European politicians and policymakers are busy preparing for more American protectionism regardless of who emerges as the next leader of the White House after elections next week.

The presidential race has remained a dead heat going into its final few days, with polling consistently rating the candidates, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump, as being tied within key battleground states and across the country.

“Whoever wins will be ‘America first’,” a senior European diplomat, who did not want to be named due to the sensitive nature of the transatlantic relationship, told CNBC last week.

“The main concern for the Americans is the economy, and the answer will have to be more economic nationalism — I don’t agree with it, but I don’t see any way around that,” said the senior diplomat, who takes part in confidential talks among the EU leaders.

The comments come after a warning from German Finance Minister Christian Lindner, who on Friday told CNBC there could be retaliation if the U.S. kicked off a trade war with the European Union.

“In that case, we need diplomatic efforts to convince whoever enters the White House that it’s not in the best interest of the U.S. to have a trade conflict with [the] European Union,” he said at the IMF annual meetings in Washington, D.C.

Trade with the United States is extremely important for European nations. The EU and the U.S. have the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship in the world, which reached an all-time high of 1.2 trillion euros ($1.29 trillion) in 2021, according to data from the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU.

Harris is seen, to some extent, as likely to continue current President Joe Biden’s policies, which in economic terms will be remembered in Europe by the Inflation Reduction Act — a sweeping U.S. legislation totaling $369 billion which targets climate and energy policies. The IRA upset many European leaders due to its perceived protectionist nature.

The “America first” policy is likely to have more repercussions for European economies under a Republican presidency. Trump has threatened to impose additional across-the-board tariffs of 10% on European products, which could put a strain on the bloc’s exporters and, according to data from Goldman Sachs, weaken the euro by as much as 10%.

Trump’s first tenure at the White House was a challenging time for some European leaders, who expressed their dislike for the former president’s style and confrontational tone. The two sides often had differing views on trade, defense and technology — among others.

“Trump cannot surprise us anymore, we know how to handle it, we have had to deal with him before,” the anonymous senior diplomat also told CNBC.

A second EU official, who also requested not to be named due to the sensitive nature of the U.S. relationship, told CNBC: “There’s no panic. We are being very pragmatic, but of course we have to prepare for both scenarios.”

The same official added that the European Commission is working on “bold” initiatives regardless of who becomes the next president.

CNBC reported in May 2023 how European officials were already quietly preparing for the possibility of a return of Trump. This meant a focus on cutting dependencies with the U.S. and with China — something that EU leaders continue to target.

In an October statement, the 27 heads of state of the EU called for “more efforts to enhance the Union’s competitiveness, strengthen its economic resilience, secure its industrial renewal and achieve the full potential of the Single Market.”

“It highlights the urgency of taking effective action,” the statement added.

The Washington Post said Friday that it will not endorse a candidate in the presidential election this year — or ever again — breaking decades of tradition and sparking immediate criticism of the decision.

But the newspaper also published an article by two staff reporters revealing that editorial page staffers had drafted an endorsement of Democratic nominee Kamala Harris over GOP nominee Donald Trump in the election.

“The decision not to publish was made by The Post’s owner — Amazon founder Jeff Bezos,” the article said, citing two sources briefed on the events.

Trump, while president, had been critical of the billionaire Bezos and the Post, which he purchased in 2013.

The newspaper in 2016 and again in 2020 endorsed Trump’s election opponents, Hillary Clinton and President Joe Biden, in editorials that condemned the Republican in blunt terms.

In a 2019 lawsuit, Amazon claimed it had lost a $10 billion cloud computing contract with the Pentagon to Microsoft because Trump had used “improper pressure … to harm his perceived political enemy” Bezos.

The Post since 1976 had regularly endorsed candidates for president, except for the 1988 race. All those endorsements had been for Democrats.

In a statement to CNBC, when asked about Bezos’ purported role in killing the endorsement, Post chief communications officer Kathy Baird said, “This was a Washington Post decision to not endorse, and I would refer you to the publisher’s statement in full.”

The Post on Friday evening published a third article, signed by opinion columnists for the newspaper, who said, “The Washington Post’s decision not to make an endorsement in the presidential campaign is a terrible mistake.”

“It represents an abandonment of the fundamental editorial convictions of the newspaper that we love, and for which we have worked a combined 218 years,” the column said. “This is a moment for the institution to be making clear its commitment to democratic values, the rule of law and international alliances, and the threat that Donald Trump poses to them — the precise points The Post made in endorsing Trump’s opponents in 2016 and 2020.”

CNBC has requested comment from Amazon, where Bezos remains the largest shareholder.

