Connect with us

Published

on

The Atlantic is publishing a collection of key internal government documents related to the Trump administrations family-separation policy, known as Zero Tolerance. The records informed the reporting of my cover story on how it came to be and who was responsible. Our hope is to introduce greater transparency around a policy that gravely harmed thousands of families and whose development and intent were concealed from the public for years. During the Trump administration, more than 5,000 migrant children were taken from their parents as part of a dubious and ineffectual strategy to deter migration across the southern border. Hundreds remain separated today.

From the September 2022 issue: We need to take away children

These records showcase, among other things, government officials attempts to mislead the public; inconsistent and sometimes nonexistent record keeping, which to this day means that a full accounting of separations does not exist; efforts to extend the length of time that children and parents were kept apart; and early and repeated internal warnings about the policys worst outcomes, which were ignored.

As you will see, some of the records are marked pre-decisional, deliberative, or attorney-client privileged in an attempt to exempt them from federal disclosure requirements and ensure they would never become public. The Atlantic obtained them only through extensive litigation.

The Atlantics records, combined with others secured by the House Judiciary Committee, the progressive nonprofit group American Oversight, and separated families themselves, have been organized and tagged for future use. The collection is far from complete, and many of the documents still contain redactions. However, we hope that this database will prove a useful tool for those engaged in research and documentation of family separations, and that the body of publicly available information will continue to grow.

Jump to Initial separations, Deliberations leading up to the implementation of Zero Tolerance, Zero Tolerance Policy, Misleading the public, Investigations by the Department of Homeland Securitys Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Problems with family reunification and attempts to thwart it, Known instances of separation, Collections, Further readingInitial Separations (Pilot Programs)

In the spring of 2017, Jeff Self, the Border Patrol chief in the El Paso Sector, which includes New Mexico and parts of Texas, quietly launched a regional program to start referring migrant parents traveling with children for prosecution, which would require those families to be separated. This strained resources throughout the immigration system, including at the Department of Health and Human Services, which took custody of the children. Federal officials would later call the program a pilot and use it as a model for expanding the practice nationwide. Some early separations also occurred in Yuma, Arizona, under a separate initiative.

Family Separation Directive for Texas Border Patrol stations in the El Paso Sector*

Family Separation Directive for New Mexico Border Patrol stations in the El Paso Sector*

Department of Health and Human Services official: They are discovering more separations that were not reported.

HHS officials contact Immigration and Customs Enforcement seeking help locating the parents of detained separated children.

HHS official reports that the Department of Homeland Security is working on a family separation policy again.

El Paso Sector After Action Report summarizing the results of separations that occurred there in 2017

Jonathan White, head of the HHS program housing children, reports, We had a shortage last night of beds for babies.

HHS officials report, We suspect that there are other [unaccompanied children] being separated from parents.

Border Patrol official Gloria Chavez tells the acting agency chief Carla Provost that the El Paso Sector has been separating families for more than four months. Provost calls for separations to stop.

Provost: This has been ongoing since July without our knowledge It has not blown up in the media as of yet but of course has the potential to.

Border Patrol official Scott Luck asks colleagues Chavez and Hull, Why are we just hearing about it?

A DHS official requests a Border Patrol report on initial separations in El Paso to present to Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen.

The acting deputy chief of the Border Patrols El Paso Sector tells Chavez, inaccurately, that family separations there lasted only two to seven days, and suggests, despite evidence to the contrary, that many people presenting themselves as families at the border were in fact unrelated. Deliberations Leading Up to the Implementation of Zero Tolerance

At a February 14, 2017, interagency meeting, immigration-enforcement officials presented a nationwide plan to separate families as an immigration deterrent. Afterward, officials at the Department of Health and Human Servicesthe agency that would be charged with caring for separated childrenpushed back against the plan while scrambling to prepare. The plan was also leaked to the media, after which Homeland Security officials began to assert publicly that the idea had been abandoned. In reality, during and after regional separation programs were implemented in Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico, the nationwide plan was still being pushed aggressively by leaders of the immigrant-enforcement agencies, as well as by Stephen Miller, President Donald Trumps chief immigration adviser, and Gene Hamilton, a confidant of Millers who worked at DHS and the Department of Justice.

