Unspoken Tensions Threaten Transatlantic Economic Diplomacy

As the global political landscape braces for the upcoming U.S. presidential election, a new unease has surfaced between European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and former President Donald Trump. The absence of dialogue between the two leaders, particularly regarding trade, is casting a shadow over current and future transatlantic negotiations.

Though von der Leyen maintains regular contact with the Biden administration, preparations for a possible Trump return to the White House are noticeably muted. In Brussels, officials express concern about the potential revival of Trump-era tariffs, threats to NATO cooperation, and renewed disputes over digital taxation, automobile imports, and agriculture.

During Trump’s first term, transatlantic trade relations suffered significant strain. His administration imposed steel and aluminum tariffs on the EU and threatened to escalate into a broader trade war. In response, the EU retaliated, targeting U.S. goods such as motorcycles and bourbon. While these tensions were somewhat alleviated under President Biden, the fear of a return to protectionism has never fully dissipated.

What is particularly alarming to EU diplomats is the lack of preparatory engagement with Trump’s current advisory circle. While von der Leyen has focused on internal EU matters and strategic autonomy in trade and defense, critics argue that a proactive outreach to Trump-aligned figures could prove crucial if the former president wins a second term.

Analysts suggest that silence is not neutrality—it may be interpreted as strategic hesitancy or political miscalculation. “In diplomacy, silence is not always golden,” remarked one EU trade expert. “By not laying any groundwork with Trump, von der Leyen risks facing a fully formed policy shock.”

The current trade agenda between the EU and the U.S. is broad: from carbon border taxes to AI regulation standards, and semiconductor subsidies to digital services taxes. A potential Trump victory could upend many of these collaborative initiatives. His “America First” approach often conflicts with EU principles of multilateralism and regulatory alignment.

Behind closed doors, there is growing pressure on von der Leyen to engage more directly, even if discreetly. Some suggest leveraging channels through European ambassadors in Washington or think tanks with access to the Trump campaign. Others advocate for a bolder strategy: publicly articulating the EU’s trade red lines and reminding the U.S. of the cost of economic fragmentation.

In this fragile moment, both Europe and the United States stand at a crossroads. The question remains: can the silence be broken before it crystallizes into a rift too wide to bridge?

As the world watches the political developments unfold, the future of EU-U.S. economic diplomacy may hinge not only on elections, but on the conversations that either happen—or don’t happen—in the months ahead.