Practical aspects of EU rearmament are tricky

Ursula von der Leyen’s proposal for European rearmament represents both a transformative bid to alter Europe’s military structure and a response to the new geopolitical realities. The proposal which sets aside €800 billion for military expansion serves as an answer to both the Russian war in Ukraine and decreasing American security guarantees. However, for all its grand rhetoric, the initiative faces multiple practical challenges stemming from financial problems alongside political complications and industrial barriers which could substantially undermine its operational success, writes Dr. Imran Khalid.

She identifies the initiative as a pivotal point which establishes European defense independence - strategic autonomy. Her vision is compelling, but translating it into reality will require overcoming several economic, political, and logistical hurdles. The initiative seeks to decrease dependence on US weapons while developing EU defense production capabilities and creating collaborative procurement initiatives among member states. According to von der Leyen, this strategy would enhance European military preparedness while providing Ukraine with continuous weapon deliveries.

Yet, the practicality of this vision is far from guaranteed because it demands solving significant structural and political barriers within the European Union. First, there is the question of funding. The EU has promised enormous financial commitments yet it fails to specify its funding sources. The plan to gather money through capital markets alongside exemptions from EU fiscal rules stands to encounter massive resistance. Several countries face economic strain from debt levels and therefore object to spending more on military programs instead of domestic programs. The Italian government has expressed opposition toward Brussels taking control of finances while it previously backed plans for common borrowing platforms.

The existing industrial framework of European defense represents a substantial barrier to successful execution. She argues that in order to meet the existing needs, European defence production should be strengthened through "Buying European." but she forgets that European defence manufacturers have fragmented operations - under different national regulations and procurement policies - without sufficient production capabilities to achieve the fast-tracked objectives outlined in her plan. Von der Leyen is pushing Europe to focus on buying domestic defense products but the continent does not have sufficient defense manufacturing capacity to fulfill the aggressive plan schedules.

The United States benefits from its consolidated and efficient military-industrial complex because its defense manufacturers operate under a unified framework. Europe's defense manufacturers work under various national rules and procurement procedures that differ from each other. Expanding production would require unprecedented coordination, long-term financial guarantees, and overcoming the bureaucratic inertia that has long plagued European defense initiatives. Then there is the issue of political cohesion, which represents a significant problem. The European Commissioner for Defence has stressed European unity yet political divisions between member states have already emerged. The Russia-friendly governments of Hungary and Slovakia have persisted in blocking Ukraine weapons deliveries despite ongoing Russian aggression.

The current military aid standoff between the EU and Hungary reveals the persistent ideological divisions which prevent the bloc from functioning as a unified unit. Spain's extension of the "defence" definition to include cybersecurity and climate actions has met strong opposition from top EU officials who call it "defence-washing". The political disagreements between member states indicate substantial implementation obstacles that endanger the rearmament plan's success. The main problem of Von Der Leyen's strategy emerges from her belief that Europe can construct a credible military-industrial base at the same time it provides Ukraine with war support. A joint EU-Ukraine defence coordination mechanism has been proposed which would integrate Kyiv into the European defence supply chain. Military production innovation in Ukraine has been impressive yet connecting its defence sector to European markets at an accelerated speed will create a massive complex challenge.

The implementation of standardization procedures alongside quality assurance protocols and security screening processes will become essential when achieving effective wartime coordination proves difficult in practice. Furthermore, von der Leyen’s approach reveals an ideological bias - one that prioritizes European strategic autonomy at the cost of pragmatic considerations. The current political climate following Trump’s return to the White House has amplified European politicians' desire to decrease dependence on U.S. military support. But the immediate disengagement from American defence technologies and procurement networks is simply impractical at the moment.

The majority of European military infrastructure depends heavily on American defence systems which makes establishing complete European defence independence a process that will require multiple decades rather than a few years. Apparently, the plan also presents several evident benefits despite its existing challenges. European defense industry growth through this initiative would create economic advantages by generating employment opportunities and advancing technological development. The joint procurement approach would enhance operational efficiency and financial savings while resolving existing problems with duplicate and inefficient national defense policies. The initiative to decrease European dependence on the United States matches current geopolitical patterns because European nations remain uncertain about future American security commitments.

Yet, the European rearmament initiative, in its present form, is a courageous but deeply flawed endeavor. There is a valid reason for desiring to build up the European defence, but the plan seems to be more politically oriented than operationally oriented. If there are no practical ways of dealing with financial, industrial and political obstacles, it will be just another grand European vision that collapses in the face of reality. The European leaders' challenge is not to merely make generous spending announcements, but to make sure that these plans are transformed into actual military capabilities. If von der Leyen's strategy is to be successful, then it will not be enough to make grand statements, a fundamental rethinking of how defence cooperation, procurement, and strategic planning are done in Europe is required. The success of von der Leyen's strategy demands fundamental changes in European defense cooperation together with procurement methods and strategic planning approaches.

Share this article: