The commentary delivers a pointed claim that stings in European capitals – as Donald Trump enters 2026, he looks more decisive on Europe’s future than Europe’s own leaders. While Brussels debates processes and Berlin hesitates, Trump acts, signals and sets terms. The piece argues that Europe’s leadership vacuum has become so visible that an American outsider once again fills the space by default.

The analysis pulls no punches and argues that Europe’s claim to geopolitical clout is a carefully maintained illusion. Beneath the grand speeches and strategic documents, the EU lacks the tools, unity and speed to act like the power it pretends to be. The piece says the problem is no longer hidden. Crises have stripped away the costume, leaving a bloc that talks big and delivers small.

The analysis dissects NATO’s new defence spending target and warns that what looks like resolve on paper could backfire in practice. The higher benchmark is meant to show seriousness to allies and adversaries alike. Instead, it risks exposing uneven commitment, hollow compliance and political theatre across Europe. The piece argues that the signal is strong, but the foundations underneath are shaky.

The commentary surveys Europe’s China debate at the start of 2026 and delivers an uneasy conclusion – Brussels is watching closely, but still reacting late. Europe tracks Beijing’s moves with growing concern, yet struggles to turn observation into strategy. The piece argues that while awareness has improved, control has not. Europe knows the risks. It just hasn’t decided what it is willing to sacrifice to reduce them.

The analysis delivers a blunt ultimatum to Europe – the period of comfortable drift is over. The EU is facing overlapping pressures on security, the economy and global influence, and the option of muddling through is disappearing fast. The piece argues that Europe is not short of strategies or warnings. What it lacks is the willingness to choose, pay and act before events force its hand.

The analysis strips the gloss off Europe’s long-running quest for “strategic autonomy” and finds a project stuck between ambition and dependence. Brussels talks about freedom of action, resilience and sovereignty. In reality, Europe is squeezed by US security guarantees on one side and deep economic exposure to China on the other. The piece argues that autonomy has become a slogan masking hard constraints Europe has not resolved.

The commentary takes aim at Friedrich Merz’s recent foreign policy moves and finds a style that looks improvised, abrasive and politically risky. What is presented as tough realism comes across as clumsy “dirty work” that raises eyebrows at home and abroad. The piece argues that Germany is projecting firmness without coherence, and paying the price in credibility.

The website of the Barcelona Center for International Affairs (CIDOB) has posted the January issue of its CIDOB Opinion newsletter containing an article “How Europe can reduce dependence on the United States” by Francis Ghilès, the Center’s non-resident Senior Fellow.

The analysis takes a close look at the principles guiding German foreign policy and exposes a widening gap between aspiration and impact. Berlin speaks the language of responsibility, multilateralism and restraint. The problem, the piece argues, is that these principles increasingly look like comfort blankets in a world that rewards speed, leverage and hard choices. What once sounded virtuous now risks sounding evasive.

The analysis tears into the EU’s handling of trade policy and finds a familiar pattern of overconfidence followed by underdelivery. Faced with a tougher global trade environment, Brussels talked up strategic autonomy and defensive tools. What it delivered instead was delay, confusion and diluted action. The piece argues that Europe did not just struggle to respond – it actively mishandled the moment.

The analysis takes stock of Europe’s position one hundred days into Donald Trump’s return to the White House and finds a Union talking geopolitics while bracing for turbulence it cannot control. The EU wants to act like a strategic power, but Trump’s early moves expose how thin that ambition still is. The piece argues that Europe is navigating the storm with limited instruments, fragile unity and heavy dependence on decisions made in Washington.

The analysis delivers a blunt assessment of Europe’s China policy and finds a continent stuck in the middle with shrinking room to manoeuvre. Brussels talks about de-risking, resilience and strategic realism. In practice, Europe remains deeply entangled with China economically while lacking the power or unity to shape the relationship on its own terms. The paper argues that Europe is trying to manage a rivalry it did not choose, with tools that are not strong enough.

The commentary delivers a stark wake-up call to Europe after Donald Trump’s military strike and capture of Venezuela’s president. What should have been a distant regional event has immediate geopolitical recoil for the EU. The piece argues that Europe’s policymakers face a harsher world order where the US prioritises its own strategic agenda, ignores international norms and uses force with growing ease.