Invitation to the February 14, 2017, meeting

HHS official Jonathan Whites internal summary of proposals discussed at the February meeting

HHS official: DHS stressed in a meeting that the overall intent of the actions is to serve as a deterrent.

White asks enforcement officials for more information about plans to separate families.

List of attempts by White to inquire and raise red flags about plans to separate families

HHS March 2017 report: Children who would be separated tend to skew heavily toward tender aged; separations could be considered a human rights abuse, cause a myriad of international legal issues, and increase the risk of human trafficking.

HHS official: DHS is looking to expand family separations despite a complaint filed with the inspector general. (Original complaint here.)

In an internal memo, federal officials describe family separation as a short term solution to be implemented in the next 30 days.**

December 2017 correspondence between DHS officials: Announce that DHS will begin separating family units.

December 2017 DHS policy proposal: Parental Choice of Detention or Separation

Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan plans to formally recommend family separation: I do believe that this approach would have the greatest impact. Zero Tolerance Policy

Zero Tolerance memo signed by Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen

DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsens follow-up Zero Tolerance memo with additional instructions

El Paso Sector initial implementation guidance

El Centro Sector implementation guidance

Del Rio Sector implementation guidance

Scott Lloyd of Health and Human Services asks McAleenan and Acting ICE Director Tom Homan for a meeting to discuss the implications of Zero Tolerance.

Border Patrol officials warn of repercussions for prosecutors who declined to participate in separations.

The Justice Departments Gene Hamilton touts a dramatic increase in prosecutions under Zero Tolerance.

A lot of parent separation cases are missing information, an HHS official reports.

HHS officials note inconsistent documentation and tracking issues.

An HHS official reports, There are a bunch of tender age girls stuck in Border Patrol stations; this is caused by the policy decision to separate kids from their families as a deterrent.

A magistrate judge in Tucson, Arizona, inquires about separation and reunification processes.

After a Bownsville, Texas, magistrate demands a list of separated families and their locations, a Border Patrol agent jokes, I might be spending some time in the slammer.

Yuma Border Patrol Sector reports: Resources are strained by meal preparation, and feeding detained families.

Amended Big Bend Sector guidance

Orders to halt separations following President Trumps executive order reversing course on Zero Tolerance in response to public outcry

A Customs and Border Protection official notes failures to properly document separations of 0-to-4-year-old children. Zero Tolerance Charts

Though a full accounting of the family separations that took place during the Trump administration does not exist, these internal government charts offer some insight into the nature of those that were recorded. For example, Homeland Security officials have often suggested that some of the individuals separated under Zero Tolerance were actually false families, or that separated parents were guilty of more serious crimes beyond the misdemeanor of illegally crossing the border, to justify taking their children away. But the first chart in this list makes clear that 2,146 of 2,256 separated parents who were referred for prosecution between May 5 and June 20, 2018, were charged only with the misdemeanor. During the same period, 137 parents were charged with the felony of having crossed the border illegally more than once, while only two were presented with other charges. The second chart notes that over those weeks, at least 251 children younger than 6 were separated from their parents, along with 1,370 children ages 6 to 12, and 1,272 ages 13 to 17.

Zero Tolerance Separation datasets May 5-June 20, 2018

Internal Border Patrol Prosecution Initiative Update charts from July 1 to July 7, 2018

Undated list of reasons for some separations Misleading the Public

Below is a small sampling of instances when government officials, members of congress, reporters and community groups sought information about a noticeable rise in family separations. Despite these inquiries, for more than a year, Department of Homeland Security officials denied that the agencys treatment of families had changed, suggesting that business was proceeding as usual and that families were not being separated any more than in the past.

The El Paso Federal Defenders Office has registered an increase in the separation of children and parents, an immigrant advocacy group wrote to Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials ahead of an August 2017 meeting. What is the current policy on family separation?

