The biting winds in the Romanian steppe, as NATO soldiers took part in military drills just a few miles away from the Ukrainian border reflected a greater unease. The Steadfast Dart exercises demonstrated the ability of a British multinational force to respond in an emergency, but the absence U.S. troops cast a shadow that highlighted Europe‘s increasing concerns over its defense capabilities as the geopolitical environment changes.
They were designed to demonstrate a coordinated response in a crisis. The drills featured aircraft destroying targets and soldiers crossing frozen trenches. In light of the evolving U.S. Foreign Policy priorities, however, the question that arises is: can Europe defend itself adequately against potential threats in the absence traditional U.S. Support pivotal since World War II?
Decades of prioritizing social welfare over defense spending have left European nations with critical capability gaps, heavily reliant on U.S. military might – a dependence increasingly scrutinized in Washington. European officials are aware of this problem, recognizing the historical underinvestment made in defence.
It is difficult to increase military spending despite the increased security concerns after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The perceived threat may be geographically far away, which makes it hard to justify increased defense spending that might impact on healthcare and necessitate higher taxes.
A common sentiment, especially among young Europeans living far away from NATO’s border with Russia, is a lack of interest in military service and involvement in the defense of Europe. The hesitancy of young Europeans, far from the NATO-Russia border, adds a new layer to Europe’s defensive posture.
‘Very Vulnerable’
Coordination of defense acquisition and operations on the battlefield to create an effective and unified combat force is a daunting challenge, even if money and personnel are available.
Lower-ranking troops cited challenges like overcoming language barrier as an example of how commanders stressed seamless collaboration. Conflict in Ukraine has strain the relationship between America and its European Allies. Some European officials try to minimize transatlantic tensions while others acknowledge that Europe is in a vulnerable position as the security environment changes.
Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukrainian President warned about a new transatlantic relationship and encouraged Europe to change. The U.S. has a large military presence in Europe. However, the shifting priorities of security towards Asia as well as possible budget cuts to defense raises questions regarding future commitments. Currently, two thirds (or $1.2 billion) of NATO’s defence spending is funded by the U.S.
Vice-President JDVance emphasized that European nations should increase their contributions as the U.S. is focused on other concerns around the world. The U.S. wants NATO nations to dedicate 5% of GDP to defence, much higher than their current threshold. Many countries still do not meet this target. Some officials hesitate to set a 5% goal, but NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg says that a target of 3% or more is adequate.
U.S. defense secretary Pete Hegseth has stressed that a strong commitment is needed to NATO Article 3 and the ability of individuals to be able to resist attacks. The U.S. provides vital, costly military capabilities, including reconnaissance, air-to-air refueling, and logistics – assets that may need to be redirected to the Indo-Pacific, requiring Europe to shoulder the financial responsibility of acquiring replacements.
The US strategic support behind the scenes is a concern, even in an exercise like Steadfast dart. It raises questions about whether such operations can be conducted without the continued involvement of the United States. Europe is currently facing critical gaps, such as in air defense systems, long-range rocket production, tanks and armored cars manufacturing and recruitment of military personnel.
‘Be Prepared for a Wartime Scenario’
Czech officials suggest that focused rearmament efforts could help Europe be ready to resist a Russian invasion in five years. Admiral Rob Bauer stressed the importance of European defense companies preparing for possible wartime scenarios and adjusting their production lines in accordance. According to him, while military might win battles but economies will win wars.
According to the paper, Europe has a huge advantage, as the GDP combined of Britain and the European Union is ten times higher than Russia. Mobilizing funds for wartime economy in Western European democratic nations, where the approval of citizens is crucial, would be a stark contrast with Russia under Vladimir Putin’s autocratic system.
European nations have few options to increase their spending without suffering economic hardship. As an example, Britain has committed only to increasing defense spending by 2.5% of its GDP in 2027, even though it acknowledges a generational challenge. Government spending limits make it difficult to dramatically increase military expenditures.
Russia may be able to increase its defense budget with more ease, as it has lower government expenditures in terms of a share of the GDP. This could also benefit from the relaxation or sanctions. Estimates based on purchasing power parity indicate that Russia may exceed the European countries’ military spending in 2024.
This could cause negative reactions on the bond market, which are concerned with unfunded commitments. Defense experts are in favor of enhancing military capability, but public opinion differs. Recent polls show that, while some prefer increased military spending at the expense public services, other people would rather maintain funding for social programs, regardless of whether it reduces military spending.
