Since regaining their independence at the twilight of the Soviet Union, the Baltic states have developed their foreign policy and security doctrine to avoid the vulnerabilities of the interwar period, summarized by the following imperative: never again alone.

This has entailed a strong commitment since the early 1990s to achieving maximum integration into Western alliances, culminating in their accession to the EU and NATO in 2004. The underlying idea is that for small states bordering an aggressive (and potentially revanchist) neighbor, the only way to ensure security is to have strong and reliable allies and to be part of a larger, interconnected, and resilient community.

While NATO – the world's strongest military alliance – has provided a formidable security umbrella, European integration has served as a powerful driver of economic development and democratic consolidation, offering the perfect springboard for the "Baltic Tigers." Overall, being at the heart of these two powerful alliances has been key to Estonia's success and sense of security.

As Estonia and its Baltic neighbors celebrate 20 years in NATO and the EU, the world appears very different and far less secure than it did in 2004. The European project and liberal democracy across the continent are increasingly under threat, challenged by populist demagogues, illiberal tendencies, and geopolitical instability.

Meanwhile, Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, now having reached its third year, has brought war back to Europe and revived fears once thought consigned to the dustbin of history. At the same time, it has tested transatlantic unity and raised well justified concerns about Western and NATO preparedness.

This is the bleak context in which the past month of political and geopolitical upheaval, triggered by Donald Trump's return to the White House, must be understood. Trump's destructive behavior – both in domestic and foreign policy – and, most notably, his rapid and dramatic reversal on Ukraine, have come as a much-feared yet still shocking cold shower for many in our region.

***

So why does America appear increasingly unreliable under Trump? How could his actions pose a fundamental threat to our security? And how might a state like Estonia mitigate the risks posed by such momentous developments?

Trump's America trust issue

Especially in our region, the United States has been the main pillar of regional security. NATO membership and bilateral security agreements with Washington have provided tangible assurances that no one would dare to threaten us.

We all remember – perhaps with a degree of nostalgia – the words of Barack Obama during his 2014 visit to Estonia, following Russia's annexation of Crimea and the war in Eastern part of Ukraine: "The defense of Tallinn and Riga and Vilnius is just as important as the defense of Berlin and Paris and London."

The monumental role played by the U.S. over the past three decades in guaranteeing Baltic security is a key reason why Trump's recent words and actions have been met with a mixture of silence, disillusionment, and denial by many local observers and policymakers.

Few critical voices have dared to openly criticize the new U.S. administration, even when it has directly targeted allies or undermined long-standing principles of amicable inter-state relations. This hesitancy reflects a deep-seated reluctance to confront the potential consequences of a rapidly eroding transatlantic relationship and the increasingly confrontational stance of the Trump administration towards traditional friends.

I would argue that, unfortunately, Trump's first month in office may not be an exception but rather a sign of what is to come over the next four years – posing significant risks to the peace and security of our region.

***

As perfectly illustrated by Trump's abrupt U-turn on Ukraine and his increasingly appeasing stance toward Moscow's autocrat, the U.S.–Russia rapprochement – both in substance and form – encapsulates three deeply concerning characteristics of Trump's America.

First, on numerous and diverse occasions, Trump has demonstrated contempt and, at times, open hostility toward America's traditional allies. From his aggressive stance in challenging –without any legitimate claim –Danish sovereignty over Greenland to the 25 percent tariffs threatened against its neighbors (compared to the 10 percent proposed toward China) and half-jokingly referring to Canada as the 51st state of the Union.

The message is clear: allies need America more than America needs them, and they have nowhere else to go.

Europe's publicized exclusion from the so-called Ukraine peace negotiations, threats to pull out from Europe, and the declared pivot to Asia – alongside open attacks on European liberal democracy (as defined by Vice President Vance in Munich) – all signal that Trump's call for 5 percent GDP defense spending is more likely an excuse to disengage rather than a genuine push to consolidate collective defense.

Second, Trump's disregard for allies is mirrored by his public admiration for dictators and autocrats. From Putin to Xi and Kim Jong Un, he appears drawn to their firm grip on power and unchallenged control over their nations.

