Updated May 27, 2020
U.S.-European Relations in the 116th Congress
A Relationship in Flux?
Trade and Investment Ties: Magnitude and Scope, by
Since the end of the Second World War, successive U.S.
Shayerah Ilias Akhtar.)
Administrations and many Members of Congress have
supported a close U.S. partnership with Europe. Often
U.S. leadership of NATO and cooperation with the EU has
termed the transatlantic relationship, the U.S.-European
helped to foster democratic and prosperous European allies
partnership encompasses NATO, the European Union (EU),
that, in turn, have bolstered U.S. foreign and security
and extensive bilateral political and economic ties. Over the
policies, the multilateral trading system, and the credibility
past 70 years, political tensions, trade disputes, and changes
of U.S. global leadership. The United States and Europe
in the security landscape have tested U.S.-European
have worked together on many common challenges—from
relations. Despite periodic difficulties, U.S. and European
promoting stability in the Balkans and Afghanistan to
policymakers have valued the transatlantic partnership as
addressing Russian aggression in Ukraine to countering
serving their respective geostrategic and economic interests.
terrorism and other transnational threats. U.S.-EU
cooperation has been a driving force in liberalizing world
President Trump and some Administration officials have
trade. Experts point out that the well-honed habits of U.S.-
questioned the tenets of the post–World War II transatlantic
European political, military, and intelligence cooperation
security and economic architecture to an unprecedented
are unique and cannot be easily replicated with other
extent. President Trump’s criticisms of NATO, the EU, and
international actors. U.S. engagement in Europe also helps
key European countries have prompted significant concerns
limit Russian, Chinese, or other possible malign influences.
in Europe. The Administration contends that it is committed
to NATO and supports close U.S.-European ties, but some
At times, U.S. officials and analysts have expressed
Europeans question whether the United States will remain a
frustration with certain aspects of the transatlantic
reliable, credible partner. Policy divergences exist on a
relationship. Previous U.S. Administrations and many
wide range of regional and global issues and managing the
Members of Congress have criticized what they view as
spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has
insufficient European burden sharing in NATO, and some
further strained U.S.-European relations. The second
have questioned the costs of the U.S. military presence in
session of the 116th Congress may wish to consider the
Europe. U.S. policymakers have long complained about EU
implications of Trump Administration policies for U.S.
regulatory barriers to trade and that the EU lacks a single
interests in Europe and U.S.-European cooperation.
voice on many foreign policy issues. Some U.S. analysts
have argued that a close partnership with Europe at times
Transatlantic Relations and U.S. Interests
requires compromise and may slow certain U.S. decisions.
U.S. policymakers have long regarded both NATO and the
EU as crucial to maintaining peace and stability in Europe
The Trump Administration and Current Tensions
and stymieing big-power competition that cost over
The Trump Administration’s 2017 National Security
500,000 American lives in two world wars. The United
Strategy states that “the United States is safer when Europe
States spearheaded NATO’s creation in 1949 and
is prosperous and stable, and can help defend our shared
encouraged the European integration project from its
interests and ideals.” The Administration asserts that the
inception in the 1950s. During the Cold War, NATO and
United States supports NATO and its Article 5 mutual
the European project were considered essential to deterring
defense commitment but argues that NATO will be stronger
the Soviet threat. With strong U.S. support, NATO and the
when all members “pay their fair share.” Critics contend
EU have enlarged since the 1990s, extending security and
that President Trump’s perceived transactional view of
prosperity across the European continent.
NATO and his almost singular focus on European defense
spending as the measure of NATO’s worth are damaging
The U.S. and European economies are deeply intertwined.
alliance cohesion. Some believe that President Trump could
In 2019, the EU accounted for about one-fifth of total U.S.
seek to withdraw the United States from NATO.
trade in goods and services. The United States and the EU
are each other’s largest source and destination for foreign
Given long-standing U.S. support for the EU, the Trump
direct investment. According to data from the U.S. Bureau
Administration’s seeming hostility has surprised the bloc.
of Economic Analysis, the transatlantic economy—
President Trump voiced support for the UK’s decision to
including the EU and non-EU countries such as the United
leave the EU (“Brexit”). He contends that the EU engages
Kingdom (UK), Norway, and Switzerland—typically
in unfair trade practices and is especially critical of the U.S.
generates over $5 trillion per year in foreign affiliate sales
goods trade deficit with the EU ($179 billion in 2019). EU
and directly employs over 9 million workers on both sides
officials are concerned by what they view as protectionist
of the Atlantic. (See also CRS In Focus IF10930, U.S.-EU
U.S. trade policies, including the use of tariffs, and some
https://crsreports.congress.gov
U.S.-European Relations in the 116th Congress
question the extent to which the United States will remain a
Other experts contend that the transatlantic partnership will
partner in setting global trade rules.
endure. Europe remains largely dependent on the U.S.
security guarantee, and the magnitude of U.S.-EU trade and
U.S.-European divisions have emerged on numerous other
investment ties will continue to bind together the two sides
issues, from aspects of relations with Russia and China, to
of the Atlantic. (See CRS Report R45745, Transatlantic
the Middle East peace process, arms control, and the U.S.
