Europe needs the United States. We often (loudly) disagree with American foreign policy, yet we remain totally reliant on the security umbrella our friends across the Atlantic provide. Which is why European leaders have been so alarmed by the anti-NATO rhetoric coming from the White House, and possibly why the recent “defence pact” between 23 EU Member States (the so-called “Permanent Structured Cooperation”, or PESCO) was signed.

Without American support, European military capabilities are severely limited. The 2011 intervention in Libya (which was, on the face of it, a European-led campaign) relied heavily on the US for “intelligence-gathering aircraft, aerial refueling tankers and precision-guidance kits for bombs”. Some commentators point to the Libya intervention as proof that Europe lacks the capabilities to launch or sustain significant military operations without the US propping them up.

Yes, many people believe the Libya mission was a mistake (or, at least, that greater support should have been offered after the regime collapsed). Nevertheless, it raises awkward questions about whether Europe can confidently look after its own defences.

US presidents have been chastising Europeans for failing to take defence seriously for years. In the meantime, the security situation has deteriorated – with the Syrian civil war and rise of Islamic State, the Russian annexation of Crimea and Ukrainian civil war, and political instability in North Africa in the wake of the Arab Spring.

Curious to know more about European defence capabilities and spending? We’ve put together some facts and figures in the infographic below (click for a bigger version).

US President Donald Trump has been very critical of European defence spending. He’s taken plenty of flack for this, but some of our commenters think it’s actually quite a reasonable position. For example, Paul says: “EU countries need to start putting their hands in their pocket and contribute to their own defence instead of relying on the few that do take their security seriously.”

To get a response, we put Paul’s comment Sir Richard Shirreff, former NATO Deputy Supreme Allied Commander Europe (2011-2014). How would he react?

Well, I would agree with both Paul and Mr Trump. European nations do need to start putting their money where their mouth is on defence. All the member nations of NATO have signed up to the notion of 2% of GDP being spent on defence, and there are only some five nations in NATO that do that. Most European nations do not. Even the UK needs to ensure that the money it spends on defence is going on defence, not civil service pensions and intelligence agency budgets as a result of some creative accounting.

So, it is really important. In fact, I would say that given the cumulative disarmament of the last at least two decades in Europe, European nations need to spend rather more than 2% on defence in order to generate real, genuine defence capability.

Having said all that, while I agree that Mr Trump was right to highlight this, it would also be very important to hear a resounding commitment from Mr Trump to NATO, to the concept of Article 5, and to his willingness to come to the aid of a NATO member under attack. Because, as you’ll remember, as a candidate he cast doubt upon that.

For another perspective, we also put Paul’s comment to Mihnea Motoc, who was previously Romanian Minister of Defence until January 2017. What would he say?

Yes, they should. But just to set the record straight, President Trump is the fourth American president in a row to make that point. That having been said, I think we can all agree that Europe has itself grown increasingly more aware that it needs to take more of its security into its own hand for other, more pressing reasons. Chief among which being the unprecedented combination of conventional threats in basically all of our neighbourhoods, and also asymmetric risks we saw striking through European territory, and everyone could feel that quite directly from 2014 onward.

So, I would say there is both the need to spend more and the need to spend better. Most of the EU Member States are bound by NATO’s recommendations to set defence expenditure at 2% of GDP. If all EU Member States achieved that level of spending, the EU’s total military expenditure would increase by no less than 85 billion euros, which would be a considerable expansion of defence expenditure.

On the other hand, the process the Commission launched around the European Defence Fund is not necessarily about spending more. It is rather about spending together, spending better. It is about economies of scale, and it is about encouraging Member States to get out of the present fragmentation and overlaps that result from conducting defence research or procurement strictly at the national level, and resort more to defence co-operation across Europe. So, it’s not necessarily about spending more in this process, although that would be far from hurting anyone. It is rather about spending more wisely.

So what about recent developments? Several EU countries recently signed up to a joint notification on the Permanent Structured Cooperation, or PESCO. On the other hand, EU states have been talking about closer defence cooperation for literally decades. Will it really be any different this time?

