Signal group chat leak made one thing crystal clear: JD Vance really hates Europe
The leaking of a US government Signal group showcased one thing in full force: JD Vance’s hatred of Europe is driving foreign policy, writes Eliot Wilson
We have all done it. Including someone in a group chat or an email chain who should not be privy to the contents can be embarrassing or downright damaging. Few of us, however, are members of the Principals Committee of the United States National Security Council, which elevates last week’s flabbergasting breach of security to a new level of seriousness.
While we shake our heads at the national security advisor, a former colonel in the Green Berets, using emojis to sum up US foreign policy, there are some elements of the content we should not overlook. Running through the machismo and frat-house aggression is one very significant thread: the profound antipathy of Vice President JD Vance towards the nations of Europe.
This should not be a surprise. The speech he gave at the Munich Security Conference in the middle of February hardly pulled its punches: he talked about “the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values” and warned that “if you’re going to enjoy competitive economies… you need mandates to govern”. This is a man who had not wholly been joking when he predicted that the United Kingdom would be the first “truly Islamist” country to have nuclear weapons.
JD Vance’s group chat messages
The Signal group chat, entitled “Houthi PC small group”, went further still. Vance expressed his reservations about taking military action against Houthi militia to protect commercial shipping because it would benefit Europe far more than the United States.
“3 percent of US trade runs through the suez. 40 percent of European trade does,” he complained. “I am not sure the president is aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now.”
JD Vance did not argue that American interests were not served by air strikes, acknowledging that three per cent of US trade used the route through the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. Even here, Michael Waltz, the national security advisor, added a qualification.
“The trade figures we have are 15% of global and 30% of container. It’s difficult to break that down to US. Specific because much of the container either going through the red sea still or around the Cape of Good Hope our components going to Europe that turns into manufactured goods for transatlantic trade to the United States. [sic]”
At least a former soldier was able to explain how the global economy works. Even if Vance was correct, though, follow the logic: he was reluctant to support action which would benefit the US economy, because it would benefit Europe more. For him it is a zero-sum game.
Any doubt was removed by his grudging acquiescence. When Waltz went on to say that only the US Navy had the capabilities to defend against the “sophisticated, antiship, cruise missiles, and drones the Houthi are now using”, and was supported by Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense, Vance conceded. “If you think we should do it let’s go. I just hate bailing Europe out again.”
‘European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC’
This was not a debate over whether US interests were affected. Even Hegseth, as brutal in his approach to Europe as Vance (“I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC”), showed no doubt that the military action was about “Restoring Freedom of Navigation, a core national interest”. It is easy enough to see why the disproportionate benefits to Europe would stick in a MAGA craw. But only the Vice President seemed to find it so noxious that it was overpowering.
For all the rhetoric of transactional relationships and hard-headed realism, Trumpism has always been a creed of visceral emotion. The President last week described Europe as “countries which have abused us for decades”, and during his first term said, quite falsely, that the European Union “was set up to take advantage of the United States”. For Trump, Europe is just one entry on a long list of malign actors attempting to bilk America, including Canada, Japan, Taiwan, China, India, Ireland and NATO.
Vance, even in this company, is an outlier. His comments on Signal demonstrate that he is willing to contemplate some disadvantage to America, so long as that to the Europe he so despises is greater. We now know what we suspected: in an administration that is a cold house for Europe, the Vice President is the frostiest presence of all.
Eliot Wilson is a writer and strategic adviser