At the latest since US Vice President JD Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference, European leaders are reacting hastily to decisions of the US government regarding the war in Ukraine and transatlantic military cooperation. After years of delay and procrastination, once again, what Jean Monnet taught us about the European Union seems to be confirmed: “Europe will be forged in crises and will be the sum of the solutions adopted for those crises”.
Europeans realise that the US’s security umbrella, a cornerstone of what was hitherto called ‘the West’, might not automatically be extended to the union and its member countries anymore. Europe itself will have to make more resolute provisions for its protection, security and peace.
While the geostrategic pressure is undeniable, a unified EU response has yet to be achieved. Well-known political fault lines, national interests and strategic cultures question EU unity on defence matters. And for many member states, defence planning and capability development without the US is hard to imagine.
The European Commission reacted swiftly, and with the recent push of an 800 million ‘ReArm EU’ programme it boosts national financing of armaments with EU tools (fiscal rules, EU loans, EIB and cohesion policy) by making them more flexible at the same time. But with this, the Union enters a different dimension of spending and decisions taken now will have long-term impacts.
Therefore, they should be based on sound assessments instead of shocks and hysteria. The Union should avoid jumping the gun under pressure. For Progressive Europeanists the path chosen cannot be a simple militarisation of the Union. The challenge is far more complex: it is about reconciling Europe’s self-perception and global image as a peace project and a successful soft power with a profile as a credible defence and security provider able to deter potential aggressors.
In this dossier, the Progressive Post addresses the manifold challenges the new security situation has left the EU in.
