It was a historic moment not only for Davos. On Tuesday, it was not the founder and giant Klaus Schwab who opened the 56th World Economic Forum, but the self-deprecating American financial manager Larry Fink. After the departure of founder Schwab, he took the scepter at the crisis-ridden World Economic Forum and peppered his opening speech with a question: Does anyone outside this hall care what we're doing here?
The author of the article assumes that there is enough interest outside the hall already because there are hundreds of narcissists in Davos hiding from the public, protected by police officers in uniform and without, similar to the one they had to wait until Wednesday afternoon to see: president Trump.
Donald Trump
As the leader of an unprecedentedly large American delegation that included nearly every member of his administration and the leader of a massive psychological operation against the European public, he repeated in his long speech, which began at exactly 1:48 p.m. and lasted about 72 minutes, that the United States is the planet's economic engine, Europe not going in the right direction, and that Europe must invest more in its own security and economy. However, Trump said that without the US, Europe is nothing. And that some countries would not exist at all without America. Can we ignore something like that when the American President says it?
In his third Davos speech (previously in 2018 and 2020) on America First President Trump expressed how euphoric he is when he travels to Switzerland: We're on our way to Davos to meet with heads of state and business leaders to create good policy action and bring hundreds of billions back to the U.S., he wrote on Twitter on January 21, 2026. He ended his message by stating: We are now clearly number one in the universe!
In his speech, he returned to the subject of Greenland, which, incidentally, he mistook for Iceland. He suggested that the US should act immediately on its future and, as a true peacemaker, he said he was not planning to use force. The day before, Trump had announced a series of talks on the subject and assured that their results would satisfy both NATO and the United States. Let me remind you that the Greenland conflict is not the first internal rift that the EU-US-NATO alliance has experienced since its inception. Relations between the Western countries have long been strained. The dispute over US control of Greenland is the latest episode in a long history of tensions between Washington and Europe:
Suez crisis. The Vietnam War. The Euromissile crisis. The invasion of Iraq. Illegal extraditions. The conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The attitude towards national security. The tariff and price war.
However, Trump said that without the US, Europe is nothing. And that some countries would not exist at all without America. He reminded the Swiss that Switzerland would not be Switzerland without America, reiterated that Switzerland was only rich because it was able to sell tax-free watches to Americans, and repeatedly mimicked Federal Councillor Karin Keller-Sutter so that no one would remember her and recall the infamous July 31, 2025 tariff conversation. Can the EU ignore something like this when the US President says it?
And when Europe is the largest trading partner of the United States, it is also one of the largest, if not the largest, investor in US Treasury bonds, and is central to US global strategy, for example in Africa and the Middle East?
This is despite the fact that Europe has already sacrificed its basic economic and security interests to the imperial dictates of the US, trust between the great powers is now virtually non-existent and the relationship has moved into the phase of hard bargaining with threats of military force.
The reality is that since Trump's return to the White House a year ago, the president has made a series of decisions that led to the demise of many rules around the world and will affect China as well.
The main themes of Trump's Davos speech
- The United States does not intend to use military force to retake Greenland (a piece of ice), but insists on immediate negotiations. Washington needs Greenland not for resource extraction but for security - deploying the Golden Dome missile defence system and deterrence dangerous opponents.
- Both Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky want to reach an agreement to resolve the conflict. Europe, not the United States, should deal with Ukraine.
- The European Union is going in the wrong direction, parts of it have become unrecognizable. According to Trump, the main problems are: ever-increasing government spending, uncontrolled mass migration and endless imports.
- Washington imposes tariffs on other countries to repair the damage caused and protect his interests. This measure has already made it possible to radically reduce the growing US trade deficit.
- Cooperation with Caracas after the US invasion is much appreciated. Trump predicts that the country will earn more in the next six months than it has in the last 20 years.
- In a recent raid, the U.S. military used weapons that no one has ever heard of. Trump described their impact as follows: the defendants gave the order to shoot, but nothing happened.
EU and NATO retaliatory measures
Response measures and tools can be divided into three categories: 1) known and established, 2) so-called unknown because untested, and 3) ad hoc in an extreme situation.
Well-known and established tools are:
- Suspension of the EU-US trade agreement. Ursula von der Leyen suggested that the US-EU trade deal, which set tariffs on 15 %, was intended to ensure stability and predictability. The European Parliament decides to postpone the vote on the trade agreement.
