As debt looms, the U.S. simply can’t afford to lose its superpower status—so we’re trapped in an ‘increasingly loveless’ union with Europe, analyst claims

Despite concerns that the trans-Atlantic alliance might dissolve due to President Donald Trump’s aspiration to acquire Greenland, the U.S. and Europe are too intricately linked militarily and economically to part ways, according to Dan Alamariu, the chief geopolitical strategist at Alpine Macro.

Indeed, U.S. geopolitical dominance actually relies on European allies, he stated in a note earlier this month, even as NATO members rush to increase military spending to address capability gaps. Meanwhile, Europe cannot turn towards China or Russia.

“The probable and likely course is a messy coexistence: intermittent trade conflicts, more intense rhetoric, and gradual European autonomy at the edges, along with continued alignment on Russia, nuclear deterrence, intelligence, and China policy,” Alamariu wrote.

The strained relations were evident over the weekend during the Munich Security Conference. Secretary of State Marco Rubio vowed to stay involved in Europe and referred to shared battlefield sacrifices, but reaffirmed the alliance.

Rubio also withdrew from a high-level meeting on Ukraine at the last minute, prompting one European official to describe the move as “” amid efforts to end Russia’s war there.

But for the time being, Europe cannot break free from its dependence on the U.S. military, especially for high-end deterrence and warfighting enablers, Alamariu said. While the European Union is boosting defense spending, it is not sufficient to achieve strategic autonomy in the near future.

“Even if politics deteriorates, Euro-Atlantic defense passes through U.S.-centered institutions,” he added. “Bottom line: Without a common EU military and budget, the EU will not become independent of the U.S., let alone split off.”

On the economic front, the two partners have highly complex ties that cover supply chains, services, foreign direct investment, and financial flows, representing the world’s deepest bilateral relationship, Alamariu explained.

This dependence works both ways and extends to military power. If NATO were to break up, the value of having the U.S. as an ally would be significantly reduced in Japan and South Korea, he said.

“Without NATO and its major allies, the U.S. would struggle to maintain its globally dominant position,” Alamariu warned. “This would have serious implications for the USD’s global role and its weak fiscal outlook. The U.S. literally cannot afford not to be a superpower, otherwise its debts will come due.”

In fact, the in recent years. And despite soaring deficits, Trump has promised to increase defense spending by 50% to $1.5 trillion.

Europe, which remains a major buyer of Treasury debt, helps finance U.S. budget deficits. Alamariu said there is no broad evidence of European liquidation of U.S. assets and predicted it is unlikely. At the same time, the American economy continues to outperform, making it attractive to investors, while Europe lacks a viable alternative to Treasuries.

EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas also emphasized U.S.-Europe codependence at the Munich Security Conference.

“When, for example, Russia发动战争,他们独自行动，因为他们没有盟友,” she said. “当美国发动战争时，我们很多人会与你们同行，并且在此过程中我们会失去人员。所以这意味着你们也需要我们成为这个超级大国。因为从经济实力的大局来看，中国是一个非常强大的国家。”

To be sure, China poses an economic threat to Europe, as a deluge of cheap imports puts the continent’s industrial base at risk, Alamariu pointed out.

China is also a crucial facilitator of Russia’s war on Ukraine and has with Moscow, particularly for dual-use components and critical minerals used in Russian drone production.

As long as Russia remains a threat, Europe has an incentive to manage its tensions with the U.S. rather than seek a complete break, Alamariu said, adding that it will still accelerate “selective autonomy” in areas such as defense investment and economic security.

“Yet, collaboration with the U.S. will likely continue despite high headline risks and mutual fear and loathing,” he said. “Our argument: the two are stuck with each other, in an increasingly loveless, if still convenient, marriage.”