A significant part of the British population is also opposed to tax hikes in order to fund increased defense expenditures. This gap between the security-focused public and officials highlights the difficulties in building consensus on increased defense spending across several NATO nations. The concept of **defense economics** is a key consideration, involving the efficient allocation of resources to maintain security while balancing other social priorities.
The Threat is Closer
Fortifications are being built in nations that border Russia. These include Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. Sweden, the latest NATO member state, issued guidelines to its residents about how they can prepare for a crisis or war. Poland and other Nordic countries are adapting civil airports into military facilities. Denmark increased its spending on defense and has pushed to rearm substantially. It even eliminated a public day to add more funds to their defense budget.
Nuclear capability is one factor that influences the balance. Although Britain and France have nuclear weapons, the combined arsenal of both countries is smaller than that of Russia. Friedrich Merz has shown interest in extended nuclear security with European allies. This signals a significant shift in European Security considerations. The principle of **nuclear deterrence** factors heavily into overall strategic calculations, particularly in the face of a perceived threat from Russia.
The primary defense line is personnel. However, Europe’s capacity to mobilize enough forces to protect its most vulnerable countries remains in doubt. The British Army is “hollowed out” despite being the leader of the Allied Reaction Force. Questions are raised about Europe’s capability to act in its absence.
Sir Keir’s Starmer proposal that British soldiers be committed to a Ukrainian peacekeeping force has exposed the divisions between European leaders, and highlighted the lack of an integrated leadership strategy. Some European NATO members have expressed tentative support for the idea, while others criticized it as premature. European leaders face domestic problems that can affect their ability forge an united, powerful front.
British Army shrinkage has reached its lowest size for many centuries. This is causing experts to doubt its ability to lead an Ukraine peacekeeping operation. Europe’s efforts to defend itself are further complicated by the struggle to retain and recruit troops. The British Army as well as the Navy had difficulty meeting recruitment targets. Younger generations are not as enthusiastic for military service. Many of them will refuse to sign up even if an invasion is imminent. French soldiers have also been ending their military service earlier in recent years.
Struggle To Recruit Troops
Starmer’s suggestion to send troops into Ukraine in case of an accord revealed the divisions among European leaders as well as the absence of any clear-cut strategy. Although some European NATO nations, such as Sweden, tentatively supported this idea the German Chancellor Olaf Scholz dismissed it as “completely pre-mature.”
Mr. Macron wanted to make sure that Europe was all on the exact same page. He invited his European colleagues to Paris in order to get a swift response. While there have been no tangible results yet, observers say that a number leaders are struggling to align their domestic policies, and this could limit the progress of Europe as a continent.
Europe has divided opinions on Russia’s potential as a threat. Hungary’s Viktor Orbán has been very straightforward about being able to get along alongside Putin.
Spain and other nations have concerns beyond Russia. Madrid concentrates its attention on Africa, particularly the Sahel.
In the absence of a clear American leader, Europe could be at risk. NATO’s unity may depend upon the American leadership and their support for Eastern Europe, according to Brigadier Andy Watson of the ARF.
NATO has long focused its defensive efforts on fighting the enemy, Russia. This focus is even stronger now that Russian forces have invaded Ukraine. Putin claimed that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was partly to stop NATO from advancing into Ukraine. The U.S. has since made it clear that this will not happen.
Putin’s invasion strategy was more about conquering and expanding the borders. With this in mind Europe must consider whether Russia would really take on an established NATO member to execute a proper defense.
The trenches in Smârdan are being erected in an attempt to mirror those in Ukraine and Ukraine’s drone tactics. British troops in Romania assisted Ukraine soldiers as part of the Operation Interflex.
The Constitution Protection Bureau of Latvia has stated that there is a low chance of a confrontation between the Baltic States of Latvia and Lithuania as well as Estonia in the year 2018. But, in the case that Moscow’s resources can be freed during the Ukraine – Kremlin war, the body would have to “increase its military presence towards NATO” in roughly the next five years from today.
The EU, as well as NATO member countries, must be able to make their own decisions, given the increased threat to NATO and historical implications of the Baltic States, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, being so close to Russia.
Laya cautions that if this is not done, it will be the U.S.A., Russia, and China who take control of the Europeans’ own countries.