The Fall of Icarus: The Shattered Illusion of European Power

For centuries, Europe shone as the heart of democracy, peace, and civilization, offering an almost flawless model to other civilizations through its individual freedoms, rich history, culture, art, and welfare system. This narrative of democracy and human rights, despite its imperial past, nurtured prosperous societies while projecting a universal roadmap to the world. However, this illusion has begun to crack under the weight of historical burdens and contemporary challenges.

Europe’s Role-Seeking After the Cold War

Emerging from the ashes of World War II, Europe sought to cloak its legacy with a new identity. The European Union, initially sprouting from a partnership in coal and steel, aimed to bid farewell to the continent’s wars. Over time, this economic peace project evolved into a political ambition: to become the world’s conscience, a symbol of democracy and the rule of law. The collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s bolstered this claim, as Europe swiftly embraced Eastern European nations, exporting democracy from the Balkans to the Caucasus and the Middle East.

Europe wove a new “myth of civilization” to escape the shadow of its past. Yet, this myth harbored deep internal fissures: the economic chasm between North and South—Germany’s industrial might versus Greece’s debt burden—and the value clashes between East and West, exemplified by Poland and Hungary’s resistance to EU norms, gnawed at the Union from within. The populist surge following the 2024 EU parliamentary elections amplified these divisions, pushing the continent’s democratic model to the brink of suffocation in its own shadow.

Geopolitical Storms: Europe Caught Between Great Powers

Today, Europe finds itself battered by a storm of challenges, caught between the unpredictability of the United States and the aggression of Russia. Donald Trump’s declaration that “NATO is obsolete” and his view of Europe as a commercial rival exposed the fragility of the continent’s post-war security architecture. This nationalism inspired Europe’s rising far-right movements, transforming the “Make America Great Again” slogan into a “Make Europe Great Again” rhetoric, a populist call for past glory.

Meanwhile, Russia’s aggression in Ukraine laid bare Europe’s strategic vulnerabilities. But was this attack sudden? The signs were evident for years: the 2008 Georgia war signaled Moscow’s intent to reclaim the former Soviet sphere as its “backyard”; the 2014 annexation of Crimea should have shaken the security paradigm.

Yet, countries like Germany deepened their energy dependence on Russia, with the Nord Stream pipelines symbolizing this blindness. Risks were ignored for economic gain. Putin’s assault was a deferred reality; Europe’s belief in its “peace myth” obscured the threat at its doorstep. With Washington distant and Moscow at the gates, this harsh reality shook the foundations of Europe’s security architecture.

Economic Siege and Shifting Alliances: China’s Influence and Europe’s Strategic Dilemmas

Simultaneously, China has infiltrated Europe’s veins like an economic siege. Through the Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing penetrated ports and infrastructure, tying the continent—from German automotives to Italian harbors—to its market, transforming 10 billion Euros in investments into a geopolitical weapon. Yet, China’s oppression of Uyghurs, interventions in Hong Kong, and threats to Taiwan tested Europe’s “values-based” politics. The continent increasingly prioritized interests over principles, a dilemma that clarified Europe’s declining role on the global stage. Against the rise of Asia and Africa’s demographic strength, Europe risks losing its “core” position.

Post-Brexit Britain, with its firm stance in NATO and the Macron-Starmer nuclear agreement, has reconnected with Europe on defense matters, proving that even in division, the continent remains interdependent. The economic outlook is frightening: while inflation and the energy crisis have surmounted, growth remains sluggish. Global trade fragmentation and Russia’s threat push the EU toward new strategies. Germany’s industry, France’s diplomacy, and the Nordic welfare model endure, but the continent is far from being a global locomotive. Trade tensions slow growth, yet the 1 trillion Euro funds for defense and green technology offer hope of turning economic statecraft into a geopolitical tool.

French President Macron’s rhetoric on Turkey vividly illustrates the erosion of power. Once accusing Ankara of straying from “values” and viewing it as a threat in the Eastern Mediterranean, Macron softened his tone amid the Ukraine war and migration crises. Turkey’s diplomatic balancing act and mediation efforts against Russia’s presence played a key role in this change. Today, he includes Turkey among key military allies, acknowledging that Europe cannot manage migration, secure energy routes, or hold NATO’s southern flank without Ankara. This shift in rhetoric is a tacit admission of waning power.

Liquid Modernity and Rebirth: Europe’s Future Trajectories

Europe today grapples with Zygmunt Bauman’s concept of “liquid modernity,” where fixed values rest on a fluid, shifting foundation. Crises are reshaping the continent, replacing rigid norms with a flexible but fragile order. To reclaim its agency, Europe must first mend its internal cracks.

