Sometimes, an image is stronger than words. Donald Trump’s disastrous first trip abroad was full of strong images: his holding on to an illuminated globe in Saudi Arabia as though he was evoking evil spirits, his grinning posture next to a Pope who appeared to wish to be somewhere else, his wife’s refusal to hold his hand, his shoving the Prime Minister of Montenegro out of the way at the NATO meeting in Brussels.

But the picture that may have the longest lasting power is one that does not show him at all. It is the picture of six of the G-7 leaders strolling through Sicily. Trump is absent from that picture because, reportedly, he lacked the stamina to walk with them. Instead, he waited for a golf cart to pick him up and drive him the 700 yards to catch up with the group. (Note that the picture appears to include Donald Tusk, who, together with Jean-Claude Juncker, represents the EU. Shinzo Abe seems to be missing from the picture, too.)

The 6 sane G7 leaders.

Gee, who's missing 🤔 pic.twitter.com/XehQVFkuiq — Amy Siskind (@Amy_Siskind) May 27, 2017

Fourteen years ago, then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld scoffed at what he called “old Europe.” No better refutation of the criticism can be imagined than that image of the 70 year old Trump in a golf cart, following the pack. Trump has been relentless in putting down his opponents, from Jeb Bush to Hillary Clinton, as “weak” and “low energy;” he must be aware how this projection now comes back to haunt him now.

The problem is not merely that he turns out to be as low on energy as one would expect from a jetlagged man in his eighth decade who refuses to exercise. The problem is that he represents a United States that has become old, too, that has run out of new ideas and therefore tries to revive the old ones: a manufacturing industry, a racist society, a religious sectarianism, an isolationist country. Trump’s America tries to hold on to a past that it cannot bring back, because it is scared of the present, let alone the future.

Rumsfeld’s quote of “old Europe” was catchy enough to be remembered, but it is worth recalling the context in which it was made: the European refusal of support for the Iraq war. History has proven Europe right on this, and Rumsfeld wrong. And now, somewhat surprisingly, it is Europe, together with Canada, that looks young and energetic. It boasts of a mix of charismatic rock star leaders (Trudeau in Canada, Macron in Paris) and seasoned politicians (Juncker, Merkel), who have, despite their age, demonstrated their toughness in reality, instead of merely tweeting about it.

The United States may well be losing its place in this world. Remarkably, one of these seasoned politicians, Angela Merkel of Germany, has made a statement that is beginning to make people shiver, both in the United States and abroad:

“The times in which we could completely depend on others are, to a certain extent, over … I’ve experienced that in the last few days. We Europeans have to take fate into our own hands.”

It is hard to overestimate the importance of this statement, from a politician known to weigh her words carefully. The European-American alliance has been, through thick and thin, thought of as a given for the postwar period. The United States (though not all by itself) saved Europe from the catastrophe of fascism, and it guaranteed Europe’s survival at the time of the Cold War. Suggestions of breaking up this alliance, especially from a centrist politician like Merkel, were unthinkable until quite recently.

But of course, such suggestions were unthinkable also before Donald Trump publicly cheered opponents of the European Union like Nigel Farage and Vladimir Putin, and refused to reiterate his country’s commitment to the NATO treaty. And there is nothing natural about the Western alliance. It was founded at a certain time, it could end at a certain time. Maybe that time is now.

Not necessarily, of course. At this stage, Merkel’s statement is little more than a calculated provocation. Europe cannot really be interested in a dissolution of the Western alliance, which has served both the United States and Europe, as well as other allies in North America, Asia and beyond. But her suggestion is that Europe does not depend on this alliance at all costs—that it could go without it if forced to do so. And it might well do so unless the White House comes up with a reassuring response. It remains to be seen whether anyone at the White House realizes the urgency of the situation.

This is no reason to cheer. A lot is problematic about this new West without the United States. Trudeau has yet to demonstrate how he stands up under pressure. Macron may still hide a cruel neoliberalism behind his winning smile. Merkel bears responsibility for the standoff with Greece in the financial crisis, and the remarkable admiration she is now gaining from left-of-center newspapers around the world stands in marked contrast to the ambivalent feelings she faces in her home country. At the moment, what holds these politicians together, is mostly who they are against: the new nationalism that emerged with Brexit and Trump and was kept at bay, for the time being, in France. At some point, they will have to show more.

And they very well may. What is remarkable is how Trump seems eager to make sure that the United States will have no say in the future of the new world, a world that is forming among countries not following the isolationism of the UK and the United States. The US President who wants to make “America First” ended up putting it in last place, unable to follow the pace of leaders of other countries. It is high time for the United States to get off Trump’s golf cart and start catching up .