American-backed ceasefire proposal. Zelensky had just met with European leaders in London in what they described as a “critical moment” in the effort to secure a durable end to Russia’s war.
Meanwhile, Russian officials seized on the controversy. Kremlin envoy Kirill Dmitriev publicly praised Trump, posting on X: “EU and UK leaders should listen to the Daddy,” a comment that drew widespread criticism in European capitals.
The timing of the leak could not be more consequential. The EU is heading toward a series of major elections, and the continent is divided over how to handle migration, defense policy, and relations with Washington. A shift in U.S. policy—real or perceived—could influence political momentum across Europe and reshape the strategic map of transatlantic relations.
Whether the leaked document reflects genuine internal planning or an early working draft that was superseded by the published National Security Strategy remains unknown. The White House insists the latter; European leaders fear the former. Either way, the leak exposes the fragility of U.S.-EU relations at a moment of global instability and raises questions about the future of the Western alliance.
As Europe assesses the fallout, one thing is clear: the controversy has reinforced growing recognition that the geopolitical assumptions of the last 30 years—about unity, alignment, and interdependence—are under strain. The strategic debate now unfolding on both sides of the Atlantic is likely to shape not only diplomatic relations, but the political identity of Europe itself in the years ahead.
Emily Johnson is a critically acclaimed essayist and novelist known for her thought-provoking works centered on feminism, women’s rights, and modern relationships. Born and raised in Portland, Oregon, Emily grew up with a deep love of books, often spending her afternoons at her local library. She went on to study literature and gender studies at UCLA, where she became deeply involved in activism and began publishing essays in campus journals. Her debut essay collection, Voices Unbound, struck a chord with readers nationwide for its fearless exploration of gender dynamics, identity, and the challenges faced by women in contemporary society. Emily later transitioned into fiction, writing novels that balance compelling storytelling with social commentary. Her protagonists are often strong, multidimensional women navigating love, ambition, and the struggles of everyday life, making her a favorite among readers who crave authentic, relatable narratives. Critics praise her ability to merge personal intimacy with universal themes. Off the page, Emily is an advocate for women in publishing, leading workshops that encourage young female writers to embrace their voices. She lives in Seattle with her partner and two rescue cats, where she continues to write, teach, and inspire a new generation of storytellers.