His attempt to model himself after these so-called strongmen is starkly evident in the contrast between his aggressive rhetoric toward democratic allies and his effusive praise for authoritarian leaders. Time and again, he seems to fall for autocrats who skillfully manipulate his ego.

A telling example of his amateurish approach to dealing with America's competitors is his handling of negotiations with Russia to end the war in Ukraine. Despite his self-proclaimed expertise in The Art of the Deal, Trump squandered his strongest bargaining chips – Kyiv's NATO membership and the future of the occupied territories – before negotiations even began. This will, in all likelihood, only embolden Moscow to demand more.

***

Ultimately, by siding with autocrats and humiliating allies, Trump is undermining the post-Cold War liberal order that has ensured U.S. primacy since the fall of the Soviet Union – the very order that, in many ways, made America great.

A striking example of this trend came on the third anniversary of the invasion of Ukraine, when the U.S. government joined North Korea, Russia, Belarus, Eritrea, and Sudan – some of the world's most repressive regimes – in opposing a UN resolution calling for a "comprehensive, just, and lasting peace in Ukraine."

The third problem is closely linked to the second. Trump seems to increasingly equate democracy with weakness – both abroad and at home – viewing the separation of powers and constitutional checks and balances as unnecessary red tapes and irritating constraints on his authority. The only thing separating him from the much-coveted status of a strongman is precisely these institutional guardrails.

At best, Trump and his administration seem to embrace a majoritarian interpretation of democracy, seeing it as mere rule by the majority rather than a system of repeated contestation and alternance.

Unlike in 2020, there are now very few "adults in the room" within the U.S. government to curb his worst instincts. This time, Trump's administration consists almost entirely of fiercely loyal figures, many of whom have little to no experience in governance. Having consolidated control over all three branches of government – and further enabled by unaccountable conglomerates of oligarchic economic power, well exemplified by figures such as Elon Musk – Trump is rapidly dismantling the U.S. federal apparatus, weakening American democracy, and, ultimately, diminishing U.S. global influence.

Disregard for democracy at home translates into an open attempt to undermine liberal democracy in Europe and beyond.

The aggressive rhetoric and baseless attacks on Germany, Romania, and European democratic institutions by Vice President Vance in Munich – under the guise of defending free speech – amount to nothing less than electoral interference. Meanwhile, Musk's daily attacks on elected European officials and efforts to undermine public trust in our institutions have become routine.

At the same time, an increasing number of voices within the U.S. administration are pushing to condition America's military presence in Europe on European governments abandoning their efforts to combat disinformation, counter illiberal and anti-democratic tendencies, and defend their democratic institutions from demagogues and hybrid attacks.

From another perspective, Trump appears to see no value in multilateralism, which he once again equates with weakness.

The reckless squandering of America's public diplomacy and soft power as a global force for democracy is epitomized by the liquidation of USAID and its widely respected programs worldwide. Nowhere is this more consequential than in the Global South, where U.S. influence is likely to be swiftly replaced by Chinese financing and Russian influence – undermining not only American interests but also those of the broader Western alliance.

What's at stake?

Trump's recent heinous verbal attack on Ukrainian President Zelenskyy – branding him a dictator – his contempt for Kyiv, dismissing it as unworthy of sitting at the table with the "big two," his parroting of Moscow's narrative that blames Ukraine for the war, and his rapacious attempt to deprive Ukraine of its natural resources in exchange for nothing all speak volumes.

They reveal not only Trump's distorted understanding of the war in Ukraine but also his worldview and fundamental approach to international relations.

With the logic behind the so-called peace talks becoming increasingly apparent, many fear a re-edition of the 1938 Munich Conference. Worse still, we may soon witness a modern-day version of the 1939 Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact – this time between Trump and Putin over Kyiv's spoils.

But would its scope stop at the borders of Ukraine? But would its scope end at Ukraine's borders?

The real fear is a new Yalta, where Europe's (in)security is decided without Europe – just as Ukraine's fate is now being discussed without Ukraine.

I do not believe it is worth psychoanalyzing Trump's bombastic rhetoric or dissecting every tweet in search of some glimmer of hope that – after all – it might not be so bad. Deeds speak louder than words. And so far, his actions have been unambiguous.

