r/EuropeanFederalists • u/paneuropeanism_ • 9d ago
Only a European Army — and true integration — will solve Europe’s defence problem
https://www.ft.com/content/2445132e-7208-4a3e-a493-c565ae1ab5b52
u/Beneficial_Snow6724 9d ago
While I fully agree on the inefficiencies of the current european defense structure and also agree that huge efficiency gains could be achieved, I think that it is not possible in the political realm right now. Since gains can only be had, if the unified structure replaces the existing ones and are not added on top. Where would that leave NATO? How realistic is it to believe, that alle EU members are ready to say goodbye to their armies? What complexities in laws will have to be cleared up?
5
u/paneuropeanism_ 9d ago
Nato must become a two-pillar organisation. If Democrats come back, that's great. If not then Europe can act independently.
That was in fact the original idea of Nato with the 1952 EDC. The plans were quite advanced and included a European Army.
1
u/Beneficial_Snow6724 9d ago
If the EU Army is just another name for the European segment of NATO, that would be fine for me, since there are already changes on the way to ensure the ability to act, especially if the US stays "awol".
5
u/paneuropeanism_ 9d ago
It would not just be the 30-or so fragmented and disjointed elements of Nato in its current form. It would be a real European Armed Forces like the US Armed Forces, embedded within a more federal Union. That is how you create scale, efficiency and sovereignty. And that is how you become independent.
0
u/Thalassin 9d ago
Eurofederalists be like : in order to be sovereign and independent, European countries should relinquish their sovereignty and independance.
Peak Eurobubble newspeak.
5
u/paneuropeanism_ 9d ago
Being a US satellite state is not sovereignty. Sorry to break it to you.
1
u/Thalassin 9d ago
Exact same arguments that Putin uses against Ukrainian independance, you use against European countries' independance.
3
u/paneuropeanism_ 9d ago
How? A European Federation is not created by the sword. It is simply a more federal EU. You can choose to join freely or not. I never met a federalist that argued otherwise.
-1
6
u/paneuropeanism_ 9d ago
The author argues that Europe's fundamental security vulnerability stems from its structural fragmentation across national militaries and that integration is unavoidable. Despite collective defense expenditures exceeding hundreds of billions of euros annually, the actual return on investment remains severely compromised by inefficiency, duplicated (and irrelevant) capabilities, disjointed supply chains and fragmented procurement. This degrades operational readiness, leaving Europe with significantly less collective power than a single, unified force. Simply spending more on fragmented national armies delivers little security while providing ever-more social openings for the Kremlin to exploit. The worst of all worlds.
Europe can no longer afford reliance on the United States as its security guarantor. Managing a high-intensity war along Europe's periphery requires rapid, decisive and likely long-term action. That includes a response mechanism that carries Europe's single collective will embedded within a federal Union rather than nearly thirty separate national parliaments. The latter would be like the US having 50 Commanders-In-Chief.
A consolidated, integrated European Army embedded within a more federal Europe offers the only viable structural solution. By centralizing defense procurement and operating under a unified command architecture, Europe would unlock massive economies of scale while establishing a genuine and sovereign political Union.