Anne Applebaum

People have more direct impact on their national governments when they vote. So the idea that J.D. Vance was somehow implying that America is more democratic was insulting. And it was it was understood that way. And as I said, it was also in a speech where he was expected to talk about European security armies and the war in Ukraine, none of which he mentioned, or if so, only glancingly.

People have more direct impact on their national governments when they vote. So the idea that J.D. Vance was somehow implying that America is more democratic was insulting. And it was it was understood that way. And as I said, it was also in a speech where he was expected to talk about European security armies and the war in Ukraine, none of which he mentioned, or if so, only glancingly.

I think in the context, it could be interpreted as a threat. I'm remembering that a few days earlier, the American Secretary of Defense had said that Europe will need to begin looking elsewhere for security, had implied that there might not be ongoing security guarantees for Europe and had implied that the United States might be withdrawing troops from Europe.

I think in the context, it could be interpreted as a threat. I'm remembering that a few days earlier, the American Secretary of Defense had said that Europe will need to begin looking elsewhere for security, had implied that there might not be ongoing security guarantees for Europe and had implied that the United States might be withdrawing troops from Europe.

I think in the context, it could be interpreted as a threat. I'm remembering that a few days earlier, the American Secretary of Defense had said that Europe will need to begin looking elsewhere for security, had implied that there might not be ongoing security guarantees for Europe and had implied that the United States might be withdrawing troops from Europe.

So yes, in that context, it felt to many people in the room like a threat.

So yes, in that context, it felt to many people in the room like a threat.

So yes, in that context, it felt to many people in the room like a threat.

Let me describe to you a conversation I had with a German member of parliament who I've known for some time. I met him at Munich. I had actually seen him at Munich the year before, and he reminded me that a year ago he said to me, I'm really worried that Europe will now be confronting three autocracies, China, Russia, and the United States.

Let me describe to you a conversation I had with a German member of parliament who I've known for some time. I met him at Munich. I had actually seen him at Munich the year before, and he reminded me that a year ago he said to me, I'm really worried that Europe will now be confronting three autocracies, China, Russia, and the United States.

Let me describe to you a conversation I had with a German member of parliament who I've known for some time. I met him at Munich. I had actually seen him at Munich the year before, and he reminded me that a year ago he said to me, I'm really worried that Europe will now be confronting three autocracies, China, Russia, and the United States.

And this year, he said to me, I said that last year, and this year I can see it coming true. Obviously, the United States is not an autocracy. It's not Russia. It's not China. But the United States is now an adversarial power. It's a country that is not interested in using the alliances that it has built over the last 70 years, 80 years.

And this year, he said to me, I said that last year, and this year I can see it coming true. Obviously, the United States is not an autocracy. It's not Russia. It's not China. But the United States is now an adversarial power. It's a country that is not interested in using the alliances that it has built over the last 70 years, 80 years.

And this year, he said to me, I said that last year, and this year I can see it coming true. Obviously, the United States is not an autocracy. It's not Russia. It's not China. But the United States is now an adversarial power. It's a country that is not interested in using the alliances that it has built over the last 70 years, 80 years.

It is not interested in creating relationships of mutual benefit. It thinks much more like a colonial or an imperial power. It speaks about annexing land and territory. It's a power that Europeans now understand, and I think this weekend really brought that home, is not a friend. And I think that's a really big shift. But this weekend was really an earthquake.

It is not interested in creating relationships of mutual benefit. It thinks much more like a colonial or an imperial power. It speaks about annexing land and territory. It's a power that Europeans now understand, and I think this weekend really brought that home, is not a friend. And I think that's a really big shift. But this weekend was really an earthquake.

It is not interested in creating relationships of mutual benefit. It thinks much more like a colonial or an imperial power. It speaks about annexing land and territory. It's a power that Europeans now understand, and I think this weekend really brought that home, is not a friend. And I think that's a really big shift. But this weekend was really an earthquake.

Everybody understood this is a different kind of America. It's a different kind of American administration. It's not one that we've seen or dealt with before, and we need new attitudes.

Everybody understood this is a different kind of America. It's a different kind of American administration. It's not one that we've seen or dealt with before, and we need new attitudes.

Everybody understood this is a different kind of America. It's a different kind of American administration. It's not one that we've seen or dealt with before, and we need new attitudes.