Mark Leonard is the director and co-founder of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) and author of “Surviving Chaos: Geopolitics when the Rules Fail” (Polity Press April 2026). The international liberal order is ending. In fact, it may already be dead. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller said as much last week as he gloated over the U.S. intervention in Venezuela and the capture of dictator Nicolás Maduro: “We live in a world … that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power … These are the iron laws of the world.” But America’s 47th president is equally responsible for another death — that of the united West. And while Europe’s leaders have fallen over themselves to sugarcoat U.S. President Donald Trump’s illegal military operation in Venezuela and ignore his brazen demands on Greenland, Europeans themselves have already realized Washington is more foe than friend. This is one of the key findings of a poll conducted in November 2025 by my colleagues at the European Council on Foreign Relations and Oxford University’s Europe in a Changing World research project, based on interviews with 26,000 individuals in 21 countries. Only one in six respondents considered the U.S. to be an ally, while a sobering one in five viewed it as a rival or adversary. In Germany, France and Spain that number approaches 30 percent, and in Switzerland — which Trump singled out for higher tariffs — it’s as high as 39 percent. This decline in support for the U.S. has been precipitous across the continent. But as power shifts around the globe, perceptions of Europe have also started to change. With Trump pursuing an America First foreign policy, which often leaves Europe out in the cold, other countries are now viewing the EU as a sovereign geopolitical actor in its own right. This shift has been most dramatic in Russia, where voters have grown less hostile toward the U.S. Two years ago, 64 percent of Russians viewed the U.S. as an adversary, whereas today that number sits at 37 percent. Instead, they have turned their ire toward Europe, which 72 percent now consider either an advisory or a rival — up from 69 percent a year ago. Meanwhile, Washington’s policy shift toward Russia has also meant a shift in its Ukraine policy. And as a result, Ukrainians, who once saw the U.S. as their greatest ally, are now looking to Europe for protection. They’re distinguishing between U.S. and European policy, and nearly two-thirds expect their country’s relations with the EU to get stronger, while only one-third say the same about the U.S. Even beyond Europe, however, the single biggest long-term impact of Trump’s first year in office is how he has driven people away from the U.S. and closer to China, with Beijing’s influence expected to grow across the board. From South Africa and Brazil to Turkey, majorities expect their country’s relationship with China to deepen over the next five years. And in these countries, more respondents see Beijing as an ally than Washington. More specifically, in South Africa and India — two countries that have found themselves in Trump’s crosshairs recently — the change from a year ago is remarkable. At the end of 2024, a whopping 84 percent of Indians considered Trump’s victory to be a good thing for their country; now only 53 percent do. Of course, this poll was conducted before Trump’s intervention in Venezuela and before his remarks about taking over Greenland. But with even the closest of allies now worried about falling victim to a predatory U.S., these trends — of countries pulling away from the U.S. and toward China, and a Europe isolated from its transatlantic partner — are likely to accelerate. Meanwhile, Washington’s policy shift toward Russia has also meant a shift in its Ukraine policy. And as a result, Ukrainians, who once saw the U.S. as their greatest ally, are now looking to Europe for protection. | Joe Raedle/Getty Images All the while, confronted with Trumpian aggression but constrained by their own lack of agency, European leaders are stuck dealing with an Atlantic-sized chasm between their private reactions and what they allow themselves to say in public. The good news from our poll is that despite the reticence of their leaders, Europeans are both aware of the state of the world and in favor of a lot of what needs to be done to improve the continent’s position. As we have seen, they harbor no illusions about the U.S. under Trump. They realize they’re living in an increasingly dangerous, multipolar world. And majorities support boosting defense spending, reintroducing mandatory conscription, and even entertaining the prospect of a European nuclear deterrent. The rules-based order is giving way to a world of spheres of influence, where might makes right and the West is split from within. In such a world, you are either a pole with your own sphere of influence or a bystander in someone else’s. European leaders should heed their voters and ensure the continent belongs in the first category — not the second.