Border Patrol officials scramble to respond after a meeting with Representative Beto ORourkes office, in which family separations were inadvertently disclosed.

Months into the El Paso Sector separation initiative, Border Patrol official Aaron Hull tells the ICE official Phil Miller, We dont like to separate families.

Houston Chronicle reporter Lomi Kriel asking whether the Border Patrols policy on family separations had changed, and receiving unclear answers in response. (Kriels article here)

Jonathan White of the Department of Health and Human Services asks Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Kevin McAleenan and Acting ICE Director Tom Homan why his agency is receiving larger numbers of separated children than in the past. Homan does not respond. McAleenan does not disclose that separations have been underway to White.

A communications official at DHS seeks guidance on how to respond to inquiries from the media and immigrant advocacy groups.

DHS official to reporters: We ask that members of the public and media view advocacy group claims that we are separating women and children for reasons other than to protect the child with the level of skepticism they deserve.

In response to another inquiry, HHS officials decline to respond, and then confirm that more than 700 children have in fact been separated.

In internal emails, DHS officials push back against the story about 700 separated children, claiming inaccurately that the actual number is much lower. Investigations by Homeland Securitys Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL)

Quarterly meeting agenda: There are reports of family separation cases at the border.

A report on an investigation into complaints of family separations cites inconsistency, inadequate protocols, and lack of collaboration. It recommends the creation of an interagency working group, a Family-Member Locator System, and other tools to prevent prolonged separations and to ensure that families are eventually reunified.

A summary of an investigation into 950 complaints about family separations anticipates permanent family separation and new populations of US orphans.

CRCL staff seeks information about the enormous volume of matters alleging inappropriate family separations.

Cameron Quinn, the head of CRCL, emails Customs and Border Protection Commissioner McAleenan to raise concerns about reports of family separations.

Quinn tells McAleenan that CRCL has received over 100 recent allegations of separations.

CRCL staff notes the Border Patrols failure to document some separations.

Quinn forwards allegations of coercion and abuse of separated parents to McAleenan and Acting ICE Director Ron Vitiello. (Original complaint found here) Problems With Family Reunification and Attempts to Thwart It

An Immigration and Customs Enforcement official named Matt Albence insists that the expectation is that we are NOT to reunite the families and proposes ways to avoid such reunifications, such as moving children away from the border faster.

We cant have this, Albence writes about reunifications.

Albence and other ICE and Border Patrol officials lament that some families have been reunified, calling it a fiasco and not the consequence we had in mind, which obviously undermines the entire effort.

Reunifications, Albence insists, are not going to happen unless we are directed by the Dept to do so.

Reports that reunification forms were given to parents in languages they did not understand

Correspondence on harried reunification efforts

An employee at a company contracted to care for separated children tells colleagues, ICE will be stopping all reunifications due to limited bed space. Known Instances of Separation

In the federal lawsuit Ms. L. v. ICE, lawyers representing the federal government turned over the most complete list of family separations that exists. The ACLU shared that database with The Atlantic after redacting details such as names and dates of birth, which could be used to identify individual parents or children who were affected by the separation policy. Collections

Here, documents are organized into collections based on key criteria, such as year, location, federal agency, and the key players involved.

Full collection

2017, the first year in which separations took place

2018, the second year in which separations took place

Department of Justice, which prosecuted some separated parents

Department of Health and Human Services, which took custody of most separated children

Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the immigration-enforcement agencies Customs and Border Protection, the Border Patrol, and Immigration and Customs Enforcement

U.S. Customs and Border Protection, whose officers separated some families at ports of entry

Border Patrol, whose agents separated most of the families affected by the Trump administrations family-separation policy

ICE, whose leadership advocated for separating families and sought to prolong separations

The White House, where a group of hawks, led by Stephen Miller, Donald Trumps senior immigration adviser, pushed for aggressive enforcement tactics, including separating families

Matt Albence, Head of enforcement and removal operations, the division of Immigration and Customs Enforcement that carries out deportations

Gloria Chavez, a long-serving Border Patrol official who had early knowledge of separations that occurred in the El Paso Sector

Gene Hamilton, Served as senio counsel at DHS under President Donald Trump. When Nielsen took over as DHS secretary, Hamilton left to work on immigration enforcement with his former boss Jeff Sessions, who was then Trumps attorney general.

