Illustration: Liu Xidan/Global Times

Europe is currently experiencing intense turbulence caused by the breakdown of transatlantic relations. Some European security analysts have even alarmingly concluded that "withdrawal from Europe by the US would be as destabilizing for the EU as a nuclear attack by Russia." Clearly, Europe is deeply concerned about the prospect of a US "exit". However, Europe should calmly recognize that what the US seeks to end is the "cost-free benefits" Europe has long enjoyed under Washington's dominance. The US is looking to shed the financial burden of its European hegemony, not its hegemony.

After World War II, the US established a vast hegemonic system centered on military security, economic and financial control, and political and cultural influence, with Europe as its core. Sustaining this system requires the US to act as both the "overlord" and the world's policeman, incurring enormous costs that have grown increasingly burdensome. However, as its relative power declines and debt continues to rise, maintaining global hegemony has grown increasingly challenging. In response, the US has adopted a "transactional diplomacy" approach, seeking to shift the financial burden of its hegemony onto others. In practice, this reduces international relations to a purely interest-driven transaction. Whether allies or adversaries, all are subject to Washington's strategy of maximizing its interests under the "America First" agenda by shifting the costs of global dominance. Europe is no exception.

Recently, renowned US scholar Jeffrey Sachs explicitly defined the Russia-Ukraine conflict as a "proxy war" during a speech at the European Parliament, holding the US responsible for instigating the conflict through its hegemonic diplomacy. He not only urged Europe to pursue strategic autonomy but also warned against viewing China as an enemy. The fact that Europe tolerated Sachs' speech marks a significant step forward in its discussion of strategic independence.

Europe has long failed to accept the reality that the Russia-Ukraine conflict is a proxy war, and has remained steadfast in its belief in the US' security guarantee, which asserts that "NATO has never been more united than it is today." The reality, however, is that the US and Europe have not become more united over the Ukraine conflict; in fact, their relationship has faced increasing discord. Now, Europe finds itself sidelined, reduced to a mere bystander. After three years of attritional warfare, Europe has not only severed nearly all political, economic, and social ties with Russia but has also become trapped in long-term antagonism with Moscow.

Strangely, Europe still seems unsure whether its strategic autonomy should be rooted in Washington or Brussels. Some European politicians view Europe's role in helping the US in the strategic competition between China and the US as an important part of the "common interests" between Europe and the US. They try to convince the US government to recognize Europe's unique value in dealing with China, urging the US to remain in the transatlantic value alliance and continue providing security guarantees to Europe. However, so far, the US has been largely indifferent.

Europe must wake up to the fact that its strategic autonomy cannot be dependent on external support. True autonomy requires Europe to define its foreign relations based on its own interests - not those of a third party, including its relations with China.

It is not difficult to see that Europe's "values-based foreign policy" is fundamentally at odds with the US's "transactional diplomacy." Under the logic of "transactional diplomacy," nations most closely tied to the US in security and trade will inevitably bear the burden of maintaining US global hegemony. Given Europe's deep security and economic dependence on the US, as well as its wealth, it is the prime target for bearing the costs of US hegemony. Washington has clearly dismantled the banner of the transatlantic alliance, making Europe realize that its relationship with the US is based on price, not values, and that everything is measured through the lens of financial cost.

The author is a research fellow at the Shanghai International Studies University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn