Plan B for Europe A Complement Strategy for European Energy Efficiency, Industrial Resilience, and Economic Security
Geopolitical Disruptions & the European Response
The Return of Donald Trump and Transatlantic Relations Going Forward
The return of Donald Trump presents realistic scenarios of trade wars, reduced commitments to NATO, and increased pressure on European industry and technological development. For the EU, this underscores the importance of recalibrating its approach to the U.S. and recognizing that, under Trump’s second presidency, economic nationalism and unilateral decision-making will dominate. This will challenge EU-U.S. cooperation on global issues such as climate change, trade, security, defence, and the regulation and promotion of technological development. Under these conditions, the EU must find a way to define its own priorities in a manner that can, at least partially, be framed as a win for a transactional U.S. president.
"Plan B" underscores the importance of transatlantic relations under a potential Trump administration—not through unconditional alignment, but through targeted, individualized, and pragmatic cooperation. Constructive engagement opportunities exist in areas such as nuclear research (including nuclear fusion), space exploration, joint investments in defence technologies, and the broader aerospace ecosystem. At the same time, the EU must prepare for trade conflicts and further unilateralism from the U.S. Some of the transactional and unilateral tendencies of the new American administration can be mitigated by focusing on engagement at the level of U.S. states, key political and business representatives, and strategically selected economic sectors.
Specific Case: Nuclear Energy
Nuclear research is one of the strategic areas that, given sufficient political will and favorable circumstances, may avoid becoming a casualty of the transactional approach to future transatlantic relations. Nuclear energy, often a contentious topic within EU debates, is critical for low-carbon electricity generation and can serve as a bridge to future nuclear fusion technologies (International Energy Agency [IEA], 2019; Nuclear Energy Agency [NEA], 2020). Cooperation in the nuclear sector can leverage technological complementarities and existing multilateral institutions (including the European Organization for Nuclear Research – CERN) with their specialized expertise.
The United States is striving to maintain its dominant position in cutting-edge scientific fields. Collaboration with the European Union or East Asian nations such as Japan and South Korea could help secure access to state-of-the-art scientific knowledge and experimental facilities (Glaser & Goldston, 2018; IEA, 2019). Fusion energy is a highly promising energy source for the future—far cleaner, more energy-dense, and geopolitically less contentious (ITER, 2020; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine [NASEM], 2019). However, research and development in nuclear fusion is scientifically complex and extremely costly.
By adopting clear scenario-based approaches and a quid pro quo mentality—aligned with Trump’s transactionalism—pragmatic scientific cooperation and joint research can be pursued in exchange for balanced trade agreements, reduced energy uncertainty, and harmonized intellectual property systems.
The Growing Challenge of China & Strategic Imbalance
With China’s rise as a dominant economic and technological power, the global balance of power is undergoing a dramatic shift. This analysis does not overlook the economic and potentially social challenges facing the Asian giant, which will likely be exacerbated by a new Trump administration. However, Beijing’s investments in artificial intelligence, digital infrastructure, and renewable energy technologies have already positioned China ahead of the EU in virtually all critical industries of the future.
In navigating the competition between the U.S. and China, as well as its direct relationship with China, the EU must adopt a dual approach: reducing economic dependence while maintaining opportunities for constructive dialogue and trade. Striking this balance will be made more difficult by U.S. pressure for unequivocal stances on China.
Russia, Ukraine, and Geopolitical Tensions
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has redefined Europe’s security paradigm. The EU’s solidarity in imposing sanctions and reducing dependency on Russian energy has demonstrated its ability to maintain unity in times of crisis. However, sustaining this dynamic requires long-term strategies to stabilize energy markets, support Ukraine’s reconstruction, and address broader geopolitical risks.
Strategic autonomy for the EU must include preparedness for a prolonged, even frozen, conflict, as well as economic losses from further closures of Asian commercial routes. At the same time, it must recognize opportunities that could arise from the potential revival of Ukraine’s industrial base. This issue is addressed in more detail in the “Plan B for Europe” section.
EU's Strategic Failures and Lessons from the Past
Despite ambitious—and well-intentioned—initiatives such as the Lisbon Agenda, Europe 2020, and the European Green Deal, the EU has consistently struggled to meet its strategic objectives. Systemic issues—including uneven implementation of reforms across member states, ambitious targets without targeted structural reforms, and excessive reliance on external supply chains—have undermined its competitiveness, sustainability, and cohesion.
Plan B's key pillars.
GARI presents a pragmatic and cautious “Plan B for Europe”, acknowledging the EU’s structural constraints and offering a gradual, realistic pathway forward. The plan prioritizes energy efficiency in energy-intensive industries, a sector capable of delivering immediate and tangible results while addressing Europe’s fundamental vulnerabilities. It focuses on precision manufacturing and infrastructure modernization, advocating for a robust incentive plan and carefully selected regulations in energy efficiency, workforce reskilling, and investments in core and critical infrastructure. The goal of these measures is to balance external dependencies, competitiveness, environmental sustainability, and social cohesion in a way that is realistic, organic, and capable of delivering results within a sufficiently short timeframe—without succumbing to the pitfalls of overly ambitious but unattainable goals.
.jpg)
This report presents a comprehensive analysis of Europe’s industrial and energy landscape in the context of global competition, systemic dependencies, and political realities. It examines the structural weaknesses in current EU strategies—including the Draghi Report—highlighting overlooked risks, unrealistic assumptions, and the growing disconnect between political ambition and implementation capacity. Drawing on macroeconomic data, geopolitical developments, and sector-specific trends, the study identifies actionable insights across energy, infrastructure, trade, and industrial policy. The goal is to support decision-makers with grounded, data-driven perspectives and to offer a foundation for realistic, long-term solutions.