Jonathan Hoffman, A close adviser and assistant secretary for public affairs to DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen

Tom Homan, The intellectual father of the idea to separate migrant families as a deterrent, who went on to serve as acting ICE director through the end of Zero Tolerance

Bob Kadlec, HHS assistant secretary of preparedness and response, who led the agencys family-reunification task force

John Kelly, Considered but ultimately rejected the idea to separate migrant families as a deterrent while serving as Trumps first DHS secretary. Kelly went on to serve as Trumps chief of staff during Zero Tolerance.

Scott Lloyd, Director of the Office of Refugee Resettlement, the HHS division that houses detained unaccompanied children. For months, Lloyd declined to look into reports of family separations, even when presented with overwhelming evidence that they were occurring.

Kevin McAleenan, Commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, which oversees the Border Patrol. In May 2018, McAleenan recommended that the Border Patrol start referring migrant parents for prosecution and separating them from their children.

Kirstjen Nielsen, After serving as chief of staff to John Kelly at DHS, Nielsen became DHS secretary and the face of family separations

Carla Provost, Acting Border Patrol chief during Zero Tolerance

Ron Vitiello, Acting Director Customs and Border Protection, who was second in command to Kevin McAleenan during Zero Tolerance and the preceding pilots

Katie Waldman, DHS deputy press secretary, who went on to marry Stephen Miller

Jonathan White, Served as head of the HHS program that houses detained migrant children. White opposed and tried to prevent family separations, and later helped lead HHS efforts to reunify families.

Chad Wolf, Chief of staff to Acting DHS Secretary Elaine Duke and Secretary Nielsen. Under Duke, Wolf pressed the DHS policy office to support proposals to separate families. Locations: Big Bend, Brownsville, Calexico, California, Canutillo, Del Rio, El Centro, El Paso, Harlingen, Hidalgo, Houston, Laredo, New Mexico, New York, Nogales, Phoenix, Port Isabel, Rio Grande Valley, San Diego, San Luis, San Ysidro, Texas, Tucson, Yuma Further Reading Congressional Reports

House Oversight Committee: Child Separations by the Trump Administration

House Judiciary Committee: The Trump Administrations Family Separation Policy: Trauma, Destruction, and Chaos Inspector General Reports Department of Justice

Review of the Department of Justices Planning and Implementation of Its Zero Tolerance Policy and Its Coordination With the Departments of Homeland Security and Health and Human Services Department of Health and Human Services

Separated Children Placed in Office of Refugee Resettlement Care

Communication and Management Challenges Impeded HHSs Response to the Zero-Tolerance Policy

Characteristics of Separated Children in ORRs Care: June 27, 2018November 15, 2020 Department of Homeland Security and Components

DHS Lacked Technology Needed to Successfully Account for Separated Migrant Families

CBP Separated More Asylum-Seeking Families at Ports of Entry Than Reported and for Reasons Other Than Those Outlined in Public Statements

Children Waited for Extended Periods in Vehicles to Be Reunified With Their Parents at ICEs Port Isabel Detention Center in July 2018

ICE Did Not Consistently Provide Separated Migrant Parents the Opportunity to Bring Their Children Upon Removal *The government supplied numerous copies of this directive with various portions redacted. The least redacted version has been excerpted here from the Border Patrols After Action Report, which summarized the results of the separations that occurred in the El Paso Sector in 2017.

**This memo was originally obtained by the office of Senator Jeff Merkley.

Note: The government occasionally supplied The Atlantic with multiple versions of the same email chain or report, and redacted different portions of each. Such documents have been combined in order to show all unredacted material.

