A Marriage of Convenience? On Rubio’s Munich Speech and the Future of US–Europe Relations

Is the transatlantic relationship still a partnership — or has it become a marriage of convenience?

Marco Rubio’s speech in Munich was widely described as more polished and conciliatory than previous appearances by the Trump administration in Europe.

And yet, what was left unsaid is also important: Ukraine was mentioned only once. Russia not at all in the main speech. The injustice of the war remained unaddressed.

Instead, the focus was on the concept of civilisational pride, Western “decline”, and the need for stronger allies who can defend themselves and their heritage.

On the surface, this is familiar language. Beneath it lies a shift.

For decades, the transatlantic relationship was based on shared commitments and values: democracy, rule of law, and a rules-based international order. Now the emphasis seems to be moving from values to power, from multilateralism to transactional leadership, from shared principles to conditional alignment.

It is telling that many commentators describe the relationship using metaphors of a troubled or even abusive marriage. Whether that comparison is fair is less important than the fact that it resonates. Trust appears to be thinning.

Europe now faces a difficult balancing act. It depends on the United States for security. Yet it must define its own political identity and strategic autonomy. Is Europe primarily a geopolitical actor, a civilisational project, or a union grounded in liberal democratic values?

And can the EU live up to its size? We are a huge market. The so called Brussels effect is not what it should be but it is there. If we can fix our single market – the gains of which is estimated to be several percentage points of additional growth in GDP annually – and reform the decision making process within the EU so that outliers such as Hungary can’t hamper the union –  we can punch above our weight, not below it as we do today. 

And the stronger the transatlantic relationship is, the more both sides of the Atlantic can benefit from it. Which takes me back to the speech: Rubio framed decline as a choice. That is true. But the character of alliances is also a choice.

Alliances built on leverage can be effective. Alliances built on trust are durable.

If the transatlantic relationship becomes a marriage of convenience rather than a partnership of shared conviction, it may survive — but it will not lead.

And in a moment of global instability, that distinction matters.