Updated February 5, 2020
U.S.-European Relations in the 116th Congress
A Relationship in Flux?
U.S. leadership of NATO and cooperation with the EU has
Since the end of the Second World War, successive U.S.
helped to foster democratic and prosperous European allies
Administrations and many Members of Congress have
that, in turn, have bolstered U.S. foreign and security
supported a close U.S. partnership with Europe. Often
policies, the multilateral trading system, and the credibility
termed the transatlantic relationship, the U.S.-European
of U.S. global leadership. The United States and Europe
partnership encompasses NATO, the European Union (EU),
work together on many common challenges—from
and extensive bilateral political and economic ties. Over the
promoting stability in the Balkans and Afghanistan to
past 70 years, political tensions, trade disputes, and changes
addressing Russian aggression in Ukraine to countering
in the security landscape have tested U.S.-European
terrorism and other transnational threats. U.S.-EU
relations. Despite periodic difficulties, U.S. and European
cooperation has been a driving force in liberalizing world
policymakers have valued the transatlantic partnership as
trade. Experts point out that the well-honed habits of U.S.-
serving their respective geostrategic and economic interests.
European political, military, and intelligence cooperation
are unique and cannot be easily replicated with other
President Trump and some officials in his Administration
international actors. U.S. engagement in Europe also helps
have questioned the tenets of the post–World War II
limit Russian, Chinese, or other possible malign influences.
transatlantic security and economic architecture to an
unprecedented extent. President Trump’s criticisms of
At times, U.S. officials and analysts have expressed
NATO, the EU, and key European countries have prompted
frustration with certain aspects of the transatlantic
significant concerns in Europe. The Administration
relationship. Previous U.S. Administrations and many
contends that it is committed to NATO and supports close
Members of Congress have criticized what they view as
U.S.-European ties, but some Europeans question whether
insufficient European burden sharing in NATO, and some
the United States will remain a reliable, credible partner.
have questioned the costs of the U.S. military presence in
Policy divergences on a wide range of regional and global
Europe. U.S. policymakers have long complained about EU
issues also pose challenges to U.S.-European relations. The
regulatory barriers to trade and that the EU lacks a single
second session of the 116th Congress may wish to consider
voice on many foreign policy issues. Some U.S. analysts
the implications of Trump Administration policies for U.S.
have argued that a close partnership with Europe at times
interests in Europe and U.S.-European cooperation.
requires compromise and may slow certain U.S. decisions.
Transatlantic Relations and U.S. Interests
The Trump Administration and Current Tensions
U.S. policymakers have long regarded both NATO and the
The Trump Administration’s 2017 National Security
EU as crucial to maintaining peace and stability in Europe
Strategy states that “the United States is safer when Europe
and stymieing big-power competition that cost over
is prosperous and stable, and can help defend our shared
500,000 American lives in two world wars. The United
interests and ideals.” The Administration contends that its
States spearheaded NATO’s creation in 1949 and
policies toward Europe seek to shore up and preserve a
encouraged the European integration project from its
strong transatlantic partnership to better address common
inception in the 1950s. During the Cold War, NATO and
challenges in an increasingly competitive world.
the European project were considered essential to deterring
the Soviet threat. With strong U.S. support, NATO and the
The Administration asserts that the United States supports
EU have enlarged since the 1990s, extending security and
NATO and its Article 5 mutual defense commitment but
prosperity across the European continent.
contends that NATO will be stronger when all members
“pay their fair share.” President Trump’s perceived
The U.S. and European economies are deeply intertwined.
transactional view of NATO and his almost singular focus
In 2018, the EU accounted for about one-fifth of total U.S.
on European defense spending as the measure of NATO’s
trade in goods and services. The United States and the EU
worth are seen by many as damaging alliance cohesion.
are each other’s largest source and destination for foreign
Some believe that President Trump could seek to withdraw
direct investment. According to data from the U.S. Bureau
the United States from NATO.
of Economic Analysis, in 2017, the U.S.-European
economy generated $5 trillion a year in foreign affiliate
Given long-standing U.S. support for the EU, the
sales and directly employed over 9 million workers on both
Administration’s seeming hostility has surprised the bloc.
sides of the Atlantic. (See also CRS In Focus IF10930,
President Trump has voiced support for the United
U.S.-EU Trade and Investment Ties: Magnitude and Scope,
Kingdom’s (UK) decision to leave the EU (“Brexit”). He
by Shayerah Ilias Akhtar.)
contends that the EU engages in unfair trade practices and
is especially critical of the U.S. goods trade deficit with the
EU ($170 billion in 2018). The EU is concerned by what it
https://crsreports.congress.gov
U.S.-European Relations in the 116th Congress
views as protectionist U.S. trade policies, including the use
and Future Prospects, by Kristin Archick, and CRS Report
of tariffs, and some question the extent to which the United
R45745, Transatlantic Relations: U.S. Interests and Key
States will remain a partner in setting global trade rules.
Issues, coordinated by Kristin Archick.)
