Europe is pinched between China and US as it seeks a more independent stance. Image: X Screengrab

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, European decision-making has become dominated by the conflict. It has even distorted our vision of what Europe is, along with the considerable discomfort of an eroding transatlantic security partnership and multiple other foreign dependencies in areas such as industry, digital infrastructure and energy.

Taken together, these developments present an extraordinary set of threats and opportunities for a series of European policies that must begin to look beyond Ukraine, without discarding the vital role that Ukraine has played in the security landscape.

Confronted by a bold American long-term vision, including President Barack Obama’s “Pivot to Asia” announced in November 2011, the US is increasingly viewing Europe as only a peripheral American concern.

Europe risks being left behind in the future, stuck between a burgeoning US and China, if it does not get its act together and concentrate on building state and regional capacity. For now, it is only starting to advance its readiness and resilience.

The EU’s feeble approach to the Gaza conflict stands in sharp contrast with the staunch support extended to Ukraine. Even NATO’s 2022 strategic concept, which clearly defines Russia as a threat and outlines Ukraine’s general path toward NATO, remains at best elusive in the absence of formal US endorsement.

Competing individual responses by EU members or heads of EU institutions and sometimes divergent responses to external shocks are unlikely to favor a new European moment, much less a common project.

If Europe is now urged to “arm itself” and invest in growing its defense capabilities, as advocated by the president of France and the chancellor of Germany in a recent opinion piece, it must also set a geopolitical ambition and roadmap that extends beyond its present boundaries.

The ambition must be bold enough to reinforce Europe’s autonomy and capacity of action long after the Ukraine war ends.

Much of this year’s NATO summit discussion has centered around the push to raise EU members’ defense spending to 5% of GDP, or 3.5% of direct defense spending. The Hague pledge, signed by most Allies, holds only as long as there is no ceasefire in Ukraine.

Should the Russian threat diminish or political will to support Kyiv weaken, European publics may become reluctant to sustain such high levels of defense spending. It also assumes that the US direct financial contribution to NATO will stay at approximately 16% of the budget, which is not guaranteed.

According to the NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, the goal is for non-US NATO allies to deliver 70% of the alliance’s total capabilities by 2032, up from 56% today.  For European countries such as Spain, Belgium, Slovakia or Luxembourg, which lack Germany’s fiscal flexibility or Poland’s and the Baltic states’ acute threat perceptions, this objective is already a significant challenge.

Long-term security cannot rest on the European defense industrial base and fiscal efforts alone. Without the necessary scale, and despite the recent rollout of its Readiness 2030 white paper to support the EU defense industry and deepen the single defense market, and the adoption of the $170 billion Security Action for Europe (SAFE) initiative, Europe is unlikely to make a meaningful impact in the near term.

A recent report indicates that Europe’s defense industry will not be able to fully replace key US capabilities in the air and maritime domains within the next decade.

In the interim, the risk of capability or deterrence gaps must not be overlooked. Efforts to develop formats like the E3+1 initiative – France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Poland – represent temporary solutions aimed at regionalized defense coalitions until a unified European defense leadership emerges.

As the war in Ukraine has demonstrated, without cooperation, partnerships, co-production and joint development to maintain interoperability and efficiency, Europe alone is not equipped to meet its current defense production needs. This is likely due to fragmentation within its defense industry and this situation is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.

Beyond Russia, and beyond the goal of transitioning to a more balanced alliance, Europe’s other major vulnerabilities include its political division and its broader geopolitical marginalization. Both are in part the result of EU member states’ ongoing struggles to overcome narrow national interests.

Recent events could indeed catalyze deeper European economic and financial integration through a new single market strategy, a scenario that, while challenging, remains attainable.

To enhance its hard-power capacity and economic independence, the world’s largest single market must address serious inconsistencies in capital markets, energy, and technology. Expanding the international role of the euro could also help reduce financing costs and help attract investments, thereby boosting Europe’s resilience.

In a world increasingly defined by a contest between Beijing and the West, where economics is seen as subordinate to geopolitics, the optimal strategy may lie elsewhere.

While keeping Russia in check, Europe must also find ways to continue engaging with both China, as a potential off-ramp to its ongoing trade war with Washington, and the US, by adding a European signature to a Trump-compliant tariffs and trade deal as a concession to the America First agenda.

This should be done without allowing either power to gain undue influence over the continent’s political systems and economies. Whether this strategy can be implemented fast enough to meet rising expectations remains one of the defining questions Europe will face in the coming years.

As global power becomes multipolar, being more adept at negotiation and compromise is not a trait reserved for rapidly rising powers. Economic prowess, diplomatic weight and global reach remain invaluable when urgency is driven by necessity.