This requires not only strengthening the Union’s institutional framework but also revitalizing its democratic values—a profound existential challenge. Yet, amidst these fissures, sparks of resilience emerge: Europe’s leadership in green transformation, rooted in its commitment to the Paris Agreement and its Green Deal initiative, and its Digital Services Act, which reins in global tech giants, signal that the continent can still assert itself as a “values power.” These successes whisper hope for adaptation and renewal in a liquid reality. However, in economic and military matters, this value-driven and innovative stance often proves less effective.

Europe’s future hinges on two divergent trajectories. In the first scenario, European states deepen internal integration and adopt a pragmatic, power-centric approach to build strategic autonomy, positioning the continent as a more independent and assertive global actor. In the second, less favorable scenario, internal polarization and political fragmentation, driven by value clashes over what constitutes democratic norms, weaken the Union’s institutional capacity, relegating Europe to a passive object amid great power competition. Like Icarus, whose wings melted as he flew too close to the sun, Europe has been captivated by the illusion of its own grandeur. Now, in the shadow of its fall, the world watches to see if it can chart a new course.

Is a New European Identity Possible?

To counter the polarization fueled by populist waves, Europe must forge a shared public sphere, embracing its diversity as a strength and crafting a new “European identity.” By reframing internal debates within a continental framework, it can engage citizens not only in prosperity but also in a shared political project.

Additionally, to shed its recent passive role on the geopolitical stage, Europe must break free from its dependencies. This means moving beyond unconditional reliance on transatlantic security guarantees and building its own defense pillar within NATO, while strengthening technological and industrial independence to counter China’s economic encirclement. By relinquishing the comfort of old alliances and embracing its own strength and pragmatism, Europe can shatter the illusion of decline and find its voice on the global stage.

Kaynakça

Barroso, José Manuel. 2024. “Europe Facing a Triple Crisis: Is Trump’s Re-election Shock Therapy?” The World Today. 9 Aralık 2024. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025. https://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/the-world-today/2024-12/europe-facing-triple-crisis-trumps-re-election-shock-therapy .

Cliffe, Jeremy, Teresa Coratella, Camille Lons, ve Arturo Varvelli. 2025. “Rise to the Challengers: Europe’s Populist Parties and Its Foreign Policy Future.” European Council on Foreign Relations (Policy Brief). 12 Haziran 2025. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025. https://ecfr.eu/publication/rise-to-the-challengers-europes-populist-parties-and-its-foreign-policy-future .

European Parliament. 2020. “Europe’s One Trillion Climate Finance Plan.” 15 Ocak 2020. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20200109STO69927/europe-s-one-trillion-climate-finance-plan .

France 24. 2025. “France, UK Sign Historic Deal to Coordinate Nuclear Deterrence for First Time.” 10 Temmuz 2025. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025. https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20250710-france-uk-sign-historic-deal-to-coordinate-nuclear-deterrence-for-first-time .

Human Rights Watch. 2024. “France: Macron Should Stand Firm on Rights in China.” 3 Mayıs 2024. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025.https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/05/03/france-macron-should-stand-firm-rights-china .

Howorth, Jolyon. 2024. “How the European Union Is Making Progress on Its Defence Agenda.” Freie Universität Berlin, Transform Europe (Working Paper No. 90). Erişim 9 Eylül 2025.https://www.polsoz.fu-berlin.de/en/v/transformeurope/publications/working_paper/wp/WP_90_Howorth/WP_90_Howorth_WEB.pdf .

Le Monde. 2025. “Turkey, Once an Awkward Partner, Has Become Essential for a Weakened European Union.” 7 Mart 2025. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025.https://www.lemonde.fr/en/opinion/article/2025/03/07/turkey-once-an-awkward-partner-has-become-essential-for-a-weakened-european-union_6738905_23.html .

Merics. 2024. “Chinese Investment Rebounds Despite Growing Frictions: Chinese FDI in Europe 2024 Update.” Erişim 9 Eylül 2025. https://merics.org/en/report/chinese-investment-rebounds-despite-growing-frictions-chinese-fdi-europe-2024-update .

Momtaz, Rym. 2025. “Taking the Pulse: With Trump, Has Europe Capitulated?” Carnegie Europe. 28 Ağustos 2025. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025. https://carnegieendowment.org/europe/strategic-europe/2025/08/taking-the-pulse-with-trump-has-europe-capitulated .

Trump, Donald. 2016. “Donald Trump Tells Crowd He’d Be Fine If NATO Broke Up.” New York Times, 2 Nisan 2016. Erişim 9 Eylül 2025. https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/04/02/donald-trump-tells-crowd-hed-be-fine-if-nato-broke-up .