The EU’s increasingly unpopular, globalist political class is crashing out after President Donald Trump ordered the US to withdraw from a wide array of international organizations tied to climate policy, gender ideology, and what his administration has labeled “woke global governance.”
The decision has triggered an unusually emotional response from EU leaders who appear to view American disengagement as an existential threat to their failed globalist project.
Germany’s Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier accused the United States of “destroying the world order,” language typically reserved for adversarial powers rather than NATO allies. Speaking at a symposium marking his 70th birthday, Steinmeier warned that the global system was descending into lawlessness.
Steinmeier claims the US has committed a “breach of values” comparable to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Without naming Trump directly in some remarks, he nevertheless made clear that the Trump administration’s assertive foreign policy and rejection of multilateral, liberal-globalism represented, in his view, a historic rupture.
Steinmeier went further, painting a bleak picture of a world ruled by “unscrupulous” powers seizing territory and resources. Critics noted the irony of Germany lecturing others on restraint while quietly calling for a massive military buildup of its own.
Despite holding a largely ceremonial office, Steinmeier’s comments carry weight within Germany and the EU. He used the occasion to urge Berlin to eliminate military “deficits” and ensure that Germany is taken seriously as a hard-power actor in an increasingly competitive world.
Earlier this week, the Trump administration confirmed that the US will no longer participate in or fund multiple UN-affiliated bodies, including the UN Population Fund, UN Women, international climate negotiation frameworks, and various democracy-promotion initiatives.
Officials framed the move—its withdrawal from the 66 international—as a recalibration of American foreign policy away from left-liberal ideological activism and toward national interest.
Also included in the withdrawal list were non-UN organizations such as the International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, and the Global Counterterrorism Forum. Many of these institutions, critics argue, have evolved into bureaucratic and ideological echo chambers entirely disconnected from reality and democratic accountability.
In an executive order posted on the White House website, Trump stated that continued involvement in these organizations was “contrary to the interests of the United States.” The document emphasized sovereignty, fiscal responsibility, and resistance to ideological capture as the guiding principles behind the decision.
French President Emmanuel Macron, for his part, accused America of “breaking free from international rules” and abandoning its allies, a charge that many observers see as ironic given France’s own record of selectively enforcing those same rules.
Trump’s supporters, meanwhile, have long argued that US participation in these institutions produced exceedingly bloated bureaucracies, left-liberal globalist ideological activism, and little tangible benefit for American workers or families.
The State Department has been explicit about this shift. When the US formally withdrew from UNESCO last July, officials cited the organization’s “globalist, ideological agenda” and its hostility to America First priorities. Continued membership, the administration said, no longer served the national interest.
From an American national-conservative viewpoint, these institutions have drifted far from their original mandates. What were once forums for cooperation have become vehicles for enforcing globalist doctrine on sovereign nations, often without voter consent.
The backlash from Europe appears rooted in its dependency on the US. For decades, EU leaders have relied on American funding, military protection, and diplomatic cover while criticizing its domestic politics. Trump’s refusal to continue underwriting that arrangement has laid bare the imbalance.
The dispute and fiery—and more than likely empty—rhetoric is based on a fundamental disagreement about power and sovereignty. It’s no secret that the EU’s leadership remains deeply invested in a global liberal, rules-based system enforced through multilateral institutions, even as those rules increasingly reflect their own increasingly unpopular ideological preferences.
Trump’s approach, meanwhile, rejects that premise outright. Rather than preserving old, ossified, institutions for their own sake, his administration has made clear it will judge alliances and organizations solely on whether they advance concrete American interests.
To Europe’s managerial elite class—particularly in Berlin—that stance is simply unforgivable. To Trump’s supporters, it is long overdue.
The post Germany’s Globalist President Says US “Destroying World Order” appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.