- Imposing tariffs worth €93 billion against the US (this has not happened yet). Industrial and agricultural goods such as motorcycles, beef, whisky and citrus fruits are being considered.
- Diplomatic pressure. Although (supposedly) EU leaders are united, Stubborn diplomatic response, and France, Germany and other allies condemn threats of tariffs as Unacceptable a Illegal, the diplomats of the European Commission are unable to refute the arguments of the United States government and the compromises on individual officials, politicians and so-called enablers available to the United States.
Unknown because untested tools:
- The Anti-Coercion Instrument (Regulation 2023/2675 on the protection of the European Union and its Member States against economic coercion, ACI), called business bazooka. It is a legal mechanism valid from 27 December 2023. The ACI was designed to protect the EU from economic bullying. It has never been used before, which makes its implementation To the unknown factor in transatlantic relations. It allows the EU to: a) Impose restrictions on US companies, particularly in the financial sector, doing business in Europe. b) Restrict the use of the euro for transactions with specific US entities. c) Restrict imports of goods and services. d) Target sanctions. ACI could be used to sanction specific individuals or institutions that are deemed to be exerting illegal pressure on the EU.
The instrument was created after Lithuania accused China of blocking its exports in 2021 and Vilnius decided to allow the opening of a Taiwanese diplomatic office. A case that gave the EU the idea of how to counter economic pressure.
The instrument is considered by its representatives to be impressive and as a nuclear option, because it allows the EU to respond with broad trade measures in its single market of 450 million citizens. Against the United States would be first time, when the EU used this instrument at all. If the ACI is applied to Trump's latest trade threats, there would likely be retaliatory tariffs.
The context of the Greenland case includes the threat of a 10% tariff on eight European countries - Denmark, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland, Britain and Norway - from 1 February 2026, rising to 25 % by June until the US can buy Greenland. But this threat was withdrawn by President Trump yesterday, January 21, after a conversation with NATO Secretary General Rutt (1967). This expected and at the same time unexpected change in President Trump's position is explained by the narcissism and legally inexplicable audacity of both personalities. Rutte cannot act and make decisions about NATO member states without their consent, and President Trump, as Commander-in-Chief of the US military and thus virtually NATO, clearly indicates who pays and orders the NATO music.
Whether a measure by a third country, in this case the US, meets these conditions is decided on a case-by-case basis. Why?
Because economic coercion against the European Union or an EU Member State can affect any policy area and can take the form of legislation or other formal or informal action or inaction. The EU instrument and policy applies regardless of the source of the coercion and therefore regardless of the identity of the third country.
President Trump's motive for acquiring Greenland, citing national security and The Golden Dome and the warning that tariffs would target EU members as well as Britain and Norway outside the EU unless Denmark handed over Greenland, an autonomous territory within the Danish kingdom, shocked European politicians and NATO officials. In addition, the warnings prompted EU leaders to call an emergency summit in Brussels on Thursday evening to discuss, with a probability bordering on certainty, a previously compiled list of U.S. services that could be hit. Given the disunity within the EU, EC and NATO, the pre-written does not necessarily mean that all the conditions necessary to activate the instrument against coercion are or have been or will be met.
Possible private sector responses
- Danish pension fund AkademikerPension plans to exit the US government bond market completely by the end of the month. The official reason is concern that President Donald Trump's policies have created too much credit risk to ignore. The United States is essentially not a creditworthy debtor and the finances of the U.S. government are unsustainable in the long run, Anders Schelde, chief investment officer at AkademikerPension, told Bloomberg on Tuesday.
The AkademikerPension fund manages about $25 billion in university workers' savings, holding about $100 million in U.S. Treasury bonds at the end of 2025.
- The Laerernes Pension Fund radically reduced its exposure to US assets before the situation over Greenland escalated this month, citing concerns about the unsustainability of US debt and threats to the independence of the Federal Reserve.
PFA, which manages about $120 billion in pension assets, recently reduced its holdings as part of a broader product and portfolio adjustment. A by FinansWatch Fund
- Paedagogernes Pension announced that it will stop implementing new strategies targeting illiquid US assets after divesting from Treasuries.
The Swedish pension fund Alecta decided to do the same as the Danes. It provides pensions to 2.8 million private clients, 37,000 companies and controls assets worth CZK 3 trillion. It reminds me of a time when many people knew the price of everything, but not the value.