We do not know whether Trump's behavior is driven by personal megalomania, self-interest, a distorted perception of American interests, or covert ties with Moscow. While understanding his motives might offer insight into the roots of his seemingly irrational and erratic foreign policy, it is unlikely to change his course of action – especially given how little traditional diplomacy and foreign policy tools may influence such motivations.

A strategy for uncertain times

In light of this troubling state of affairs, how can a small country like Estonia – or the Baltic states more broadly – navigate these uncertain times while minimizing risks, especially in the face of fading certainties and an aggressive, potentially emboldened neighbor?

While there is no silver bullet, and too many variables are at play to provide certainty, some key factors could help steer the course toward calmer and more secure waters. The overarching goal, to paraphrase Hastings Ismay's famous quote, should be: "to keep the Russians out, the Americans calm, and the Europeans united."

The first priority should be to avoid unnecessary quarrels with the U.S. administration.

While the Trump administration cannot be relied upon in the same way as its predecessors, minimizing confrontation and taking constructive steps to maintain a functional relationship should be a key objective.

In this context, emphasizing increased defense spending could serve as a viable narrative. Not only is it a necessary step for every Western country in these uncertain times, but it also addresses one of Trump's long-standing grievances. After all, he once declared: "I would personally encourage Russia to do whatever the hell they want to any NATO country that doesn't pay enough."

***

At the same time, Estonia and the Baltic states – given Trump's proven unreliability – should prioritize European unity above all else, even when this means resisting temptations to accommodate the U.S. administration during moments of tension between Washington and Brussels or its Member States.

A scenario to avoid is one where European allies are sidelined in an attempt to gain favor with or appease Washington, as seen recently when Lithuania's Foreign Minister declined to take sides in Trump's dispute with Denmark – a highly committed ally – over Greenland, claiming it was merely a bilateral issue.

Such an approach is particularly dangerous for a small country that could itself become a target of aggression. The Baltic states have consistently upheld the power of norms over the norm of power when defending Ukraine, Georgia, and other nations.

Abandoning this principled stance – especially when it comes to supporting European allies – to appease Trump could prove a dangerous gamble, particularly given Europe's key role in ensuring Baltic security. The risk is that, in times of crisis, the same argument could come back like a boomerang, leaving the Baltics exposed to the very logic they once sought to resist.

Despite the fundamental role of the U.S. in Baltic security, the EU – historically regarded as an economic bloc – has significantly strengthened its role as a security actor, particularly following Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine.

Moreover, in recent years, when confronted with existential crises, the EU has proven its ability to rise to the challenge. Just a few years ago, the battle against COVID-19 was rightly seen by governments and citizens alike as a matter of life or death. On that occasion, Europeans put aside their differences, acted swiftly, and mobilized the necessary resources to deliver a genuinely European response.

Additionally, it is crucial to recognize that when it comes to the security of the three Baltic states, NATO's enhanced Forward Presence in the region is primarily ensured by European and Canadian troops—not by American soldiers. As long as European unity remains intact and the principle of each for its own does not take hold, those forces are likely to remain in place, continuing to deter Russian imperialism.

This is yet another key reason why prioritizing European unity should be a top strategic goal.

***

Investing in a genuine European Defense Union and advancing strategic autonomy are essential to ensuring Baltic security while simultaneously strengthening NATO's European pillar. In a time of growing transatlantic divisions, the guiding principle should be clear: act as part of the transatlantic alliance whenever possible, but as Europeans whenever necessary.

Lastly, the Baltic states should support every effort –such as the recent initiatives in Paris – to build a broad alliance of democracies that extends beyond the EU to include Canada, the U.K., Norway, and other like-minded countries, brought together by the common sense of insecurity and committed to upholding international law and resisting the rule of the strong over the weak.

Democracy and geopolitics have become increasingly intertwined, making such an alliance essential not only for regional security but also for achieving the best possible peace for Kyiv. A strong and secure Ukraine, fully integrated into the European community of democracies, remains the most effective barrier against Russian imperialism.

---

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!