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Die SPD ringt sichtbar mit ihrem Führungsanspruch. Parteichefin und Arbeitsministerin Bärbel Bas schließt eine Kanzlerkandidatur 2029 für sich schon mal aus und löst damit Zweifel an Ambition, Rollenverständnis und strategischer Orientierung der Sozialdemokratie aus. Gordon Repinski analysiert, warum diese Aussage keine persönliche Zurückhaltung  ist und was sie über den aktuellen Zustand der SPD sagt. Im 200-Sekunden-Interview stellt sich der Parlamentarische Geschäftsführer der SPD-Fraktion Dirk Wiese den Fragen nach Richtung und Selbstverständnis seiner Partei. Es geht um Bürgergeld, Reformen, Sanktionen, Rentenfragen, die Energiepreise und um darum, ob die SPD noch auf Sieg spielt oder sich mit Verwaltung begnügt. Danach der Blick nach Sachsen-Anhalt. Beim IHK-Neujahrsempfang in Halle sendet Kanzler Friedrich Merz wirtschaftspolitische Signale, die in der Koalition noch für Diskussionen sorgen werden. Rasmus Buchsteiner ordnet ein, warum Merz dort über längeres Arbeiten, Steuerpolitik und das Heizungsgesetz spricht und wie groß die Nervosität der CDU mit Blick auf die starke AfD ist. Und: Donald Trumps Ansprüche auf Grönland lösen weitere Sorgen aus in Dänemark, aber auch für unerwartete wirtschaftliche Effekte mit einer ironischen Note. Den Spaziergang mit Ulrich Siegmund findet ihr zum Nachhören hier und das 200-Sekunden-Interview mit Sven Schulze zum Unvereinbarkeitsbeschluss hier. Die Machthaber-Folge, in der wir Giorgia Meloni porträtiert haben, gibt es hier.  Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor and a foreign affairs columnist at POLITICO Europe. Russia’s reaction to America’s gunboat diplomacy in Venezuela has been rather tame by the Kremlin’s standards, with a pro forma feel to it. The foreign ministry has come out with standard language, issuing statements about “blatant neocolonial threats and external armed aggression.” To be sure, it demanded the U.S. release the captured Nicolás Maduro, and the Deputy Chairman of Russia’s Security Council Dmitry Medvedev dubbed the whole business “unlawful” — but his remarks also contained a hint of admiration. Medvedev talked of U.S. President Donald Trump’s consistency and how he is forthrightly defending America’s national interests. Significantly, too, Russian President Vladimir Putin has yet to comment directly on the snatching of his erstwhile ally. Nor did the Kremlin miss a beat in endorsing former Vice President Delcy Rodriguez as Venezuela’s interim leader, doing so just two days after Maduro was whisked off to a jail cell in New York. Overall, one would have expected a much bigger reaction. After all, Putin’s alliance with Venezuela stretches back to 2005, when he embraced Maduro’s boss Hugo Chávez. The two countries signed a series of cooperation agreements in 2018; Russia sold Venezuela military equipment worth billions of dollars; and the relationship warmed up with provocative joint military exercises. “The unipolar world is collapsing and finishing in all aspects, and the alliance with Russia is part of that effort to build a multipolar world,” Maduro announced at the time. From 2006 to 2019, Moscow extended $17 billion in loans and credit to Venezuela. So why the current rhetorical restraint? Seems it may all be about bargaining — at least for the Kremlin. Moscow likely has no wish to rock the boat with Washington over Venezuela while it’s actively competing with Kyiv for Trump’s good graces. Better he lose patience with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and toss him out of the boat rather than Putin. Plus, Russia probably has zero interest in advertising a hitherto successful armed intervention in Ukraine that would only highlight its own impotence in Latin America and its inability to protect its erstwhile ally. Indeed, there are grounds to suspect the Kremlin must have found Maduro’s surgically executed removal and its stunning display of U.S. hard power quite galling. As POLITICO reported last week, Russia’s ultranationalists and hard-line militarists certainly did: “All of Russia is asking itself why we don’t deal with our enemies in a similar way,” posted neo-imperialist philosopher Aleksandr Dugin, counseling Russia to do it “like Trump, do it better than Trump. And faster.” Even Kremlin mouthpiece Margarita Simonyan conceded there was reason to “be jealous.” Indeed, there are grounds to suspect the Kremlin must have found Maduro’s surgically executed removal and its stunning display