Post publisher and chief executive Will Lewis, in an article published online explaining the decision, wrote, “The Washington Post will not be making an endorsement of a presidential candidate in this election. Nor in any future presidential election.”

“We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates,” Lewis wrote.

“We recognize that this will be read in a range of ways, including as a tacit endorsement of one candidate, or as a condemnation of another, or as an abdication of responsibility,” he wrote.

“That is inevitable. We don’t see it that way. We see it as consistent with the values The Post has always stood for and what we hope for in a leader: character and courage in service to the American ethic, veneration for the rule of law, and respect for human freedom in all its aspects.”

Seven of the 13 paragraphs of Lewis’ article either quoted at length or referred to Post Editorial Board statements in 1960 and 1972 explaining the paper’s rationale for not endorsing presidential candidates in those years, which included its identity as “an independent newspaper.”

Lewis noted that the paper had endorsed Jimmy Carter in 1976 “for understandable reasons at the times” — which he did not identify.

“But we had it right before that, and this is what we are going back to,” Lewis wrote.

“Our job as the newspaper of the capital city of the most important country in the world is to be independent,” he wrote. “And that is what we are and will be.”

Post editor-at-large Robert Kagan, a member of the paper’s opinions section, resigned following the decision, multiple news outlets reported.

More than 10,000 reader comments were posted on Lewis’ article, many of them blasting the Post for its decision and saying they were canceling their subscriptions.

“The most consequential election in our country, a choice between Fascism and Democracy, and you sit out? Cowards. Unethical, fearful cowards,” wrote one comment. “Oh, and by the way, I’m canceling my subscription, because you are putting business ahead of ethics and morals.”

The announcement came days after Mariel Garza, the head of The Los Angeles Times‘ editorial board, resigned in protest after that paper’s owner, Patrick Soon-Shiong, decided against running a presidential endorsement.

“I am resigning because I want to make it clear that I am not okay with us being silent,” Garza told the Columbia Journalism Review. “In dangerous times, honest people need to stand up. This is how I’m standing up.”

Soon-Shiong, like Bezos, is a billionaire.

Marty Baron, the former editor of The Washington Post, called that paper’s decision “cowardice, with democracy as its casualty.”

″@realdonaldtrump will see this as an invitation to further intimidate owner @jeffbezos (and others),” Baron wrote. “Disturbing spinelessness at an institution famed for courage.”

The Washington Post Guild, the union that represents the newspaper’s staff, in a statement posted on the social media site X said it was “deeply concerned that The Washington Post — an American news institution in the nation’s capital — would make a decision to no longer endorse presidential candidates, especially a mere 11 days ahead of an immensely consequential election.”

“The message from our chief executive, Will Lewis — not from the Editorial Board itself — makes us concerned that management interfered with the work of our members in Editorial,” the Guild said in the statement, which noted the paper’s reporting about Bezos’ role in the decision.

“We are already seeing cancellations from once loyal readers,” the Guild said. “This decision undercuts the work of our members at a time when we should be building our readers’ trust, not losing it.”

Former Post reporters Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, whose stories about the Watergate break-in during the Nixon administration won the newspaper a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, in a statement said, “We respect the traditional independence of the editorial page, but this decision 11 days out from the 2024 presidential election ignores the Washington Post’s own overwhelming reportorial evidence on the threat Donald Trump poses to democracy.”

“Under Jeff Bezos’s ownership, the Washington Post’s news operation has used its abundant resources to rigorously investigate the danger and damage a second Trump presidency could cause to the future of American democracy and that makes this decision even more surprising and disappointing, especially this late in the electoral process,” Woodward and Bernstein said.

Post columnist Karen Attiah, in a post on the social media site Threads, wrote, “Today has been an absolute stab in the back.”

“What an insult to those of us who have literally put our careers and lives on the line to call out threats to human rights and democracy,” Attiah wrote.

Rep. Ted Lieu, a Democrat from California, in his own tweet on the news wrote, “The first step towards fascism is when the free press cowers in fear.”

Trump in August told Fox Business News that Bezos called him after the Republican narrowly escaped an assassination attempt in July at a campaign rally in western Pennsylvania.

“He was very nice even though he owns The Washington Post,” Trump said of Bezos.

Bezos last posted on X on July 13, hours after the assassination attempt.

“Our former President showed tremendous grace and courage under literal fire tonight,” Bezos wrote in that tweet. “So thankful for his safety and so sad for the victims and their families.”

Trump on Friday met in Austin, Texas, with executives from the Bezos-owned space exploration company Blue Origin, among them CEO David Limp, the Associated Press reported