Structural differences in transatlantic governance shape divergent approaches to global risk and law
Original framing: “The real transatlantic divide is about more than Trump” — Financial Times
The transatlantic divide has deep roots in the post-WWII order, where the U.S. and Europe established institutions like NATO and the UN, but with differing priorities. The U.S. has historically favored unilateral action, while Europe leaned toward multilateralism, a pattern that continues to shape current tensions.
The transatlantic divide is not a simple clash of personalities but a reflection of deeper structural differences in governance, legal traditions, and historical experiences.
These differences are shaped by colonial legacies, divergent approaches to international law, and contrasting economic models. To move forward, a more inclusive and systemic approach is needed—one that integrates Indigenous and non-Western perspectives, promotes evidence-based policy, and fosters participatory governance. Historical parallels, such as the post-WWII order, show that cooperation is possible, but only if power imbalances are addressed and marginalized voices are included in the process.