of U.S. hard power quite galling. | Boris Vergara/EPA From Russia’s perspective, this is an understandable sentiment — especially considering that Putin’s “special military operation” in Ukraine was likely conceived as a quick decapitation mission aimed at removing Zelenskyy and installing a pro-Kremlin satrap in his place. Four years on, however, there’s no end in sight. It’s essentially a demonstration of America’s military might that highlights the limits of Russia’s military effectiveness. So, why draw attention to it? However, according to Bobo Lo — former deputy head of the Australia mission in Moscow and author of “Russia and the New World Disorder” — there are other explanations for the rhetorical restraint. “Maduro’s removal is quite embarrassing but, let’s be honest, Latin America is the least important area for Russian foreign policy,” he said. Besides, the U.S. operation has “a number of unintended but generally positive consequences for the Kremlin. It takes the attention away from the conflict in Ukraine and reduces the pressure on Putin to make any concessions whatsoever. It legitimizes the use of force in the pursuit of vital national interests or spheres of influence. And it delegitimizes the liberal notion of a rules-based international order,” he explained. Fiona Hill, a Russia expert at the Brookings Institute who oversaw European and Russian affairs at the White House for part of Trump’s first term, echoed these thoughts: “Russia will simply exploit Trump’s use of force in Venezuela — and his determination to rule the country from afar — to argue that if America can be aggressive in its backyard, likewise for Russia in its ‘near abroad.’” Indeed, as far back as 2019, Hill told a congressional panel the Kremlin had signaled that when it comes to Venezuela and Ukraine, it would be ready to do a swap. This all sounds like two mob bosses indirectly haggling over the division of territory through their henchmen and actions. For the Kremlin, the key result of Venezuela is “not the loss of an ally but the consolidation of a new logic in U.S. foreign policy under the Trump administration — one that prioritizes force and national interests over international law,” noted longtime Putin opponent Mikhail Khodorkovsky’s New Eurasian Strategies Center. “For all the reputational damage and some minor immediate economic losses, the Kremlin has reason, on balance, to be satisfied with recent developments: Through his actions, Trump has, in effect, endorsed a model of world order in which force takes precedence over international law.” And since Maduro’s ouster, Trump’s aides have only made that clearer. While explaining why the U.S. needs to own Greenland, regardless of what Greenlanders, Denmark or anyone else thinks, influential White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller told CNN: “We live in a world … that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power.” Now that’s language Putin understands. Let the bargaining begin — starting with Iran.

Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen has ruled out selling the island to the U.S. at upcoming crunch talks in Washington. Greenlandic Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt and Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen are set to meet with U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio at the White House on Wednesday to discuss President Donald Trump’s threats to take over the island. Asked Tuesday if those discussions could see Greenland agreeing to a purchase offer from the U.S., Nielsen said: “The mere talk of being able to buy another people is disrespectful.” Trump has repeatedly voiced his desire to buy the self-ruling Danish territory, calling it a strategic imperative, and has not ruled out using other methods, including military action, if Greenland and Denmark refuse to make a deal. “It’s easier,” Trump said Sunday, referring to buying the island. “But one way or the other, we’re going to have Greenland.” Nielsen made the remarks during a joint press conference with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in Copenhagen and added that Greenlanders “choose Denmark,” vowing to stick together with the Danes. “We enter the room together,” he said. “We go out together, and we talk to the Americans together.” Frederiksen said “It has not been easy to stand up to completely unacceptable pressure from our closest allies for a lifetime. But there is much to suggest that the hardest part is still ahead of us.”

