London — Britain’s ability to influence global affairs has fallen to its weakest point in centuries, according to analysts, as the United States under Donald Trump increasingly acts unilaterally on security, energy and geopolitics, paying little heed to its traditional European allies.
Recent US actions — including moves involving Greenland, Venezuela and Iran — have highlighted how marginal Britain and Western Europe have become in Washington’s strategic calculations. Officials in London have struggled to shape outcomes or even secure meaningful consultation, reinforcing perceptions that Britain’s leverage over the US has sharply diminished.
Experts argue that this shift reflects long-term structural decline rather than any single administration. Western Europe’s post-war dominance, they say, has been eroded by decades of lower defence spending, demographic stagnation, economic regulation and reduced appetite for hard power. Britain, once a central partner in US-led global interventions, now plays a far smaller role.
Military capacity has been a key factor. Since the end of the Cold War, Britain has significantly reduced troop numbers, naval strength and industrial defence capacity. In contrast to earlier eras — such as the Falklands War in 1982 or the Gulf conflicts of 1991 and 2003, when the UK deployed tens of thousands of troops — current force levels would struggle to sustain a comparable operation.
The US, meanwhile, has consolidated its dominance across multiple fronts. It is now the world’s largest oil producer, a leader in artificial intelligence, space technology and advanced weapons systems, and home to the world’s most powerful financial and technology firms. Analysts note that Silicon Valley, Wall Street and the Pentagon’s defence-industrial base now outstrip all Western European equivalents combined.
Britain and Europe also face growing technological and financial dependence on the US. Dollar-denominated transactions, digital payment systems, cloud data storage and military supply chains are largely US-controlled. Any disruption to these systems would pose severe challenges for European economies and armed forces.
Energy policy has further exposed vulnerabilities. Britain’s failure to expand domestic gas production, delay in nuclear construction and reliance on imported liquefied natural gas — much of it from the US — have reduced energy security and increased costs. Similar challenges affect much of continental Europe, particularly following the loss of Russian energy supplies.
Economically, Britain has slipped down global rankings. Once the world’s richest nation, it now sits around 35th in GDP per capita on a purchasing power parity basis. While London retains strengths in finance, intelligence and artificial intelligence research, analysts say these are insufficient to offset broader industrial and technological decline.
International law and multilateral institutions, long used by European states to amplify influence, are also seen as less effective. Observers note that such frameworks carried weight when backed by credible military and economic power — something Europe increasingly lacks.
Relations with Washington now depend heavily on US interests rather than alliance sentiment. While British leaders continue to emphasise the “special relationship”, US officials appear focused primarily on domestic priorities and core strategic regions, with Europe viewed as a security consumer rather than a partner.
Some commentators have dismissed proposals to weaken NATO or distance Britain from the US as unrealistic, arguing that European states lack the capacity to defend themselves independently. France and Britain’s nuclear deterrents, they say, are no substitute for US military power.
Policy specialists suggest that Britain faces stark choices. Rejoining the European Union is widely viewed as unlikely to reverse the trend, given the EU’s own economic and strategic challenges. Instead, analysts argue that Britain would need to pursue radical domestic reform to regain influence.
Proposals include raising defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP, expanding troop numbers, accelerating procurement reform and investing in missile defence, cyber warfare and autonomous systems. Funding such measures would likely require significant reductions in welfare spending, pension guarantees and non-essential public programmes.
Energy reform is also seen as central, with calls to abandon net-zero targets, liberalise energy production, expand nuclear capacity and reduce taxes on domestic oil and gas extraction. Supporters argue that cheaper, more reliable energy is essential for economic revival and industrial competitiveness.
Whether such measures are politically feasible remains uncertain. But analysts agree on one point: without a significant increase in military strength, economic resilience and technological capacity, Britain’s ability to shape global events is likely to continue to decline.
Create Your Own Website With Webador