U.S.-European divisions have emerged on numerous other
Issues for Congress
issues, including aspects of relations with Russia and China,
Many Members of Congress appear to favor a strong, close
the Middle East peace process, arms control, and the U.S.
transatlantic partnership. Broad bipartisan support exists in
decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate
Congress for NATO. Many Members view U.S.-EU
change. Differences over Iran are considerable. The EU
economic and trade ties as mutually beneficial. Potential
strenuously opposed the U.S. decision to withdraw from the
issues for the second session of the 116th Congress include
2015 multilateral nuclear deal with Iran. EU policymakers
viewed the deal as further imperiled by the January 2020
NATO. In the 116th Congress, Members have
U.S. drone strike that killed a powerful Iranian military
considered legislation to reaffirm U.S. support for
commander. Although the UK, France, and Germany
NATO and limit the President’s authority to withdraw
subsequently accused Iran of violating the nuclear accord,
from the alliance. In light of NATO’s 70th anniversary in
European officials resented President Trump’s reported
2019, Congressional hearings examined the future of the
efforts to coerce this decision by threatening to impose
alliance, including NATO’s costs and benefits for the
tariffs on European automobiles.
United States. Congress also may wish to assess NATO
efforts to counter terrorism and address emerging
Some analysts also are concerned about possible
security challenges, including cyber and hybrid threats.
breakdowns in U.S.-European consultations, especially
after European governments appeared blindsided by
U.S.-EU economic relations. Congress may review
President Trump’s decision in October 2019 to withdraw
progress on a U.S.-EU trade liberalization agreement. In
U.S. forces fighting the Islamic State terrorist group in
2018, the Administration notified Congress of the
Syria. Many European countries have participated in the
negotiations under Trade Promotion Authority. U.S.-EU
U.S.-led effort to defeat the Islamic State. Some European
talks have been at an impasse amid discord on their
officials contend that the U.S. decision paved the way for
scope, especially with respect to agriculture. Reports
Turkey to launch a military operation in Syria against allied
suggest that U.S. and EU officials may seek to revive
Kurdish forces fighting the Islamic State.
trade negotiations in early 2020.
Administration supporters maintain that President Trump’s
Future of the EU. The EU is contending with numerous
approach is resulting in greater European efforts to spend
challenges, including its future relationship with the UK,
more on defense and to address inequities in U.S.-EU
“euroskeptic” political parties, democratic backsliding
economic relations. Some have sought to downplay
in some EU countries, migratory pressures, and
concerns about the transatlantic partnership’s demise. The
terrorism. Congress may wish to consider whether and
Trump Administration has endorsed new NATO initiatives
how such issues could affect the EU’s future
to deter Russia, increased the U.S. military footprint in
development and U.S.-EU cooperation.
Europe, and sought to de-escalate trade tensions with the
EU. U.S. officials have invited European allies and friends
Brexit. The UK exited the EU on January 31, 2020.
to work with the United States to confront challenges posed
Congress may wish to review Brexit’s implications for
by Russia, China, and Iran (among others).
U.S.-UK and U.S.-EU relations, for NATO, and for the
Northern Ireland peace process. Some in Congress
Future Prospects
support a future U.S.-UK free trade agreement.
To many in Europe, U.S. policy trends appear to jeopardize
the transatlantic partnership and the broader U.S.-led post–
Russia. Congress has consistently condemned Russian
World War II international order. Some European leaders
aggression, including in Ukraine, and Russian influence
argue that Europe must be better prepared to address future
operations in Europe and the United States. The 116th
challenges on its own. The EU has put new emphasis on
Congress has enacted sanctions aimed at curbing
enhancing defense cooperation and concluding trade
Russian energy export pipelines to Europe. Members
agreements with other countries and regions, including
also have considered additional sanctions legislation to
Canada, Japan, and Latin America. U.S. supporters of close
address Russian election interference, arms sales, and
U.S.-European ties express concern that President Trump’s
other malign activities. European vulnerabilities to
approach to Europe endangers decades of cooperation that
hostile Russian measures and the degree to which
have advanced key U.S. security and economic interests.
Russia could benefit from transatlantic divisions may be
issues for continued congressional oversight.
Others contend that the transatlantic partnership will
endure. Europe remains largely dependent on the U.S.
China. Many Members of Congress have expressed
security guarantee, and the magnitude of U.S.-EU trade and
concern about China’s growing strategic interest and
investment ties will continue to bind together the two sides
financial investments in Europe, especially with respect
of the Atlantic. Some observers note that European allies
to fifth generation (5G) network security and other
and partners in NATO and the EU continue to work with
critical infrastructure. Congress may wish to examine
the Administration on common interests. (See also CRS
further the implications of Chinese activities for
Report R44249, The European Union: Ongoing Challenges
transatlantic security and economic relations.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
U.S.-European Relations in the 116th Congress
IF11094
Kristin Archick, Specialist in European Affairs
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11094 · VERSION 7 · UPDATED