On his trip to Europe, the United States President Donald Trump was at his most belligerent. He insulted and humiliated his hosts – mainly two women and a Muslim – and US NATO allies of the US as a whole.

So what now? There is little more that anyone can say about Trump’s uncouth and unbecoming behavior. All that can be done is watch and see if the so-called US system of checks and balances can stop this, though it does not seem to have much hope of doing so at the moment. In the meantime, the wrecking ball of the US administration will continue to swing wildly and wickedly.

The question should be: why are Europeans continuing to put up with this insulting behavior? Can Europe not think of a different future where it is not constantly forced to play second fiddle to Washington?

After all, the US has decided to declare a trade war on the world’s two largest economic entities after itself: China and the European Union. Whereas China is standing firm, taking a dignified position while doing so, Europe seems confused. Europe could learn a thing or two from the Chinese: there is no need to cling to an older way of organizing the world or an imaginary “Western” alliance.

The old world order gave Europe prestige and a disproportionate say in how the world is run, but tied it closely to the US – perhaps acceptable when the US seemed to be “reasonable”, but increasingly intolerable now. This order is dangerous, as it hinges on one power that is no longer reliable or trustworthy. Is Europe trying to protect its old privileges by hanging onto the coat tails of the hegemon, and one that it knows is an ally only in name?

Europe’s future does not lie in looking back and preserving old systems. It needs to instead work with the global majority to build a new one. The US, in an attempt to preserve a system where it sits on top, may continue to resist change, but there is no reason why Europe needs to do the same. Europe can help build a system that suits the 21st century, rather than the immediate period after WWII. It needs to radically redefine its relationship with Asia, a relationship that is still defined by deep-rooted views shaped by its colonial past. It needs to move past that. 

What could it do? First, start at home. Surprisingly, to perhaps agree with Trump, paying for its own defense would seem to be a good first step. Why does the world’s third largest economy need to rely on the US for its own security? Apart from it being an outdated Cold War approach, it is wholly unsuited to allowing Europe to define its future and independence. 

In fact, an independent defense structure – and the retiring of NATO – might resolve some of Europe’s security concerns. No matter how US tries to argue, Russia sees NATO as an anti-Russian alliance. Thus, the expansion of NATO and the presence of US troops on Russia’s doorstep is a clear worry for Moscow, if not a red flag, and understandably so.

Europe may be concerned about Russia. But, for Russia, the issue is the US, not Europe. If the need for US forces and protection is removed, Russia’s fear of the US military presence would be removed, and thus it would no longer be a threat. In fact, Europe, even during the Cold War, has had a much more balanced and complex understanding of Russia (and the Soviet Union before that) than the US. A different world order would give Europe more flexibility to decide how it wants to co-exist with Russia. 

Another thing Europe can do is deepen its relationship with Asia. Europe could create its own version of the “Trans-Pacific Partnership”, albeit one that includes China as a key partner, rather than seeking to exclude it as part of a geopolitical chess game. Imagine a trade pact that included the European Union, China, South Korea and the ASEAN region. This would cover almost all of the world’s major economies, and be a statement to the rest of the world that global trade will continue to be a vehicle for shared development and growth. It will help put a stop to the US holding the world to ransom through unilateral actions, or at least act as a buffer.

In fact, Europe has already started to make moves on this front. Last week, it signed a free trade agreement with Japan, reported to be the world’s largest, covering 30 percent of the global economy. Europe has also been willing to risk US disapproval when engaging with Asia: despite the protests of the Obama administration, European countries like the United Kingdom, Germany and France all chose to support the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Europe has also chosen to embrace the possibilities in the Belt and Road Initiative.

These tentative moves towards Asia were done when Europe could perhaps still feel good about its close ties to the US. Now that its close ties to Washington are more of an embarrassment, imagine how much further engagement can go?

The author is founder and CEO of the Global Institute For Tomorrow (GIFT), an independent pan-Asian think tank based in Hong Kong.The author contributed this article to China Watch exclusively. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of China Watch.

All rights reserved. Copying or sharing of any content for other than personal use is prohibited without prior written permission.