The EU and UK Intend to Destroy Western Civilization: Not on Trump’s Watch
By Bradley A. Thayer
The EU and the U.S. are headed for a great clash. It has been building some time. 2026 is the time to have it.
It is not about Greenland, although that issue reveals much. EU members are extending conventional deterrence to Greenland by sending a handful of soldiers to serve as a tripwire force. That deterrent is targeted at the U.S.
That deployment has caused many Americans and Europeans to observe that the EU will defend Greenland from the U.S. but not their actual borders from an invasion of many tens of millions that is transforming the Continent and destroying Western civilization.
The problem is that the EU is well on its way to a hard authoritarianism.
And it is not just the EU, it is the UK, too. Under the increasingly tyrannical government of Keir Starmer’s Labour government, there is the elimination of free expression. Britons may be imprisoned for a tweet and are jailed at numbers that demonstrates the great freedoms of British people—hard won through civil war, wars, and struggles—are being lost.
There is a proposal by the Labour government to suspend trial by jury in some circumstances. Moreover, so far over 20 Councils have asked for local elections, due in May 2026, to be delayed because the Reform Party is expected to perform very well. As a result, millions Britons would lose their right to vote in the election.
As many tens of thousands of illegal migrants cross the Channel each year, Dutch activist and commentator Eva Vlaardingerbroek has been banned from entering the UK for speaking out about the costs of mass immigration to Europe and criticizing Starmer’s government.
Moreover, unless President Trump can stop it, the UK is transferring the strategic territory of Diego Garcia to Mauritius, where it will almost certainly fall under People’s Republic of China (PRC) influence, and allowing the PRC to build a massive new embassy in London that will be better situated for collecting intelligence.
Tension between the U.S. and Western Europe has existed before. During the Cold War, there were instances of considerable tension. The 1956 Suez crisis. The French under President Charles de Gaulle advanced the "politics of grandeur” and a "Third Way,” neither American nor Soviet, but European (read French) led.
Publicly, one of the stated purposes of the independent French nuclear force was to be able to fire in all directions, that is, even against the U.S. In 1966, de Gaulle withdrew France from NATO’s Military Command structure.
De Gaulle was not alone. West German Chancellor Willy Brandt advocated Ostpolitik, which flirted dangerously with the Soviet Bloc in vain effort to improve relations. His NATO allies feared Brandt was attempting to secure German unification by offering the Soviets German neutrality.
While strains were present in the past, they have never been this precarious. And that’s not all. While Americans were looking south of the border, there is ample trouble to the north.
Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney has jumped into this fight on the side of America’s enemy the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Carney said he is seeking a strategic partnership with Beijing.
That is a direct threat to U.S. national security because Canada is the northern flank of U.S. security. Its strategic partnership with the PRC introduces the possibility of basing rights or exercises that introduces a major possibility of an axis between Beijing and Ottawa.
If Communist dictator Xi Jinping is Carney’s new BFF, then the Canadian prime minister is going to have to incur the costs of his decision.
What the EU and Labour government seek to accomplish through boundless immigration is already well underway in Canada. Indeed, Canada is fundamentally changing through immigration.
25 percent of Canada’s population is foreign born and among the political elite in Ottawa there is as great a hostility towards the U.S. as you find in Brussels or London.
The historical ties between Canada and the U.S. are fraying. The civilizational foundation is dissolved as the Canada’s population changes due to the conscious decision of Canadian leadership. The U.S. cannot allow Canada to align with the America’s existential foe.
Fundamentally, the U.S. has three major problems with EU, UK, and Canada.
First, the EU, UK, and Canada are becoming increasingly totalitarian.
Second, they have de facto an open borders policy and are importing immigrants by the tens of millions.
Third, neither the EU’s, Starmer’s, nor Carney’s government will alter that policy despite great support for political parties and some countries like Hungary who stand opposed.
Just the reverse, their collective foot has the petal to the metal.
The cost of these policies is the intentional destruction of Europe and Canada by endless immigration back by the full coercive power of Brussels, London, and Ottawa. The consequence is the death of Western civilization.
The costs imposed upon the EU, UK, and Canada for continuing this are simply not high enough.
It is time for Uncle Sam to say: "not on my watch.”
Americans are a product of Western civilization, and they get a vote in what happens to it. If the EU, UK, and Canada are on a path to destroy Western civilization, then the U.S. has to stop it.
Only by doing so can Americans preserve what their ancestors earned and what they must preserve for their progeny. America’s vote is to save Western civilization from those currently in power in Brussels, London, and Ottawa. It falls to President Trump to do it.
Western civilization is more important that the EU, or Starmer’s or Carney’s governments. If they will not change course, Uncle Sam has to look at his menu of options and means to increase the costs.
These include tariffs. The U.S. might employ tariffs against some EU states until they change their immigration policies. Specific remigration targets should be set before any relief.
The U.S. could create a new trade association with states like Poland and Hungary that recognize the danger with the intent of advancing trade but also providing a non-EU alternative for European states.
The Department of State might create Charles Martel or John Sobieski Fellowships to support Europeans who need help to fight for the West against their governments. The same should be done for the UK and Canada.
The Left seems to have a monopoly on Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), but it should not. How about the good guys create some to support Western civilization and advance remigration.
Don’t supporters of the West have any billionaires? Or are they, as Jonathan Swift describes in Gulliver’s Travels, like the Grand Academy of Projectors in Lagado—too busy trying to figure out how to get sunshine from cucumbers or how to turn ice into gunpowder.
There are a lot of tools in the toolkit, and the ones that need to be forged can be. It is time to employ them in conjunction with the many Europeans who demand change in Brussels, as do many British and Canadian citizens.
If harder measures are needed—those that impact intelligence or military alliance structures—they need to be considered. NATO was not intended to defend a Muslim Europe. But that is happening.
What would have been thought of as an absurdity worthy of Swift may come to pass in major European states by mid-century.
Of course, the EU hopes to wait out Trump. Starmer, or his successor, does not have to call a national election until 2029. It is the same date for Carney. No doubt all will be doing what they can doing what it can to ensure that the Democrats win in 2026 and 2028.
A key problem for Trump’s second term is how to solve this in a short period of time: friends are becoming increasingly totalitarian, supporting endless immigration, and there can be no change to that policy, ever.
The endless immigration was a horrible and gross strategic mistake from the American perspective. But if your intent is to destroy the West, it makes perfect sense.
Mass immigration was done intentionally by elites in the EU, Canada, UK, and U.S. to destroy their societies.
The EU’s leadership is not a friend but increasingly opposed to U.S. national security. If the EU will not change its policies, it is past its sell by date.
If other measures will not work, then now is the time to link security to mass remigration, with targets for each EU member, UK, and Canada.
Mass immigration is destroying NATO, European states, and Western civilization. The U.S. cannot sit by while the West is destroyed.
When friends go totalitarian it is time to remind them of their past and provide some tough love in the present.
F the EU, we need to close all of our bases and bring all our men home let those pansies protect themselves from Russia and China, and we need to cut off Canada from everything American and ban them from entering our country.