The Russian invasion of Ukraine has undeniably shaken the foundations of European defense, emphasizing the urgent necessity for the continent to bolster its military capabilities. Following the invasion, reports showed dire situations—Germany had ammunition for just two days and France was short on artillery vehicles. This alarming reality propelled the European Union to establish the European Defence Industry Programme (EDIP), which aims to invest at least 500 billion euros (approximately US$543.6 billion) over the next five years to prepare Europe for any potential warfare.
This is not the first foray by the EU to launch initiatives intended to reshape its defense industry. Back in 2017, the European Defence Fund (EDF) was set up to provide financial resources for the development of military technologies and industrial production. The former President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, championed this move, citing the need for Europe to become self-reliant and carve its future defense pathways. Yet, even with decades of investment, the EDF struggled to equip European militaries effectively.
The downward trend of European defense readiness had been evident since the Cold War, with defense spending plummeting from 132 billion euros (US$143 billion) in 1990 to 84.2 billion euros (US$92 billion) by 2000, according to reports. The need for military preparedness revitalized fears of conflict especially following Russia's annexation of Crimea, prompting Juncker to propose the EDF, set to invest up to 1.5 billion euros (US$1.6 billion) annually for research and development of military technologies.
The EDF has seen mixed results. On one hand, revenue generated by major European producers showed promising growth, jumping from 94 billion euros (US$102 billion) in 2010 to new heights after 2017. Defense production volumes accelerated, increasing at 4.51 percent annually, alongside employment surging from 430,000 jobs to 516,000 from 2015 to 2022. Yet, the industry's growth was paradoxically tied more to foreign clients seeking to build up their military capabilities than to European demand. Exports made significant gains, soaring from 12 billion euros (US$13.5 billion) to 52 billion euros (US$56.5 billion) between 2010 and 2022, highlighting Europe's reliance on global clients, often at the expense of its own military needs.
The newly introduced EDIP seeks to address these weaknesses identified within the EDF by establishing the European Defence Industrial Strategy (EDIS). This strategy emphasizes collaboration on military platforms and aims to prevent the outflow of advanced military technology. It is set against the backdrop of complex defense diplomacy, characterized by clashing interests among EU states.
Today, European nations grapple with how to secure their military needs without compromising interoperability. For example, as of October 2023, there are 14 different battle tank models within the EU alone—a situation far from the ambition of interoperability, which remains mired by national rivalries and conflicting interests. Collaborative endeavors, such as the Franco-German Main Ground Combat System, have been stalled due to disputes over leadership roles, making it challenging to move forward.
Politicians like Lithuania’s Defense Minister Dovile Sakaliene are vocal about the geographical and strategic nuances surrounding arms procurement. Sakaliene argued the necessity for European states to balance arms purchases between U.S. and European manufacturers, underscoring the sentiment, "We will balance… security is Paramount". She remarked on the importance of diversifying procurement, acknowledging Europe's dependence on U.S. defense capabilities but stressing the need for European self-strengthening: "It would be naïve to think Europe doesn’t need the U.S. We do. But at the same time, Europe needs to grow stronger." This statement resonates with the broader discourse within Europe as leaders contemplate the balance between fostering domestic production capabilities and relying on transatlantic partnerships.
This debate isn't isolated. French President Emmanuel Macron recently emphasized the misguided allocation of European taxpayer funds solely on American arms, advocating for bolstered investment within the continent's industries. This desire to decouple from U.S. reliance reflects growing sentiments among EU leaders, and Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis proposed creating a €100 billion European Defense Fund, modeled after the EU’s pandemic recovery fund.
The questions at the center of the current defense dialogue are complex. Will Europe prioritize funding its defense industry sufficiently to cultivate independence? The United States manages distinct military capabilities, yet Europe’s defense architecture is rooted in restraint and cost-effectiveness—a model echoed by other global players with successful militaries operating on lower budgets.
The future of Europe's defense hinges on its ability to create synergistic, interoperable defense systems. Spending money isn't the silver bullet—it’s creating cohesive operational capabilities and supporting European firms. The looming specter of the Russian threat offers Europe no choice but to reconcile its internal disparities and craft solutions jointly timed with concrete action. Should the EU opt for enforcing standards favoring internal cohesion or strive for market-driven approaches favoring exports? The answer to this question lies at the heart of upcoming discussions on European defense policy and alignment.