Not quite realistic reactions in conjunction with NATO
On the night of 18 January, The Economist reported that as a last and most radical option, even the abolition of US military bases in Europe is being considered.
Later, The Times reported that Germany could at least significantly increase payments for renting US bases in Germany.
I won't continue with the speculative reactions of a virtually comatose NATO. Why comatose?
The military defeat of Ukraine in the conflict with Russia will represent, also in the context of the ongoing long-standing anthropological war on various fronts, the defeat of NATO.
Moreover, already in the run-up to the aforementioned defeat, the Pentagon decided to reduce US participation in 30 NATO structures. Instead of a one-time withdrawal, the Pentagon intends to simply not replace personnel when their services expire. It is specified that U.S. participation in these activities will not completely end.
The seemingly irrational and in fact downright suicidal attitude of European political leaders can be explained by a simple fact: the so-called elites are deeply rooted in the transatlantic system from which they derive their power and legitimacy. They see this system as threatened and are prepared to defend it at almost any cost, even if that cost involves the loss of European sovereignty or territory.
President Trump, his entourage and those who brought them to power have put the European and NATO elites through a budget squeeze. The final bill has not yet been issued, but it will be. This is regardless of whether President Trump is president or not. Vice President JD Vance, powerful political advisor Stephen Miller, politician, diplomat and lawyer, Marco Antonio Rubio, to name just three of many, will not disappear from the scene in the imaginable future. The aforementioned personalities will continue the work presented by President Trump after his departure from the White House, while Brussels will continue to dream of Europe's strategic autonomy.
Conclusion
The reality is that under the rhetoric of independence, European governments have systematically caved in to Trump - from increasing NATO military spending initially to 3 percent, only to see everyone now pushing for 5 percent, much of which will go directly into the pockets of US arms companies, to punitive trade terms, to accepting financial responsibility for sustaining the war in Ukraine and its reconstruction.
Once we realise that today's European leaders have long since stopped thinking in terms of national or even European interests and instead became addicted to a single goal - the preservation of the dying system of Western hegemony, or so-called of a rules-based order, and the benefits that accrue from it in their sub-imperial role, their seemingly irrational behavior makes sense.
What should worry Europeans is not the prospect of Abandonment USA or the disintegration of NATO, but how to awaken citizens to a development that could create space for real autonomy. In fact, the opposite is true: it can be assumed with a probability bordering on certainty that Europe's embrace of the illusion of knowledge and the limited worldview of the leaders of NATO member states, which prevent their independence from the United States, will cause Europe to be trapped in a subordinate role even after Washington agrees with Moscow and Beijing on the governance of the newly emerging blocs, the festive menu and the direction of march to lunch without Europe.
I recall that President Putin thanked his colleague Trump for inviting him to join the Peace Council Charter signed in Davos, and told his Palestinian counterpart Mahmoud Abbas that Russia was ready to send the new organisation one billion dollars from assets frozen by the previous US administration.
That's why the reaction in the US to Trump's speech is not surprising: the Republicans are relieved, the Democrats are worried, and no one knows premiere Switzerland, nor the Czech basin and its president. Eight years ago Trump was flattered, six years ago he was seen as critical and this year he is showing his strength. Everyone who can will take a picture of him. If he wants, he'll stop and answer questions: Let's see what happens. Yes, we'll see when the time comes.
In the meantime, everyone needs to realize the new world order under American leadership. We live in a world where something means something in the morning and not in the evening, says Swiss Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis, not pretending: None of us are ready for a new era, not even President Trump. But everyone knows: There's no turning back. Yeah: There's no going back. That is why it is important to see how small countries like Switzerland, the Czech Republic or even Austria can protect themselves from the fact that only the law of the fist, the law of the strongest, applies.
I therefore recommend that you familiarize yourself with the 900-page strategy document Project 2025, published by the Heritage Foundation. The document is considered the ideological foundation of the second Trump administration and could potentially help answer the question: How to understand and deal with the dominator of Davos, President Trump? Since the author of this post is not a grandfather of all-knowledge, he offers to familiarize himself with the aforementioned document, co-authored by economist Diana Furchtgott-Roth, close to the White House, while emphasizing her independence from the government. The lady has worked for every Republican president in recent American history and predicts difficult economic times for Europe. No approval needed.
Jan Campbell
English 
Czech 
Spanish 
French 
Italian 
Russian 
Chinese 
German