Europe facing an unenviable choice: weapons or the future?
March 15, 2025
Jože P. Damjan, DELO, Saturday Supplement
The European Union was founded on the principles of peace, stability, and progress, building its strength on economic integration and social cohesion. However, its security has largely depended on NATO, effectively subordinating its foreign policy to American interests. Today, this paradigm is crumbling under the weight of geopolitical upheavals and misguided political decisions. Above all, due to the latter, Europe is now confronted with an unenviable choice—invest in weapons or invest in the future.
The Geostrategic Context of Misguided Political Decisions
The war in Ukraine, the rise of China as a global economic power, and changes in U.S. leadership have fundamentally altered the global geopolitical landscape and Europe’s perception of its security situation. EU countries have become entangled in an American proxy war with Russia on Ukrainian soil. Despite the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of any real military threat from Russia, the U.S. political elite did not halt NATO’s expansion. In 2008, NATO invited countries bordering Russia to join, which Moscow declared a red line. Consequently, Russia attacked Georgia in 2008, annexed Crimea in 2014, and launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
The U.S. political elite saw Russia’s aggression in Ukraine as an opportunity to weaken Russia. A 2019 study by the Rand Corporation, a military think tank, predicted that the U.S. could gain significant benefits by imposing sanctions and isolating Russia internationally, while also taking over Russia’s energy exports to Europe. However, the study overlooked the fact that the global geopolitical landscape has fundamentally shifted over the past two decades. Russia has strengthened itself economically and militarily, while China has emerged as a global economic powerhouse. When Western countries imposed sanctions on Russia after its aggression in Ukraine, fewer than 50 countries supported them, while nearly 150 continued trading with Russia. Russia found an ally in China, enabling it to continue exporting energy and accessing critical technologies.
Paradoxically, the war in Ukraine has economically strengthened Russia, while Europe has been hit by an energy crisis, high inflation, and economic stagnation. Between 2023 and 2024, Russia’s economy grew by 6.8%, while the EU’s economy grew by only 1.6%. Germany’s economy stagnated, and Europe’s energy-intensive industries lost 15% of their capacity, further eroding the EU’s competitiveness.
The Dilemma: Weapons or Development and the Welfare State
Europe now faces moralistic opposition to a diplomatic resolution of the war in Ukraine. Politicians claim that “peace may be more dangerous than continuing the war,” while the European Commission promotes a new arms program, ReArm, which would allow EU countries to invest €800 billion in weapons. This means Europe, driven by fear of Russia, is neglecting issues of competitiveness and development.
The comparison is shocking: the European Commission is urging member states to invest €800 billion in weapons, while allocating only €3.4 billion to support the automotive industry, which employs 13.8 million people. Europe is shifting its focus from producing electric vehicles to producing tanks.
Moreover, the Commission proposes that member states exclude military spending of up to 1.5% of GDP from deficit limits. If countries want to increase spending on infrastructure, education, or healthcare, they must adhere to strict fiscal rules, but no such restrictions apply to weapons purchases. Europe is thus faced with a dilemma: invest in weapons or invest in development and the welfare state?
How Real is the Russian Threat?
A key question is how real the Russian threat to Europe actually is. Russia has a population of 150 million and 1.5 million active soldiers, while the EU has 450 million people and comparable military resources. How likely is it that Russia would attack and occupy Europe? The U.S. think tank Institute for the Study of War calculated that, at the current rate of advancement in Ukraine, it would take Russian forces over 170 years to reach Paris.
Furthermore, no Russian strategic document outlines territorial claims over Europe. Russia’s interests lie primarily in Ukraine, Crimea, and the Black Sea. The European Commission has simply assumed the threat without conducting a strategic analysis.
Can Weapons Buy Us Security and Peace?
If Europe wanted to become militarily self-sufficient, it would need to invest around €910 billion in defense over the next decade. This would mean increasing military spending to 2% of GDP. But the key question is whether this would actually bring Europe security and peace. Russia is not intimidated by the combined might of NATO, which includes the U.S. and Europe. Additional European armament would not change this.
Instead of arming itself, Europe could pursue security and trade agreements with Russia. The complementary nature of the European and Russian economies means that mutual economic cooperation would benefit both sides. Trade and investment ties would serve as the best guarantee of security and a deterrent to conflict.
The Opportunity Costs of Investing in Weapons
Investing in weapons is economically less efficient than investing in infrastructure, education, and healthcare. The multiplier effect of defense spending is estimated to be below 1, meaning that every euro spent on the military generates less added value than investments in other sectors. Moreover, most defense spending flows abroad, providing little benefit to domestic economies.
Europe’s problem is not the Russian threat but its declining competitiveness and negative demographic trends. For over four decades, Europe has been falling behind China and the U.S. If Europe does not focus on development and innovation, it will continue to lose its competitive edge.
Conclusion
Europe is facing an unenviable choice: invest in weapons or invest in the future. History teaches us that security is impossible without economic strength and social cohesion. Instead of focusing on armament, Europe should prioritize development, innovation, and cooperation with other nations. Only in this way can we ensure peace and prosperity for future generations.
Translated by AI