The foreign ministers of Denmark and Greenland will make their case against Donald Trump’s threats over the Arctic island when they meet U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday, according to an EU diplomat familiar with the plans. While the talks have been mooted for some days, there was no confirmation of the details. Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and Greenlandic Foreign Minister Vivian Motzfeldt will hold the discussions at the White House. The talks come after Trump ramped up his rhetoric on Greenland in a series of saber-rattling statements in recent days following his administration’s bombing raid on the Venezuelan capital and capture of leader Nicolás Maduro. In a sign of the increasing diplomatic activity, Motzfeldt and Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen will travel to Brussels on Monday for a meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte. Both Copenhagen and Greenland, a self-ruling Danish territory, have rejected Trump’s designs on the island, which he has repeatedly stated is vital to American security interests. “I’d love to make a deal with them. It’s easier. But one way or the other, we’re going to have Greenland,” Trump said aboard Air Force One on Sunday. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said that a U.S. invasion would lead to the end of NATO. European leaders have also pledged their support for Greenland’s right to self-determination, amid fears U.S. operation in Venezuela on Jan. 3 could embolden Trump to go after Greenland next.

The organizers of a traditional dog sled race in Greenland said they are investigating who sent an invitation to U.S. President Donald Trump’s special envoy to the island. The Greenland Dog Sledding Association (KNQK) published a statement on social media Tuesday saying an American journalist had informed them that Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry had been invited to its annual race. The association said it was “unacceptable that political pressure is being exerted from outside” and described “the participation of foreign political actors” as “wholly inappropriate,” adding it was conducting an “investigation” to find out who invited Landry. Trump last month appointed Landry, a Republican who has been in office since early 2024, to lead his efforts to take control of Greenland. Landry called the “volunteer position” an “honor” in a post on social media and said he would work to “make Greenland a part of the U.S.” Vice President JD Vance’s wife Usha was supposed to attend the dog sled race last year during an American tour of the island but canceled her participation after protests in the self-ruling Danish territory. Trump, who has claimed that controlling Greenland is a strategic imperative for the U.S. and Arctic security, recently mocked Copenhagen’s efforts to shore up the island’s defenses. “You know what their defense is? Two dog sleds,” he scoffed, apparently referencing Greenland’s dog sled patrols.

The leaders of the five political parties in Greenland’s parliament have a message for U.S. President Donald Trump: Leave us alone. “We do not want to be Americans, we do not want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,” the party leaders said in a joint statement Friday.  The statement comes after Trump has become increasingly explicit about his desire to take over Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory of the Kingdom of Denmark — a desire made more real by recent U.S. strikes in Venezuela.  “We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not, because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor,” Trump told reporters during an event at the White House on Friday. “I would like to make a deal the easy way, but if we don’t do it the easy way, we will do it the hard way,” he said. But the Greenlandic leaders pushed back, repeating their request to be left alone to manage their own affairs. “We would like to emphasize once again our desire for the U.S.’s disdain for our country to end,” they said. “The future of Greenland must be decided by the Greenlandic people.” They added that they have increased their “international participation” in recent years. “We must again call for that dialogue to continue to be based on diplomacy and international principles,” they said in the statement. Taking over Greenland would be relatively simple, according to officials and experts, though Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has warned that doing so would spell the end of NATO. Eight of Europe’s top leaders backed Greenland earlier this week, saying security in the Arctic must be achieved “collectively” and with full respect to the wishes of its people.

