Mark Rutte's message to the US president-elect was pretty clear. The new NATO Secretary General was one of the first heads of state and government to congratulate Donald Trump on his victory. “I look forward to working with him again to advance peace through strength through NATO,” Rutte said in a statement.

He then quickly emphasized that “through NATO, the United States has 31 friends and allies who help advance U.S. interests, multiply American power and ensure the security of Americans.” An easy-to-understand reference to what Washington if it remains loyal to the alliance and its mutual defense clause.

Will Trump listen to Trump whisperers?

Rutte is considered a “Trump whisperer” – someone who knows how to deal with him, how to flatter his ego.

As Dutch prime minister, Rutte was able to prevent Trump from derailing a NATO summit in the summer of 2018 by praising the U.S. president's role in getting allies to spend more on defense.

Currently, two-thirds of NATO members spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense, and defense spending and production are on an upward trend across the alliance, Rutte said in his statement.

A transactional approach to NATO

But it is unclear whether that will be enough for Donald Trump and how successful a charm offensive could be this time. Trump has repeatedly made it clear that he does not believe in the value of the alliance per se. His approach to NATO is more transactional.

During the campaign, Trump indicated he would stay in the alliance as long as European countries “stay fair” and stop “taking advantage” of U.S. defense spending.

It seems unlikely that Trump will withdraw the US from NATO entirely, but there are many ways to harm the alliance. Trump could, for example, remove the US from military command – France did that in 1966.

A Trump administration “could make life in NATO quite difficult because it is an organization that does everything by consensus,” Ian Lesser, a distinguished fellow at the German Marshall Fund, a transatlantic think tank, told DW.

Will Trump tremble? up NATO?

In Lesser's view, managing alliance relations will become very, very difficult if NATO's largest contributing partner “does not agree or has eccentric views.” This is a big problem, especially now that there is a war raging in Europe.

Trump has promised to end Russia's war against Ukraine within 24 hours. Many in Europe fear he could strike a deal with Russian leader Vladimir Putin at Ukraine's expense, or at least cut American support for Kiev.

Trump could reduce arms sales to Ukraine or “order the American military and intelligence agencies to stop sharing intelligence with Ukraine,” Jacob Kirkegaard, senior fellow at the Bruegel think tank, told DW. This could have far-reaching implications for Ukraine's war effort.

Could the Europeans close the gaps?

US aid to Ukraine was crucial, Steven Blockmans told DW. The senior fellow at the Center for European Policy Studies in Brussels pointed out that the Europeans cannot replace this support.

“Despite all the talk in Europe about creating more strategic autonomy,” Blockmans said, “reliance on the US has actually grown – both in terms of security and trade.” A possible trade war with the US is certainly one further cause for concern for Europeans, as Trump has threatened during the election campaign to impose tariffs on all goods imported from abroad.

Demands more European sovereignty

But could the outcome of the US elections accelerate the push for greater autonomy and unity in the EU? French President Emanuel Macron certainly seems to think so. After the US election, Macron said he and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz wanted to “work towards a more united, stronger and more sovereign Europe in this new context”.

Many in the European Parliament seem to agree. “We really need to invest in Europe's competitiveness, industrial and technological sovereignty,” Sven Mikser, a former Estonian foreign minister and now a European lawmaker, told DW. “We have to be really serious.”

Populist leaders in Europe are emboldened by Trump

However, experts remain skeptical. “It’s one thing to talk about strategic autonomy in the intended sense,” said Ian Lesser of the German Marshall Fund. “The operationalization is something completely different. It’s about rebuilding Europe’s defense capability, which could take many years.”

The new discussion about greater European sovereignty comes as the continent struggles with economic volatility, declining competitiveness and – moreover – the rise of right-wing nationalism.

Not surprisingly, populist nationalist parties on the continent, revitalized by recent European and national elections, see no need for more autonomy.

Trump's victory should not have shocked Europe. But as Steven Blockmans pointed out, that doesn't mean “it won't be a chaotic time.”

Edited by: Andreas Illmer