Resit Kemal As / Editor-in-Chief, World Of Global
The trade tensions between the European Union and the United States have long ceased to be a disagreement that can be glossed over with diplomatic courtesy. Tariffs, subsidy wars, technological restrictions, and the “me first” reflex… The two sides of the Atlantic have not been speaking the same language for quite some time. The outbreak of a trade crisis is no longer a question of possibility, but of timing.
At first glance, such a crisis may be presented as a “trade dispute between two allies.” In reality, the issue runs far deeper. The backbone of the global economic order has rested on the US–Europe axis since the Second World War. When this axis fractures, it is not only the two sides that are affected—the entire global balance is shaken.
The first impact is felt in global trade volumes. The US and the EU together account for nearly one-third of world trade. Mutual tariffs and sanctions do not only disrupt transatlantic commerce; they directly hit third countries integrated into this economic corridor. When a production line in Germany slows down, the supplier industry in Türkiye does the same; when demand contracts in the US, ports in Asia fall silent. The global economy functions like a line of dominoes.
The second—and more dangerous—consequence is the “de-ruling” of global trade. The World Trade Organization has already been largely ineffective. A deepening US–EU trade conflict could completely collapse the idea of a rules-based system. What replaces it? An order where the powerful set the rules, and political loyalty matters more than economic access. Trade thus becomes an extension of geopolitics rather than diplomacy.
The countries that suffer most in such a scenario are medium-sized and fragile economies. They lack both the coercive power of the US and the institutional resilience of Europe. For countries like Türkiye, this picture presents both risks and opportunities. It is risky because shrinking demand, rising financing costs, and global uncertainty are felt immediately. It is an opportunity because, in a world where supply chains are being reshaped, new gaps can be filled with the right strategic moves.
Yet these opportunities do not materialize automatically. A US–EU trade war would also push China indirectly to the center of the stage. Washington’s hardening stance toward Europe may force Brussels into more pragmatic relations with Beijing. This could move the world toward not a bipolar, but a tripolar trade order: the US, China, and a “hesitant Europe.” In such a system, uncertainty becomes permanent; investor confidence gives way to investor caution.
One of the most critical consequences would be the intensification of the struggle between the dollar and the euro. Trade wars are not fought solely over goods; currencies, payment systems, and financial infrastructures also become targets. The tension between America’s dollar-centric financial power and Europe’s quest for strategic autonomy would make the global financial system more fragmented and fragile.
Ultimately, a US–Europe trade crisis is far more than an economic dispute. It is directly linked to the West’s internal struggle over power and direction. The rhetoric of shared values has given way to calculations of shared interests—and those calculations no longer align as they once did.
As the world watches this crisis unfold, one thing should not be forgotten: every crack in the Atlantic creates waves in the Pacific, storms in the Middle East, and tremors in developing countries. Because the global economy is still most affected by conflicts at its very center.
And all signs suggest that this conflict is only just beginning.