While U.S. President Donald Trump brashly cited the Monroe Doctrine to explain the capture of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro, he didn’t leave it there. He also underscored a crude tenet guiding his foreign adventures: “It’s important to make me happy,” he told reporters. Maduro had failed in that task after shunning a surrender order by Trump — hence, he was plucked in the dead of night by Delta Force commandos from his Caracas compound, and unceremoniously deposited at New York’s Metropolitan Detention Center. Yet despite the U.S. president’s admonishment about needing to be kept happy — an exhortation accompanied by teasing hints of possible future raids on the likes of Cuba, Colombia and Mexico — one continent has stood out in its readiness to defy him. Maduro’s capture has been widely denounced by African governments and the continent’s regional organizations alike. South Africa has been among the most outspoken, with its envoy to the U.N. warning that such actions left unpunished risk “a regression into a world preceding the United Nations, a world that gave us two brutal world wars, and an international system prone to severe structural instability and lawlessness.” Both the African Union, a continent-wide body comprising 54 recognized nations, and the 15-member Economic Community of West African States have categorically condemned Trump’s gunboat diplomacy as well. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni even had the temerity to issue a blunt dare to Washington: If American forces attempt the same trick in his country, he bragged, “we can defeat them” — a reversal of his 2018 bromance with the U.S. president, when he said he “loves Trump” because of his frankness. Africa’s forthrightness and unity over Maduro greatly contrasts with the more fractured response from Latin America, as well as the largely hedged responses coming from Europe, which is more focused on Trump’s coveting of Greenland.   Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni had the temerity to issue a blunt dare to Washington: If American forces attempt the same trick in his country, he bragged, “we can defeat them” | Badru Katumba/AFP via Getty Images Fearful of risking an open rift with Washington, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer waited 16 hours after Maduro and his wife were seized before gingerly stepping on a diplomatic tightrope, careful to avoid falling one way or the other. While highlighting his preference for observing international law, he said: “We shed no tears about the end of his regime.” Others similarly avoided incurring Trump’s anger, with Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis flatly saying now isn’t the right time to discuss Trump’s muscular methods — a position shared by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz. So, why haven’t African leaders danced to the same circumspect European tune? Partly because they have less to lose. Europe still harbors hope it can influence Trump, soften him and avoid an irreparable breach in the transatlantic alliance, especially when it comes to Greenland, suggested Tighisti Amare of Britain’s Chatham House. “With dramatic cuts in U.S. development funds to Africa already implemented by Trump, Washington’s leverage is not as strong as it once was. And the U.S. doesn’t really give much importance to Africa, unless it’s the [Democratic Republic of the Congo], where there are clear U.S. interests on critical minerals,” Amare told POLITICO. “In terms of trade volume, the EU remains the most important region for Africa, followed by China, and with the Gulf States increasingly becoming more important,” she added. Certainly, Trump hasn’t gone out of his way to make friends in Africa. Quite the reverse — he’s used the continent as a punching bag, delivering controversial remarks stretching back to his first term, when he described African nations as “shithole countries.” And there have since been rifts galore over travel bans, steep tariffs and the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is credited with saving millions of African lives over decades. U.S. President Donald Trump holds up a printed article from “American Thinker” while accusing South Africa President Cyril Ramaphosa of state-sanctioned violence against white farmers in South Africa. | Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images In May, Trump also lectured South African President Cyril Ramaphosa in the Oval Office over what he claimed amounted to genocide against white South Africans, at one point ordering the lights be dimmed to show clips of leaders from a South African minority party encouraging attacks on the country’s white population. Washington then boycotted the G20 summit hosted by South Africa in November, and disinvited the country from this year’s gathering, which will be hosted by the U.S. According to Amare, Africa’s denunciation of Maduro’s abduction doesn’t just display concern about Venezuela; in some part, it’s also fed by the memory of colonialism. “It’s not just about solidarity, but it’s also about safeguarding the rules that limit how powerful states can use force against more vulnerable states,” she said. African countries see Trump’s move against Maduro “as a genuine threat to international law and norms that protect the survival of the sovereignty of small states.” Indeed, African leaders might also be feeling their own collars tighten, and worrying about being in the firing line. “There’s an element of self-preservation kicking in here because some African leaders share similarities with the Maduro government,” said Oge Onubogu, director of the Africa Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “In some countries, people on the street and in even civil society have a different take, and actually see the removal of Maduro as a good thing.” The question is, will African leaders be wary of aligning with either Russian President Vladimir Putin or China’s Xi Jinping, now that Trump has exposed the impotence of friendship with either by deposing the Venezuelan strongman? According to Onubogu, even before Maduro’s ouster, African leaders understood the world order had changed dramatically, and that we’re back in the era of great power competition. “Individual leaders will make their own specific calculations based on what’s in their favor and their interests. I wouldn’t want to generalize and say some African countries might step back from engaging with China or Russia. They will play the game as they try to figure out how they can come out on top.”