Continue Reading

Politics

Starmer warns of ‘lost decade of kids’ – as he launches 10-year youth plan

Published

on

By

Starmer warns of 'lost decade of kids' - as he launches 10-year youth plan

Sir Keir Starmer has declared it his “moral mission” to “turn the tide on the lost decade of young kids left as collateral damage”.

The government launches its 10-year youth plan today, which has pledged £500m to reviving youth services.

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy has also warned that young people are now “the most isolated in generations” and face challenges that are “urgent and demand a major change in direction”.

But despite the strong language, the Conservatives have warned that “under Labour, the outlook for the next generation is increasingly bleak”.

Lisa Nandy is on Sky News from 7am – follow live

Launching the 10-year strategy, Sir Keir said: “As a dad and as prime minister, I believe it is our generation’s greatest responsibility to turn the tide on the lost decade of young kids left as collateral damage. It is our moral mission.

“Today, my government sets out a clear, ambitious and deliverable plan – investing in the next generation so that every child has the chance to see their talents take them as far as their ability can.”

What’s in the government’s strategy?

Under the plans, the government will seek to give 500,000 more young people across England access to a trusted adult outside their homes – who are assigned through a formal programme – and online resources about staying safe.

The prime minister said the plans will also “ensure” that those who choose to do apprenticeships rather than go to university “will have the same respect and opportunity as everyone else”.

OTHER MEASURES INCLUDE

  • Creating 70 “young futures” hubs by March 2029, as part of a £70m programme to provide access to youth workers – the first eight of these will open by March next year;
  • Establishing a £60m Richer Young Lives fund to support organisations in “underserved” areas to deliver high-quality youth work and activities;
  • Improving wellbeing, personal development and life skills through a new £22.5m programme of support around the school day – which will operate in up to 400 schools;
  • Investing £15m to recruit and train youth workers, volunteers and “trusted adults”;
  • Improving youth services by putting £5m into local partnerships, information-sharing and digital tech.

The plan comes following a so-called “state of the nation” survey commissioned by Ms Nandy, which heard from more than 14,000 young people across England.

Launching the strategy, she said: “Young people have been crystal clear in speaking up in our consultation: they need support for their mental health, spaces to meet with people in their communities and real opportunities to thrive. We will give them what they want.”

Read more:
Child poverty strategy launched
Young people may lose benefits

Lisa Nandy will speak about the plan on Sky News on Wednesday morning. Pic: PA
Image:
Lisa Nandy will speak about the plan on Sky News on Wednesday morning. Pic: PA

But the Conservatives have criticised the government for scrapping the National Citizen Service (NCS), which ended in March this year.

Shadow culture secretary Nigel Huddlestone said “any renewed investment in youth services is of course welcome”, but said Labour’s “economic mismanagement and tax hikes are forcing businesses to close, shrinking opportunities while inflation continues to climb”.

Continue Reading

World

Is this what the beginning of a war looks like? How the US threat around Venezuela is shaping up

Published

on

By

Is this what the beginning of a war looks like? How the US threat around Venezuela is shaping up

Is this what the beginning of a war looks like?

In the deep blue waters of the Caribbean, visible from space, an unremarkable grey smudge.

The USS Gerald R Ford seen off the US Virgin Islands on 1 December. Credit: Copernicus
Image:
The USS Gerald R Ford seen off the US Virgin Islands on 1 December. Credit: Copernicus

But this is the USS Gerald R Ford: the largest, most deadly aircraft carrier in the world. And it is only part of an armada, apparently set on Venezuela.

The Gerald R Ford,  USS Winston S Churchill, USS Mahan and USS Bainbridge in the Atlantic on 13 November. Source: US Department of Defense
Image:
The Gerald R Ford, USS Winston S Churchill, USS Mahan and USS Bainbridge in the Atlantic on 13 November. Source: US Department of Defense

From being able to count on one hand the number of warships and boats in the Caribbean, since August we can see the build-up of the number, and variety of ships under US command.

And that’s only at sea – air power has also been deployed, with bombers flying over the Caribbean, and even along the Venezuelan coast, as recently as this week.

