A leading conservative think tank closely associated with U.S. President Donald Trump’s second-term policy agenda has publicly argued that dismantling the European Union is in the interest of both the United States and Europe. 

In comments to the Dutch current-affairs program Nieuwsuur, Nile Gardiner, director of the European branch of the Heritage Foundation, said he saw “no future scenario” in which Europe would be better off with the EU than without it. 

The remarks mark one of the clearest public endorsements yet by a Trump-aligned policy figure for ending the European project altogether.

The Heritage Foundation is widely regarded as a key intellectual driver of Trump’s second-term agenda through its “Project 2025” policy framework. 

Gardiner’s statements therefore go beyond academic critique, signaling how parts of Washington’s conservative policy ecosystem view the EU not as a partner to be reformed, but as an institution to be dismantled. 

His comments were published on December 23, following earlier criticism of Europe voiced in February by U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance.

Sovereignty, Migration, and Tech Regulation

Gardiner framed his opposition to the EU around sovereignty, free speech, and migration. 

He argued that the EU concentrates too much power at the expense of member states and suppresses dissenting political movements, particularly nationalist and right-wing parties. 

He cited what he described as “deep-rooted concerns” in Washington over restrictions on freedom of expression within the EU and portrayed Brussels as disconnected from public opinion.

A central grievance highlighted by Gardiner was EU regulation of U.S. technology companies. 

He pointed to fines totaling 120 million euros imposed by the European Commission on the social media platform X for violations of EU internet law. 

According to Gardiner, such penalties amount to “attacks on American tech companies” and undermine U.S. security interests. 

He also accused the EU of enabling mass migration and weakening national identities, warning of increased Islamic influence in Europe—claims that reflect broader narratives promoted by U.S. and European far-right movements.

Reaction from European institutions was cautious but increasingly critical. 

Michael O’Flaherty, the EU’s commissioner for human rights, urged Europeans to show courage in the face of American criticism. 

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was more direct, calling the idea of dismantling the EU “unacceptable and indefensible.” 

The chair of the European Parliament committee responsible for U.S. relations described the Heritage-linked security strategy as a “frontal attack on the EU” and warned that it amounted to interference in European democratic processes.

At the same time, some European right-wing politicians welcomed elements of the U.S. critique. 

Dutch MEP Mieke Andriese of the PVV described the American position as a “clear strategic warning for Europe,” particularly on migration. 

Sander Smit of the BBB party said he did not support abolishing the EU but agreed that the bloc suffers from democratic deficits, declining legitimacy, and excessive bureaucracy. 

These reactions highlight how U.S. ideological pressure intersects with existing divisions inside Europe.

Gardiner explicitly linked EU integration to U.S. security interests, arguing that efforts to turn the EU into a defense actor undermine NATO by diverting military resources. 

“NATO will hopefully exist for centuries,” he said, while predicting the EU would ultimately disappear. 

He added that the Trump administration supports nationalist and sovereigntist movements in Europe that favor greater self-determination, naming leaders in Italy, Poland, and France as political allies, while denying that U.S. support involved financial backing.

The stance has also fueled internal controversy within the Heritage Foundation itself. 

Around 15 staff members reportedly left the organization in recent weeks amid ideological disputes, including disagreements over ending support for Ukraine and Trump’s tariff policies.