After the already famous Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky dispute in the oval office, transatlantic relationships are biting. In the days after the meeting, Trump has cut all military aid to Ukraine, leaving Europe to the perspective of similar treatment in the near future.
The European nations, including the United Kingdom, have shown unity immediately after, with a summit quickly convened in the United Kingdom and strong financial commitments both to defend Ukraine and to “rearm” Europe.
Citizens widely support this change towards militarization. In a recent Eurobarometer survey, 79 % of respondents supported greater cooperation in defense at the European Union level (EU), and 65 % agreed that defense spending should be increased.
However, the implementation of a new defense strategy will involve answering many difficult questions. For example, if an EU defense force would involve all Member States and potential roles of EU antagonistic members such as Hungary and Slovakia (both pro-trump and pro-russia) and those of NATO members not belonging to the EU such as the United Kingdom, Norway or even Canada.
The questions about who would lead such an initiative are also in the air. Currently, the newly chosen Chancellor of Germany, Friedrich Merz, is leading the burden with his appeals to “achieve the independence of the United States.”
As the largest economy in the block, Germany would finance by default a significant amount of any European defense force, but this reflects a paradigm shift in the defense panorama of the continent. Six decades ago, a military union would have been unthinkable, since France firmly opposed the German rearmament throughout the twentieth century.
Even at the end of the Cold War in 1990, nuclear non -proliferation was a condition for the reunification of Germany. As things are, France and the United Kingdom are the only nuclear powers in Europe; Much of the continent nuclear deterrence power takes the form of American nuclear missiles parked throughout its territory.
A European NATO without the US?
Currently, NATO has 32 members, including all EU member states except the neutral countries of Austria, Cyprus, Ireland and Malta. Other European NATO members are the United Kingdom, Norway, Iceland, Albania, Montenegro and Türkiye, together with the USA and Canada.
A European defense effort would most likely use NATO as a framework, but without the active participation of the United States. This would mean that all EU member states would also be included in NATO, with the support of Canada and members of the organization not belonging to the EU, such as the United Kingdom and, potentially, Turkey. In this way an intergovernmental approach to European defense would be maintained and the United States dependence would be reduced.
However, to replace the role of the United States, it would be necessary for other NATO members to take a step forward. NATO military planners assume that, in case of a Russian attack on a European country of the organization, the 100,000 American soldiers in Europe would be quickly reinforced with up to 200,000 additional American soldiers, supported by other NATO members and US strategic assets.
A credible European deterrence, which could prevent, for example, a rapid Russian incursion into the Baltic countries, would need a minimum of 1,400 tanks, 2,000 infantry combat vehicles and 700 pieces of artillery. This is more combat power than currently exists in the combined land forces of France, Germany, Italy and Great Britain.
In addition, Europe would have to develop aviation, transportation, missiles, war with drones, communication and intelligence, while recruiting and training 300,000 new troops to replace US troops.
Financial commitment to the defense of the EU
Defending Europe without the United States will mean a great expense, and the European Commission has committed to do so.
The recently announced Package Europe includes a five -part plan to raise almost 800 billion euros. It will reinforce the European defense industry and improve military capacities, and provide urgent military support to Ukraine after the suspension of US aid. The proposed measures, presented on March 4, include a greater fiscal margin for investments in defense, 150 billion euros in loans and the mobilization of private capital. All this will be discussed at the next European Council meeting on March 6.
The EU’s response to Trump, both in diplomacy and commerce and in defense, has so far been proactive, recognizing that the fragmentation of the block would be the only alternative.
However, if NATO can no longer serve as a framework for the defense of Europe, the EU will have to consider a specific self -defense strategy. This approach would be even more demanding and could mean the creation of a completely new intergovernmental institution from scratch. Currently, the most probable scenario implies the emergence of a revitalized NATO, a rearmed Germany and the creation of a single EU defense market.
