“Euro-gloom” is pervasive. It is encouraging that Europe’s business and political leaders are finally confronting the continent’s shared problems. The unintended consequence, however, is that they are also talking the European Union down.

Mood and morale can shape politics as powerfully as hard facts. Brussels’ effort to complete the single market and catch up with the digital revolution must therefore be matched by a more confident account of what Europe is, what it has achieved and what it can still become.

Europe has endured a difficult period, but Europeans need not resign themselves to a diminished global role. On the contrary, President Donald Trump’s destruction of America’s reputation and standing is creating the conditions for a bold new EU strategy.

The European Union now has an opportunity to build on its credibility as a longstanding architect of international rules and standards. It can help shape the “new world order” that many countries, unsettled by the collapse of old assumptions, are increasingly demanding.

China has long called for an overhaul of the institutions and agreements that emerged from the Bretton Woods conference near the end of World War II. Beijing and a host of developing countries, including many of tomorrow’s population giants, argue that the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and World Trade Organization, along with the United Nations and its agencies, remain tilted toward Western interests.

Those doubts have been compounded by Trump’s abandonment of longstanding U.S. commitments. Trust is evaporating not only in America’s security guarantees but also in the dollar’s role as the linchpin of international finance. The system Washington did so much to build is now being weakened by Washington itself.

No one can say when these fears and resentments will harden into a framework for negotiating global change. Today’s maelstrom of conflicts and economic friction, much of it aggravated by Trump, must first subside enough for cooler heads to prevail. Europe should prepare now for the moment when they do.

Before presenting its own proposals for a more equitable international order, however, Europe must project a stronger image of its achievements and resilience. Influence begins with credibility, and credibility is difficult to sustain when a continent appears unsure of its own worth.

If it hopes to bring an array of rich and poor nations toward a new global settlement, the EU must burnish its reputation and recover some of the lustre it enjoyed during the final quarter of the 20th century. Its success in knitting former enemies into a peaceful, prosperous and broadly progressive force was once admired around the world. That achievement has become so familiar to Europeans that they often fail to appreciate how extraordinary it remains.

Brussels has never mastered its image problem. The European Commission has traditionally pursued a “good news” approach to media relations, placing a positive gloss on detailed dossiers and policy announcements. Yet it is the wider sweep of Europe’s experience, including the scale of the problems no member state could solve alone, that best demonstrates the EU’s raison d’être and rebuts the familiar slur that it is merely an unelected bureaucracy.

To present a more convincing account of its accomplishments, the EU needs an information strategy that reassures Europeans that their stubborn structural problems are being addressed. Equally important, it must persuade audiences beyond the continent that Europe remains a consequential political and economic force.

More capable communicators than the eurocrats could make much of Europe’s strengths. Inward investment is surging. European stock markets and equities are outperforming many of their counterparts elsewhere. Breakthroughs in pure science could help overcome the continent’s technological shortcomings. The euro’s appeal as a safe haven is growing, while Europe’s pre-eminence in humanitarian assistance and development aid remains unmatched. These are not the attributes of a continent condemned to irrelevance.

So what should be done? The European Commission is already grappling with a crowded list of urgent problems and cannot easily divert personnel and resources. It could nevertheless establish two task forces: one devoted to more imaginative and effective public communication, and another charged with opening a discreet worldwide consultation on reforming the leading international institutions.

No one should expect immediate results. There is no magic wand for objectives this ambitious or long-term. But Brussels plainly needs to widen its focus in both areas. On communications, the Commission has never fully understood that domestic commentators shape public opinion far more than the EU-accredited press corps does. Nor has it grasped that regional and local news organizations often enjoy unrivaled credibility with their audiences, even as Brussels shamefully neglects them.

In shaping new global frameworks, meanwhile, the EU should listen rather than lecture. Demographic upheaval is redrawing the geopolitical landscape, and Europe could help assemble a mosaic of the needs, grievances and ambitions of countries around the world. Its most persuasive asset in that diplomatic undertaking is the international trust still invested in Europe’s commitment to the rule of law.

That trust should not be mistaken for permanent goodwill. It must be renewed through action, imagination and a willingness to treat other countries as partners in reform rather than students of a European model. But at a moment when the United States is discarding much of the authority it accumulated over eight decades, Europe has a rare opening. The question is whether it can overcome its own gloom long enough to seize it.