Relations: U.S. Interests and Key Issues, coordinated by
decisions to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate
Kristin Archick.)
change and the 2015 multilateral nuclear deal with Iran. EU
Issues for Congress
policymakers viewed the nuclear deal with Iran as further
Many Members of Congress appear to favor a strong
imperiled by the January 2020 U.S. drone strike that killed
transatlantic partnership, despite some concerns about
an Iranian military commander. Although the UK, France,
European positions on certain foreign policy or trade issues.
and Germany subsequently accused Iran of violating the
Potential issues for deliberation include
nuclear accord, European officials resented President
Trump’s reported efforts to coerce this decision by
NATO. The 116th Congress has passed legislation
threatening to impose tariffs on European automobiles.
reaffirming U.S. support for NATO and limiting the
Many European leaders also oppose President Trump’s
President’s ability to unilaterally withdraw from the
decision to suspend U.S. funding to the World Health
alliance. In light of NATO’s 70th anniversary in 2019,
Organization (WHO) pending a review of its role in
Congressional hearings examined the future of the
allegedly mismanaging the response to the COVID-19
alliance, including NATO’s costs and benefits for the
pandemic and view the threat to withdraw the United States
United States. Congress also may wish to assess NATO
from the WHO as counterproductive.
efforts to counter terrorism and address emerging
security challenges, including cyber and hybrid threats.
European officials voice increasing concerns about
perceived breakdowns in consultations with the United
U.S.-EU economic relations. Congress may review
States. European governments appeared blindsided by
progress on a U.S.-EU trade liberalization agreement. In
President Trump’s decision in October 2019 to withdraw
2018, the Administration notified Congress of the
U.S. forces fighting the Islamic State terrorist group in
negotiations under Trade Promotion Authority. U.S.-EU
Syria. Many European countries have participated in the
talks have been at an impasse amid discord on their
U.S.-led effort to defeat the Islamic State. Some European
scope, especially with respect to agriculture, but
officials contend that the U.S. decision paved the way for
discussions are continuing.
Turkey to launch a military operation in Syria against allied
Future of the EU. The EU is contending with numerous
Kurdish forces fighting the Islamic State. The EU also
challenges, including its future relationship with the UK,
criticized the Trump Administration’s lack of coordination
“euroskeptic” political parties, democratic backsliding
in imposing a travel ban from most EU countries in March
in some EU countries, migratory pressures, and
2020 to help combat the spread of COVID-19. In May
terrorism. Managing COVID-19’s economic
2020, the U.S. announcement of its intent to withdraw from
consequences and addressing climate change are also
the Open Skies Treaty due to concerns about Russian
top EU priorities. Congress may wish to consider
compliance took European governments by surprise; the
whether and how such issues could affect the EU’s
treaty permits unarmed surveillance flights over
future development and U.S.-EU cooperation.
participating states, including most European countries.
Brexit. The UK exited the EU on January 31, 2020.
Administration supporters maintain that President Trump’s
Congress may wish to review Brexit’s implications for
approach is resulting in greater European efforts to spend
U.S.-UK and U.S.-EU relations, for NATO, and for the
more on defense and to address inequities in U.S.-EU
Northern Ireland peace process. Some in Congress
economic relations. Some downplay concerns about the
support a future U.S.-UK free trade agreement; U.S.-UK
transatlantic partnership’s demise. The Administration has
negotiations began in May 2020.
endorsed new NATO initiatives to deter Russia, increased
Russia. Congress has consistently condemned Russian
the U.S. military footprint in Europe, sought to de-escalate
aggression, including in Ukraine, and Russian influence
trade tensions with the EU, and invited European
operations in Europe and the United States. The 116th
governments to work with the United States to confront
Congress enacted sanctions aimed at curbing Russian
challenges posed by China and Iran (among others).
energy export pipelines to Europe. Members have
Future Prospects
considered additional sanctions legislation to address
Russian election interference, arms sales, and other
Many U.S. supporters of close U.S.-European ties express
concern that President Trump’s approach is endangering
activities. European vulnerabilities and the degree to
which Russia could benefit from transatlantic divisions
decades of cooperation that have advanced U.S. interests.
may be issues for ongoing congressional oversight.
Some European leaders argue that Europe must be better
prepared to address future challenges on its own. The EU
China. Many Members of Congress have expressed
has put new emphasis on enhancing defense cooperation
concern about China’s growing strategic interest and
and concluding trade agreements with other countries and
financial investments in Europe, especially with respect
regions, including Canada, Japan, and Latin America. The
to fifth generation (5G) network security and other
EU is at the forefront of international efforts to develop
critical infrastructure. Congress may wish to examine
COVID-19 treatments and vaccines, and aims to be a global
further how Chinese activities, including Chinese efforts
leader on issues such as data protection and climate change.
https://crsreports.congress.gov
U.S.-European Relations in the 116th Congress
to assist European countries in responding to COVID-
Kristin Archick, Specialist in European Affairs
19, could affect transatlantic relations.
IF11094
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 10 · UPDATED