🔗 Share this article

Donald Trump's national security strategy presents a misguided view of the European Union. The document asserts that unrestrained immigration and so-called "woke" policies represent an existential threat to the continent's identity. However, this perspective is based on a fundamental misreading of the reality. The actual danger confronting Europe is not societal but economic and technological backwardness.

The Stark Growth Gap Separating the US and Europe

The data paint a stark picture. From 2008 and 2023, US GDP grew by eighty-seven percent, compared to a paltry 13.5% growth for the European Union. During this period, European income per person fell from 76.5% to just half of the American figure. Remarkably, even the poorest US state now boasts a greater average income than several leading European economies like France and Italy.

Currently, about half of the world’s top fifty tech companies are US-based, while only four are from Europe.

The Technological Shortfall: The Core Question

The growing economic gap stems from superior productivity growth in the United States, largely due to technological innovation and better use of resources. The landscape of global tech leadership is decidedly US-centric. Over the past five decades, 241 US firms have grown into companies valued at over $10bn, compared with just 14 in the European continent.

This disparity prompts a pressing question: In the race for future industries like semiconductors, AI, and fusion energy, where does Europe stand? Most analysts concede it is largely a contest between two involving the United States and China, with Europe entering at a clear disadvantage.

Underlying Factors of the Continent's Technological Lag

A number of key factors explain this technological divide.

• Financing Ecosystem: The US boasts a much more robust and more dynamic network for funding startups. Europe has yet to establish a true capital markets union, which limits the growth potential of emerging companies.
• Regulatory Fragmentation: Excessive and fragmented rules hinder European business. A American entrepreneur can introduce a product under a single regulatory framework to access a consumer base of hundreds of millions. The European Union, despite a bigger population size, is divided among 27 separate regimes, creating significant internal barriers.
• Mindset Differences: Attitudes toward risk-taking vary greatly. In some EU nations, business failure was historically met with stigma, whereas in the US, it is often considered a badge of experience.
• Defense Spending: The United States enjoys a tightly woven innovation pipeline linking defense and academia. Europe's chronic underinvestment in military capabilities has weakened its ability in pioneering research.

A Path Forward: Grounds for Cautious Optimism

In spite of these challenges, one can find reasons for hope. European leaders are increasingly aware of the severe threat and have started to advance serious reform. Notable reports on EU competitiveness and the single market highlight the necessity of major changes.

Given appropriate incentives and rule changes, these assets could support far greater levels of commercial innovation.

Europe retains considerable advantages: skilled workforce, excellent schools and universities, and world-class research institutions. Coupled with a vast domestic consumer base and substantial household savings, these foundations have the potential to trigger a surge of investment and entrepreneurship.

Crucially, even if the EU does not take the lead in developing next-generation technologies, it can still significantly boost economic output by implementing and tailoring innovations from elsewhere.

A Critical Juncture

The European Union now stands at a decisive moment. To paraphrase a famous line, economic erosion often happens "slowly, then all at once". To date, Europe's slide in innovation has been steady. However, if it fails to take decisive action to address its deep-seated problems, today's gradual weakening could give way to a sudden and irreversible loss of global economic relevance.