Northrop Grumman Corp

Europe Grapples with Defense Unity as Ukraine War Drags On

By [Your Name], Chief International Correspondent, nouvelles-du-monde.com

DAVOS, Switzerland – Four years into Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Europe is wrestling with a fundamental question: how to bolster its defense capabilities in a world increasingly defined by geopolitical uncertainty and a shifting relationship with the United States. The debate, reignited at the World Economic Forum in Davos this year, centers on whether a more unified approach – potentially including a standing European army – is the answer to longstanding divisions and inefficiencies.

The discussion comes as tensions with the U.S. under President Donald Trump add urgency to the conversation. Trump’s recent assertions that he could end the Ukraine war in a single day, coupled with pressure on NATO allies to increase defense spending, have prompted European leaders to re-evaluate the continent’s security architecture.

“We need to strengthen the European pillar of NATO,” Finnish President Alexander Stubb told CNBC at Davos last month, advocating for boosting both European defense industries and the capabilities of individual European states.

The idea of a unified European military isn’t new. It was first proposed in 1951, with France suggesting a joint force to counter the Soviet Union and address concerns about German rearmament. However, the proposal failed to gain traction in the French National Assembly three years later.

Today, the concept is gaining renewed attention. Andrius Kubilius, the European Union’s Commissioner for defense and space, proposed at Davos the creation of a 100,000-strong standing military force, capable of acting “as Europe.” Spain’s Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares echoed this sentiment, arguing for greater integration of the continent’s defense industry to improve efficiency.

However, not all are convinced. EU’s Kaja Kallas cautioned that a Europe-wide army would be “extremely dangerous,” pointing to existing commitments within NATO. “If you are already part of NATO then you can’t create a separate army,” she said.

Experts highlight the practical challenges of such an undertaking. Max Bergmann, director of the Europe, Russia and Eurasia program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, noted that European militaries are largely designed to operate with the United States, not independently. “Europe’s response to any war would be ‘very messy,’” he told CNBC, citing issues of interoperability, redundant spending, and a lack of coordination.

Despite these hurdles, public opinion appears to be shifting. An EU Barometer survey showed that support for a common EU defense and security policy reached 81% in the spring of 2025 – the highest level since 2004. Recent polls in several European countries, including Lithuania (61%), Germany (59%), and Spain (58%), indicate significant public backing for the idea of a regional army.

Guntram Wolff, a senior fellow at Bruegel specializing in defense economics, believes a sovereign European army remains “quite unlikely” unless circumstances dramatically change. He argues that citizens would prefer to see countries fulfill joint defense commitments.

At last year’s NATO summit in The Hague, member states pledged to increase defense spending to 5% of GDP, responding to pressure from Trump. Spain was the sole exception, opting to cap its military budget at just over 2% of GDP. Spanish Economy Minister Carlos Cuerpo affirmed the country’s commitment to NATO capability reinforcement, stating Spain would remain a “reliable partner.”

The debate over European defense unity underscores a growing recognition of the need for greater strategic autonomy, even as the importance of the transatlantic alliance remains paramount. The path forward, however, remains unclear, with leaders weighing the benefits of a more integrated approach against the practical and political challenges of realizing such a vision.