A Boeing B-52H Stratofortress near Venezuelan coast from Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, on 3 December. Credit: FlightRadar24
Image:
A Boeing B-52H Stratofortress near Venezuelan coast from Minot Air Force Base, North Dakota, on 3 December. Credit: FlightRadar24

Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro told crowds his country has endured 22 weeks of aggression from the US and Donald Trump.

Things could be about to get worse.

So let’s rewind those 22 weeks to understand how we got here…

‘Drug boat’ strike

On 2 September, the White House posted on X that it had conducted a strike against so-called “narcoterrorists” shipping fentanyl to the US, without providing direct evidence of the alleged crime.

Sky’s Data & Forensics unit has verified that in the past four months since strikes began, 23 boats have been targeted in 22 strikes, killing 87 people.

Read more: The US-Venezuela crisis explained

The latest was on 4 December, after which US Southern Command announced it had conducted another strike on an alleged drug smuggling boat in the eastern Pacific.

It was the first such strike since 15 November and since the defence secretary, sometimes referred to as secretary of war, Pete Hegseth, came under scrutiny for an alleged “second strike” in an earlier attack.

The US says it carried out the action because of drugs – and there has been some evidence to support its assertion.

The Dominican Republic said it had recovered the contents of one boat hit by a strike – a huge haul of cocaine.

Legal issues

Whatever the cargo, though, there are serious, disputed legal issues.

Firstly, it is contested whether by designating the people on the boats as narcoterrorists, it makes them lawful military targets – or whether the strikes are in fact extra judicial murders of civilians at sea.

And more specifically… well, let’s go back to that very first video, of the very first strike.

What this footage doesn’t show is what came afterwards – an alleged “second strike” that targeted people in the water posing no apparent threat.

That has created a crisis for Hegseth.

Speaking at a cabinet meeting last week, the defence secretary said he did not see that there were survivors in the water when the second strike was ordered and launched in early September, saying that “the thing was on fire”.

And the 4 December strike shows this strategy isn’t over.

The strikes are just part of the story, as warships and planes have headed toward the region in huge numbers.

Drugs or oil?

Some have said this isn’t about drugs at all, but oil.

Venezuela has lots – the world’s largest proven reserves.

Speaking to the faithful on Fox News, Republican congresswoman – and Trump supporter – Maria Salazar said access to Venezuela would be a “field day” for American oil companies.

And Maduro himself has taken up that theme. A few days later, he wrote this letter to OPEC – which represents major oil producing nations – to “address the growing and illegal threats made by the government of the United States against Venezuela”.

That’s how Maduro has framed this – a plan by the US “to seize Venezuela’s vast oil reserves… through lethal military force”.

Lethal military force – an understatement when you think of the armada lying in wait.

And it may be called upon soon. Trump on Tuesday said he’s preparing to take these strikes from international waters on to Venezuelan territory.

Maduro has complained of 22 weeks of “aggression”. There may be many more to come.

Additional reporting by Sophia Massam, junior digital investigations journalist.

The Data X Forensics team is a multi-skilled unit dedicated to providing transparent journalism from Sky News. We gather, analyse and visualise data to tell data-driven stories. We combine traditional reporting skills with advanced analysis of satellite images, social media and other open source information. Through multimedia storytelling we aim to better explain the world while also showing how our journalism is done.

Continue Reading

World

Trump gives withering verdict on America’s traditional allies

Published

on

By

Trump gives withering verdict on America's traditional allies

Donald Trump’s bruising assessment of Europe as “weak” and “decaying” is a bitter blow to nations already reeling from the release of his national security strategy.

At the end of the 45-minute interview with Politico, EU leaders might be forgiven for thinking, with friends like these, who needs enemies?

“Europe doesn’t know what to do,” Trump said, “They want to be politically correct, and it makes them weak.”

Trump meets leaders from Ukraine, Germany, France, the UK, Italy, and Finland, as well as the EU and NATO, in August Pic: Reuters
Image:
Trump meets leaders from Ukraine, Germany, France, the UK, Italy, and Finland, as well as the EU and NATO, in August Pic: Reuters

On the contrary, I would imagine some choice words were being uttered in European capitals as they waded through the string of insults.

