The F-35 is a fifth-generation fighter, developed in cooperation with eight countries, making it a model of international cooperation. When President Trump introduced his successor, the F-47, he praised its advantages – and said that the version sold to his allies would be deliberately downgraded.
Trump said last week that it makes sense, “One day, maybe they are not our allies.”
For many countries that marry the United States, his remarks confirm a relevant conclusion: the United States can no longer trust. Even countries that have not yet directly affected can see where things are going, as Mr. Trump threatens the allies' economies, their defense partnerships, and even their sovereignty.
Currently, they are in talks to minimize post-strike pain, including a round of tariffs expected in April. But at the same time, they are pulling backwards. Preparing to intimidation become a lasting feature of U.S. relations, they are trying to go their own way.
Some examples:
-
Canada reached a $4.2 billion deal with Australia this month to develop cutting-edge radars and announced it is negotiating participation in the EU's military accumulation.
-
Portugal and other NATO countries are reconsidering plans to buy the F-35, fearing U.S. control over parts and software.
-
After years of delays, negotiations between the EU and India on a free trade and technology agreement between the EU and India have suddenly accelerated.
-
Brazil is not only increasing trade with China, but also trading in China's currency, thus bringing the US dollar far away.
-
Discussions on establishing or ensuring access to nuclear weapons to protect their own protection are now common in several countries, including Poland, South Korea and Australia.
As other countries become richer, more capable, and less convinced that the centrality of the United States will be permanent, hence with some degree of movement. But Trump 2.0 has strengthened the process over the past few months.
History and psychology help explain why. Social scientists studying international relations say few forces have such a powerful lasting impact on geopolitics, such as distrust. It repeatedly poisoned negotiations in the Palestinian-Israel conflict. It burned the Cold War tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union for decades.
The so-called realists – viewing international relations as an immoral race between selfish states – believe that trust should always be assessed with skepticism, because believing in good intentions is risky.
But Mr. Trump has sparked cautious suspicion. His distrust of allies is evident in his zerosum view of the gains of others as the losses of the United States. What it creates is familiar – a spiral of distrust. Research shows that if you think the other party (or country) is not trustworthy, you are more likely to break the rules and contract without being ashamed, and research shows that strengthens the partner’s own distrust, resulting in more aggressiveness or less interaction.
“Trust is fragile,” wrote Paul Slovic, a psychologist at the University of Oregon, in a groundbreaking study on risk, trust, and democracy in 1993. “It is usually quite slow, but can be immediately destroyed by a single misfortune or mistake.”
In Mr. Trump's case, allies pointed to the ongoing attacks.
His tariffs on Mexico and Canada imports were ignoring the North American Free Trade Agreement he signed during his first term, shocking U.S. neighbors.
His threat was to make Canada a U.S. state and send the U.S. military into Mexico, following the drug cartel (Pulbash) violation of sovereignty, unlike his demands on the Greenland and Panama Canals. His blame for Ukraine is on Russia's war to further alienate its allies, forcing them to ask: Is the United States a dictator or a defender of democracy?
Relatively faster, they determined that even if Mr. Trump’s boldest proposal (such as turning Gaza into the Middle Eastern Riviera) was a fantasy, the trend line pointed in the same direction: towards the world order, unlike the Olympics, it was more like the final battle.
Perhaps there is no country that is more shocking than Canada. Despite its vast differences in military power, it shares the world's largest unsafe border with the United States. Why? Because Canadians trust the United States. Now, for a large extent, they don't.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney said Thursday that the country's traditional relations with the United States are “end”.
“Trump violated the profound assumptions of Canada's foreign policy that the United States is an inherently trustworthy country,” said Brian Rathbun, professor of global affairs at the University of Toronto. “This is very threatening to Canada's fundamental interests in trade and security, leading it to send to alternatives.”
Economic patriotism is new for Canada, but it has sparked a purchase in Canada that urges consumers to avoid U.S. products and stocks. Canadians also cancelled US holidays in large numbers.
Mr. Trump’s threat is even more important in the long run, with a surprising consensus around a controversial or overlooked policy: Canada should build pipelines, ports and other infrastructure east to west, rather than north to south, to reduce its dependence on the United States and push its resources to Asia and Europe.
Europe has made progress in this process. After the U.S. election, the EU finally reached a trade agreement with South American countries to create one of the world's largest trade zones and is committed to closer trade relations with India, South Africa, South Korea and Mexico.
Japan is Asia's largest ally and has been prioritizing new markets in the south of the world, with fast-growing economies such as Vietnam providing new customers.
“Japan already has a new perspective and we absolutely have to change the portfolio of investments,” said Ken Jimbo, a professor of international politics and security at Keio University in Tokyo. For the current and subsequent governments, he added: “We have to adjust expectations for the American alliance.”
When it comes to defense, some people call “Americanization” more challenging. This is especially true in Asia, where there is no equally NATO, and the dependence on the support of the United States has somewhat hindered the military of the countries the United States promises to defend (Japan, South Korea and the Philippines).
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was in Manila on Friday, pledging “really prioritize and move to the region.” However, many American partners are now working together without the United States, signing mutual access agreements for each other’s forces and establishing new alliances to stop China as much as possible.
Europe is also many years away from the help of American weapons and technology, and it is still many years before it can fully defend itself. However, in response to the Trump administration’s tariffs, threats and widespread contempt, the EU recently announced plans to increase military spending, which Mr. Heggs called Europe “tragic”. This includes a 150 billion euro loan scheme to fund defense investment.
The EU in 27 countries is also increasingly with two non-members, the UK and Norway, defending Ukraine and other strategic defense priorities.
For some countries, this is not enough. Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk told parliament in early March that Poland would explore opportunities for nuclear weapons because of concerns that Mr. Trump could not believe Mr. Trump was fully defending NATO countries.
“It's a security contest,” Dusk said.
In February, South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Tae-Yul told the National Assembly that building nuclear weapons “is not on the dining table, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it is not on the table either.” According to some estimates, South Korea and Japan have technical knowledge to develop nuclear weapons in less than two months.
Former Singaporean diplomat Bilihari Kausikan said some distrust leads to healthy caution, noting that Asia has been skeptical about the United States since the Vietnam War. He said the end result of the Trump era could be “a more diverse world with more maneuverable space” and the dominant U.S.A.
But for now, distrust is spreading. Experts say anything in the long run will take years and a series of expensive trust-building efforts to bring the United States together with the old and new allies.
“Trust is hard to build and easy to lose,” said Deborah Welch Larson, a political scientist at UCLA. “The distrust of America’s intentions and motivations grows every day.”
Reported by Matina Stevis-Gridneff From Toronto, Jeanna Smialek From Brussels, Cui Sang From Seoul and Martin Farkler From Tokyo.
