Europe’s Bold Defence Initiative: A Response to New Threats

Europe is setting forth on a significant spending initiative, reminiscent of the nearly trillion-euro response crafted during the Covid pandemic. As we navigate this new phase, the rhetoric surrounding this endeavor evokes the existential threat the pandemic once posed.

This time, however, the looming threat comes from Russia. “There is an intelligence assessment that Russia will test EU defences within three to five years,” remarked a senior EU official, underscoring the seriousness of the situation.

Concerns are also growing regarding Donald Trump’s potential decision to withdraw the U.S. from NATO. The urgency today is driven not by a pandemic, but by both an unholy partnership between Trump and Vladimir Putin and the geopolitical tensions that arise from it.

The EU’s Defence White Paper

The EU’s White Paper on Defence outlines three critical objectives: supporting Ukraine during its darkest hour, fortifying its defenses to deter potential re-invasions by Russia, and restoring Europe’s depleted military stocks to guard against Kremlin ambitions in Eastern Europe. Additionally, it is essential to prepare for the possibility of a U.S. withdrawal from Europe.

Kaja Kallas, the EU’s foreign policy chief, asserted, “If we invest enough in defence, if we build our capabilities, then it will also deter aggressors from attacking us. If we don’t do that, weakness invites aggressors to attack.” This sentiment encapsulates the current European resolve to strengthen its military posture.

A Watershed Moment

This marks a pivotal moment for Europe. After years of criticism—much of it unfounded—from Donald Trump regarding Europe’s reliance on U.S. security, there exists a growing consensus that Europe must reverse decades of declining defense budgets and over-dependence on the United States.

The White Paper proposes an impressive budget of up to €800 billion in new spending over the next five years. In tandem, an Anglo-French coalition aims to deploy a “reassurance force” on the ground in a post-ceasefire Ukraine.

Germany has recently changed its debt regulations to allow substantial borrowing for defense and infrastructure, while reports indicate that Europe’s major military powers are committed to shouldering the bulk of NATO’s responsibilities to discourage Trump from unilaterally stepping back.

Prospects and Skepticism

Following discussions among G7 national security advisors, EU officials emerged surprisingly optimistic after the Trump-Putin phone call and the subsequent conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Significant was the conversation around halting attacks on energy infrastructure and activities over the Black Sea—both critical for restoring Ukraine’s maritime access to Asian markets.

While there have been recent exchanges of hundreds of prisoners—a “good day for Ukraine,” as one senior EU figure put it—doubt remains regarding Putin’s true intentions. He has offered only minimal concessions, such as refraining from attacking energy infrastructure, while maintaining demands for Ukraine’s unconditional surrender.

The sentiment among analysts is palpable. “Trump holds many cards,” stated Rafael Loss, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR). “The past few weeks have shown he is prepared to use them against Ukraine, but not to make Russia shift from its maximalist demands.”

Business Interests and Ukraine

Trump’s keen interest in business deals appears to align with Moscow’s outlook. As Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s economic envoy, recently noted, “American companies lost over $300 billion by leaving the Russian market,” hinting at potential opportunities for joint ventures with Russian firms. This dual interest complicates Europe’s stance, which remains committed to re-arming amidst the uncertainty.

Investing in Defence

The EU aims to address notable gaps in military capabilities, including air defense, precision missiles, drones, and artillery. Recognizing the substantial nature of the required investments, the EU will introduce the SAFE loans program, providing up to €150 billion over five years to member states needing financial support.

Notably, EU leaders, except for Hungary’s Viktor Orbán, strongly believe that a Russian victory in Ukraine could lead to threats against EU member states within five years.

One senior EU source reflected on the dramatic and diverse hybrid attacks from Russia, emphasizing the urgent need for a comprehensive defense strategy. “We were accustomed to cyberattacks and energy blackmail,” the source explained. “Now, we’re facing hybrid assaults on our physical infrastructure, like undersea cables.” This underscores the need for European citizens to understand the implications behind increased defense spending—a conversation that must begin now.

Unnerving Divisions

Even as the EU speaks of unity, old fractures re-emerged during recent summits, driven partly by long-standing financial disagreements and varying geographical proximities to Russia. Countries like Greece, France, Spain, and Italy are advocating for Eurobonds, arguing that the proposed spending options would only deepen their debt. Conversely, northern states such as the Netherlands and Sweden resist this idea.

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez articulated this stance, emphasizing a broader definition of security that encompasses migration and climate change, rather than strict defense considerations. “Our threat is not a Russia crossing the Pyrenees but in cyberattacks and terrorism,” he noted.

Challenges in Ukraine’s Support

As Kaja Kallas attempts to secure €40 billion for immediate military support to Ukraine, she faces resistance. Trump’s abrupt halt to military aid has left Ukraine particularly vulnerable. There is a perception that some European nations—like Denmark—are contributing disproportionately compared to larger countries like Italy and France.

Ultimately, Kallas’s proposal to provide €5 billion for military ammunition has struggled to find traction. Only a consensus-driven contribution from Ireland was assured, amounting to €315 million based on EU redistribution keys.

The ultimate prospect for Ireland includes funding directed toward Ukraine’s defense industry, training de-mining battalions, enhancing cybersecurity, and procuring non-lethal military equipment. As Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha articulated, they seek assistance across several operational domains, including air defense.

Looking Ahead

Taoiseach Micheál Martin expressed Ireland’s supportive stance toward the EU’s proposals, yet questions linger regarding potential benefits from the anticipated billions in soft loans, especially for fortifying undersea cables amid growing Russian military interests.

Amid debates surrounding military spending and national neutrality, some caution arises over the implications of European rearmament policies. As noted by MEP Lynn Boylan, the EU has channeled vast resources for rearmament while community funding and climate change measures have languished.

Final Thoughts

The need for cohesive action in the face of rising threats cannot be overstated. As Nicu Popescu from the ECFR pointed out, “Any slight hesitation or failure to react with complete unanimity to defend every inch of EU territory would have catastrophic consequences.” It is witness to dramatic shifts occurring in Europe’s geopolitical landscape, necessitating decisive and collaborative measures amidst an era of uncertainty.

What once seemed improbable—a potent military alliance among European states against a common foe—might just be the reality we face today. Now, more than ever, unity and resolve will shape the future of Europe, as it grapples with emerging threats both seen and unseen.