What has Trump said?

First up, the US president criticised European leaders for failing to end the war between Russia and Ukraine.

“They talk but they don’t produce. And the war just keeps going on and on,” he said.

The fact that the Russians have shown no real commitment to stopping the invasion they started is not mentioned.

Instead, the blame is laid squarely at the feet of Ukraine and its allies in Europe.

“I think if I weren’t president, we would have had World War III,” Trump suggested, while concluding that Moscow is in the stronger position.

Trump meeting European leaders in the Oval Office in August. Pic: @RapidResponse47
Image:
Trump meeting European leaders in the Oval Office in August. Pic: @RapidResponse47

Does he have a point?

Critics claim that the White House has emboldened the Kremlin and brought Putin in from the cold with a summit and photo opportunities.

Trump highlights the fact that his return to office forced many European NATO members to increase defence spending drastically.

On this, he is correct – the growing insecurity around how long America can be relied on has brought security into sharp focus.

But the release of the new US national security strategy has only added to the feelings of unease.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on Tuesday claimed some of its contents were unacceptable from a European point of view.

“I see no need for America to want to save democracy in Europe. If it was necessary to save it, we would manage it on our own,” he told a news conference in Rhineland-Palatinate, the German state where Trump’s paternal grandfather was born.

Meeting between, left to right, Keir Starmer of the UK, Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine, Emmanuel Macron of France, Donald Tusk of Poland, and Friedrich Merz of Germany. Pic: AP
Image:
Meeting between, left to right, Keir Starmer of the UK, Volodymyr Zelenskyy of Ukraine, Emmanuel Macron of France, Donald Tusk of Poland, and Friedrich Merz of Germany. Pic: AP

The leader of the EU’s biggest power also said the new US strategy was not a surprise and largely chimed with the vice president’s speech at the Munich Security Conference in February.

For this reason, Merz reiterated that Europe and Germany must become more independent of America for their security policies.

However, he noted, “I say in my discussions with the Americans, ‘America first’ is fine, but America alone cannot be in your interests.”

For his part, while Trump said he liked most of Europe’s current leaders, he warned they were “destroying” their countries with their migration policies.

He said: “Europe is a different place, and if it keeps going the way it’s going, Europe will not be…in my opinion, many of those countries will not be viable countries any longer. Their immigration policy is a disaster”.

He added: “Most European nations… they’re decaying.”

Read more:
Analysis: Putin preparing for more war, not less
White House: Europe ‘unrecognisable in 20 years or less’

Again, the comments echoed his security strategy, which warned immigration risked “civilisation erasure” in Europe.

There’s no doubt immigration is a major concern for many of the continent’s leaders and voters.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Zelenskyy meets European leaders

However, irregular crossings into the EU fell 22% in the first 10 months of 2025 according to Frontex, a fact which seems to have passed the president and his team by.

“Within a few decades at the latest, certain Nato members will become majority non-European”, his security document warned.

It also suggested “cultivating resistance” in Europe “to restore former greatness” leading to speculation about how America might intervene in European politics.

Trump appeared to add further clarification on Tuesday, saying while he did not “want to run Europe”, he would consider “endorsing” his preferred candidates in future elections.

👉 Tap to follow Trump100 wherever you get your podcasts👈

This comment will also ruffle feathers on the continent where the European Council President has already warned Trump’s administration against interfering in Europe’s affairs.

“Allies do not threaten to interfere in the domestic political choices of their allies,” Antonio Costa said on Monday.

“The US cannot replace Europe in what its vision is of free expression… Europe must be sovereign.”

So, what will happen now, and how will Europe’s leaders respond?

If you are hoping for a showdown, you will likely be disappointed.

Like him or loathe him, Europe’s leaders need Trump.

They need the might of America and want to try to secure continued support for Ukraine.

While the next few days will be filled with politely scripted statements or rejections of the president’s comments, most of his allies know on this occasion they are probably best to grin and bear it.

Continue Reading

Trending