The EU’s status as a normative power is under pressure from both internal divisions and external shocks, writes Uwe Wunderlich. Yet this moment also presents an opportunity for the EU to redefine what it means to be a global actor in the 21st century.
The European Union faces an increasingly volatile global and domestic landscape. From geopolitical competition to democratic backsliding, energy insecurity and rising authoritarianism, Europe is no longer operating in a world that supports its founding assumptions.
This is more than a temporary crisis, it is a structural turning point. As the global order fragments and the United States reorients its foreign policy, the EU is being forced to reconsider its identity, capabilities and future trajectory. What emerges is a fundamental dilemma: can the EU preserve its normative values while becoming a more strategic, autonomous actor in a post-liberal world?
Europe’s strategic dilemma
European integration has long been shaped by crises. The EU’s more recent evolution is marked by moments of tension, such as the Eurozone debt crisis, the migration crisis and the Russian war in Ukraine, that have either deepened cooperation or exposed its limits. But today’s challenges go beyond the episodic. They represent a polycrisis: overlapping and mutually reinforcing political, economic and normative pressures that are reshaping the Union’s internal cohesion and external environment.
Internally, the rise of populist movements and democratic backsliding in countries like Hungary, Slovakia and Poland have strained the EU’s legal and political integrity. Externally, the liberal international order, a foundational pillar for European integration and the EU, is in retreat.
Institutions and norms that once underpinned European influence are now contested, and the EU’s traditional model of projecting soft power through norm diffusion faces diminishing returns. In short, the EU is entering what political scientists call a critical juncture; a moment when entrenched paths are disrupted and new trajectories become possible. The outcome is not predetermined, and several pathways are possible, including adaptation, transformation and fragmentation.
A major factor driving this juncture is the changing nature of the transatlantic relationship, one of the traditional pillars of European integration. Historically, the United States served as both strategic protector and normative partner. But under the Trump administration, the US has adopted a more transactional, unilateral approach to foreign policy, undermining long-standing alliances and multilateral institutions. The implications for Europe are profound. The trust that once underpinned NATO and wider transatlantic cooperation has been eroded.
Even if US foreign policy shifts again, European policymakers can no longer assume American consistency. The possibility of a renewed Trump presidency or similar political developments forces the EU to plan for a world in which its principal ally may no longer support the liberal order; or indeed, the EU project itself. This rupture has catalysed a broader strategic rethink in Brussels and across European capitals. The question is no longer whether the EU should develop strategic autonomy, but how far and how fast it must go.
From normative to strategic power?
Since the early 2000s, the EU has portrayed itself as a normative power, an actor that shapes global affairs through values like human rights, rule of law and multilateral cooperation. While this self-image remains important, it no longer reflects the strategic realities of today’s world.
In response to a rapidly changing international environment, the EU is beginning to recalibrate. A new, more assertive approach is emerging, one that increasingly blends normative language with an explicit geoeconomic strategy. Trade agreements with partners like Canada (CETA) and Japan (EPA) now serve not just market access goals but broader geopolitical aims. New tools, such as the Anti-Coercion Instrument, allow the EU to counter economic threats from rivals like China or even the US.
The EU is also moving to reduce its reliance on the US dollar, strengthen the euro as a global currency and assert more control over crucial supply chains, especially in areas like clean tech, semiconductors and critical raw materials. These steps mark the evolution of the EU into a strategic-normative actor: still, in principle, committed to liberal values, but overtly pairing them with hard-nosed economic and political tools. This development can be traced back to 2016 and the new pragmatic realism of the EU’s Global Strategy.
Security and defence are the final frontiers of this transformation. With US reliability in question, calls for European defence cooperation have gained new urgency. The EU’s Strategic Compass, adopted in 2022, lays out a roadmap for becoming a more capable security provider. Initiatives like PESCO (Permanent Structured Cooperation) and the European Defence Fund (EDF) aim to improve operational coordination, develop joint capabilities and strengthen technological independence.
Critically, strategic autonomy does not mean withdrawing from NATO or abandoning transatlantic ties. Rather, it signals the EU’s need for resilience, the ability to act independently, when necessary, while still cooperating with allies when possible. This shift is about capability, not isolation. The EU already possesses significant resources. The issue, therefore, is more about political will, institutional coherence, and the ability to act collectively. A more unified and strategically autonomous Europe would not only bolster its own security but contribute to a more stable global order.
A new role in a turbulent and pluralist world
Europe is not alone in facing the consequences of Washington’s unpredictability. Countries such as Japan, Canada, Australia and New Zealand share concerns about the weakening of global norms and institutions. This opens up opportunities for the EU to forge new alliances, entrench existing ones, and, ultimately, strengthen its role as a stabilising force.
The European Political Community (EPC), launched in 2022, has the potential to play a crucial role in this process. Unlike traditional enlargement or foreign policy instruments, the EPC is a flexible instrument for differentiation, an informal platform that brings together EU member states and over 20 non-EU countries, including the UK, Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia and Western Balkan states, to cooperate on issues as far-ranging as security, energy, connectivity and geopolitical coordination.
Its primary value lies in reinforcing strategic convergence across the continent without the institutional constraints of the EU or NATO. The EPC represents a novel form of geopolitical outreach, a way for Europe to extend its strategic community beyond the formal EU while avoiding the rigidities of accession processes.
It offers a space for high-level coordination, diplomatic signalling, and crisis response in a period when shared interests may not align neatly with institutional membership. While still evolving, the EPC could become a vital tool in Europe’s external toolkit, one that complements EU enlargement, supports regional resilience and builds Europe’s profile as a convenor in an increasingly fragmented world. In principle, the EPC is open to non-European countries such as Canada, for example.
The EU stands at a pivotal crossroads. Its traditional identity as a normative power is under pressure from both internal divisions and external shocks. Yet this moment also presents an opportunity: to redefine what it means to be a global actor in the 21st century. Rather than abandoning its values, the EU must learn to defend them more effectively.
That means using its economic clout, investing in defence, strengthening partnerships beyond the Union and building political consensus at home. If it can do so, the EU can position itself as a leading actor in an increasingly pluralist and fragmented world. This will require a delicate balance: preserving its normative commitments while embracing the tools and strategies needed to navigate a world shaped by realpolitik, power competition and strategic rivalry.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, not the position of EUROPP – European Politics and Policy or the London School of Economics. Featured image credit: European Union
Discussion about this post