Eric Alter,  a former UN civil servant, is dean and professor of international law and diplomacy at the Diplomatic Academy in Abu Dhabi.

Join the Conversation

24 Comments

  1. Aucune évaluation honnête des actifs minéraux de l’Ukraine ne se rapproche des chiffres que revendiquent les hauts responsables gouvernementaux.
    L’US Geological Survey, et même les publications des ministères ukrainiens, ne rapportent que des traces de métaux des terres rares n’importe où dans le pays.
    Même si nous ne considérions que des terres non rares, d’autres problèmes deviennent apparents. Beaucoup de ces réserves sont entre les mains des Russes, et une grande partie du reste ne peut pas être extraite commercialement aux prix actuels du marché.
    La situation en Ukraine est alarmantement similaire à celle de l’Afghanistan, où les évaluations du Pentagone des réserves minérales afghanes ont considérablement surestimé leur taille réelle et leur valeur marchande, tout en donnant aux planificateurs de guerre plus de temps et de ressources pour poursuivre ce qui était finalement un effort de guerre perdu.

  2. EU cut off their branch. A de-industrialized economy without cheap energy will never be compet itive

  3. Europe should have remained a ‘Community’, a trading block with no internal tariffs. Although it never achieved that. Each country has a long history, which usually involved fighting their neighbors and taking care of their own national interest. Some of the nations (Fr/Sp/Eng) also looked to their colonies as well as Europe. Churchill – ‘we look to the sea, not the land’.
    England (according to the exWarsaw Pact) countries played the honest broker in stopping a Fr/De EU dominating smaller countries; or more cynically it was the historical practice of keeping the ‘balance of power’ in Eu.
    As for the Sepo’s when I said to German ‘the founding of the USA was the last great achievement of the Europeans’ (Bismarck) he retorted ‘and the founding of Europe was the last great achievement of the Americans’.
    Russia’s heading for internal collapse, the US has lost interest and the EU is totally dysfunctional. Ursula vdL, Junker, LeGrarde are like the ancien regime, a ruling elite who think they are the rulers and the plebs should accept their pontifications.
    EU fiddles while Fr/De/It/Es/Ie and the UK are about to explode over the bad behavior of certain guests.

    1. Good comment. The democratic idea that every member has a vote will never work in reality, because every member is inherently nationalistic and selfish. The federations in the US, Russia, China, and India work because power is centralized in a powerful government. And that’s missing in the EU.
      The collapse of Comecon or the incompetence of the EU, ASEAN, and BRICS are proof of nationalism and selfishness—by nature!

  4. NATO is a U.S. post war construct. EU is a group of mini-states trying to act large on the world stage by freeloading off American military technological and economic heft. Things are going back to normal.

    1. If trump decides to tariff them at 90%, there’s not a damn thing they can do. All he has to do is threaten to stop funding Nato, and they’ll drop on the their knees, begging. By the way, our Nato contribution and troops in Europe, mea the EU can afford free healthcare for its citizens, while we can’t.

    2. The Chinese man with the Westernized name Dave talks about the US, NATO, and the EU using information from Chinese state media because he doesn’t even know how to “Google” objective information. For example, he told me that Ukraine has NO rare earths. Unbelievable! 😂🤣 If only this moron knew how easy it is to type three words into the “Google search or enter URL” field: “Ukraine rare earths.”

  5. Best thing UK ever did was leave the EU. It’s a rancid confederation, presided over by corrupt officials. Kallas is terrible old woman, always taking shots at the Trump administration. She forgets her place and fails to understand that Russia would swallow Estonia if not for the US.

    1. Germans of a certain age will never forget how the Sepo’s normalised the FDR.
      But the Eu do have a tendency to regard the Sepo’s as a rich, uncouth, guest who could ‘trump’ in front of the monarch.
      Or even worse use the wrong cutlery.

  6. The EU is the dumping ground for depleted or outed politicians. Von der Leyen is an offspring of a politician clan in Germany and served as “defense minister” under IM (Inoffizieller Mitarbeiter) Angela Merkel. One is from the establishment, the other from the spying network of the old Communist Party of Germany.
    How can the EU still be respected with such “leaders”? That’s why Donut Trumpet, Vampire Poo-tin, and Xhit Cheatpig see the EU as a bunch of powerless but funny clowns.

    1. Yes, Merkel’s background is very dubious. Very few people migrated into E Germany like her parents did.

      1. The DDR was a Nazi-free zone, unlike the FRG, where retreaded Nazis ran the show for the US.

        1. The DDR was full of March Violets. Ambitious people jump on any bandwagon, like the CCP.
          Some of Merkel’s family came from Masuria, a slavic part of E Prussia that overwhelmingly voted for the Austrian corporal