Listen on * Spotify * Apple Music * Amazon Music Donald Trump stellt mit seinen Ansprüchen auf Grönland und seiner Sicherheitsstrategie zentrale Grundannahmen des NATO-Bündnisses infrage. In dieser Folge spricht Rixa Fürsen mit Stefanie Babst, langjährige NATO-Strategin, über den wachsenden Vertrauensverlust zwischen den Alliierten und die Frage, wie ernst die europäischen Partner die Drohungen aus Washington nehmen müssen. Babst erklärt, warum die nationale Sicherheitsstrategie der USA mehr ist als Rhetorik, weshalb Grönland für Trump strategisch so attraktiv ist und wie sehr der Schulterschluss mit Russland die NATO politisch aushöhlt. Im Mittelpunkt steht dabei die unbequeme Frage nach der Verlässlichkeit amerikanischer Sicherheitsgarantien für Europa. Das Berlin Playbook als Podcast gibt es jeden Morgen ab 5 Uhr. Gordon Repinski und das POLITICO-Team liefern Politik zum Hören – kompakt, international, hintergründig. Für alle Hauptstadt-Profis: Der Berlin Playbook-Newsletter bietet jeden Morgen die wichtigsten Themen und Einordnungen. Jetzt kostenlos abonnieren. Mehr von Host und POLITICO Executive Editor Gordon Repinski: Instagram: @gordon.repinski | X: @GordonRepinski. POLITICO Deutschland – ein Angebot der Axel Springer Deutschland GmbH Axel-Springer-Straße 65, 10888 Berlin Tel: +49 (30) 2591 0 information@axelspringer.de Sitz: Amtsgericht Berlin-Charlottenburg, HRB 196159 B USt-IdNr: DE 214 852 390 Geschäftsführer: Carolin Hulshoff Pol, Mathias Sanchez Luna

House Speaker Mike Johnson will travel to London later this month to address the United Kingdom’s Parliament, becoming the first sitting U.S. speaker to do so. Johnson announced his invitation on Wednesday, saying he was “honored and humbled” to accept the invite from Sir Lindsay Hoyle, speaker of the U.K. House of Commons, ahead of America’s 250th anniversary of independence. “The U.S. and the UK have stood together as pillars of peace and security across generations,” Johnson said in a statement. “We forged this important friendship in the great wars of the 20th century, but the true source of our strength comes from our shared commitment to individual freedom, human dignity, and the rule of law, which together form the exceptional, joint heritage of the English-speaking world.” Johnson’s address on Jan. 20 will be one of many ceremonial events the U.S. has planned to commemorate this year’s anniversary around the country. “As America begins its Semiquincentennial celebration, I will be happy to visit one of the great shrines of democracy itself, where the principles that launched the long struggle for American liberty were debated and refined,” Johnson added. Though Johnson will be the first sitting speaker to address Parliament, Hoyle said he was pleased to continue a tradition from 50 years ago, when his predecessor invited then-Speaker Carl Albert to London to mark the 200th anniversary. Doing so, Hoyle added, continues to “acknowledge the enduring close relationship between our parliaments and people.” “Our UK Parliament is sited just miles away from where the cross-Atlantic relationship began more than 400 years ago,” Hoyle said in a statement distributed by Johnson’s office. “The courage of the Founding Fathers, who set sail on the Mayflower for the New World, built a bridge and connections across the Atlantic, which continues until today.” POLITICO London Playbook previously reported that Johnson was expected to visit Parliament.