Some of our commenters are optimistic. Mugur, for example, thinks Brexit might finally allow meaningful progress to be made in EU defence co-operation. Is he right? How would Sir Richard Shirreff respond?

Well, I say that I don’t think it will make a great deal of difference. It might sound as if things are going to be different and, of course, Brexit will change the equation. The concern I have is that it will be seen as a sort of political get-out to avoid having to really deliver proper effective military capability. The best way ahead for European defence remains NATO, the most successful alliance the world has ever seen. The reason we’ve been lucky enough to maintain peace in Europe for 70 years is, of course, partly the effect of the European Union in breaking down the internecine squabbles between European nations, but ultimately European defence – particularly from outside threats – has rested on NATO, and will continue to rest on NATO.

My other concern is that, with Brexit and with Britain no longer around the European Council table, you’re going to have the brakes taken off on the development of what you might call the unnecessary duplication of military capabilities, such as operational headquarters, etc., which can already be done very effectively through NATO as a result of the Berlin Plus agreement between the EU and NATO… So, I’m afraid I’m pretty cynical about PESCO. I think it sounds good, but I’m not convinced it’s going to deliver.

Finally, what would Mihnea Motoc‘s reaction be to Mugur?

Yes, I do think it will be different. I’m sure we will get it right, making defence co-operation the norm between Member States and not the exception as is currently the case. That is not true only for the PESCO that was recently launched, but also for the whole process that the Commission initiated last June with the EU Security and Defence Package.

Let me give you a few reasons why I think it’s not going to be yet another false start on defence co-operation. Firstly, there is an exceptionally favourable political context. There is clear and massive support from Member States. We saw not less than 23 Member States already at the starting line for PESCO. These notifications come with a relatively far-reaching list of binding commitments for Member States that subscribe to it. Furthermore, there are considerable financial incentives for deeper co-operation that the Commission has put forward, including in the PESCO context. The European Defence Fund can thus co-finance up to 30% of projects that are submitted under PESCO. So, these are just a few reasons why there is widespread confidence, and I for one certainly trust that we will get it right this time.

As for Brexit… Well, it might be that we would not even have this cooperation if it wasn’t for Brexit, which of course is a painful event for all of us. Brexit was followed by a very positive and substantial Position Paper that the UK has put together on defence and security co-operation for after Brexit. However, Brexit is just one of the factors that explains the current dynamics on European defence. Let us recall that it was for the first time in 2014 when the then-candidate for EU Commission President, Jean-Claude Juncker, made defence policy a political priority for his campaign. Later on it has become a political priority for this Commission and for the EU as such. That was long before the Brexit referendum.

Why can’t Europe take care of its own defence? Will Brexit clear the way for deeper EU defence cooperation? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!

IMAGE CREDITS: CC / Flickr – European External Action Service


253 comments Post a commentcomment

What do YOU think?

  1. avatar
    José Bessa da Silva

    Because is a continent and not a country. Each european country can and must take care of it’s own defence though.

    • avatar
      Oliver Hauss

      At least in the fantasies of people whose respect for the law and human lives is just as abysmal as that of any terrorist. In the real world, Europe has rarely been safer.

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Dear Oliver, how many terrorist attacks with how many victims per year in scale of europe would convince You something might be wrong with your lovely muslim friends? Look, sunshine, here in Poland we had none terrorist attacks over last two decades, no berlin, parisx2, nice, londonx2, manchester, madrid, barcelona and so on and so on. Why is that so?

    • avatar
      Matej Zaggy Zagorc

      Europe has been safer from ourselves, yes. I don’t recall Europe existing this long without a war, but what I believe Marko means is that we’re letting to many religious fanatics and different cultures roll into Europe.
      I guess we just like it not being a war zone and are prepared to kneel to that as long as there is no full out war.

    • avatar
      Marko Martinović

      Europe is safer then countries like Congo, but things are getting worse and worse. People are dieing and being assaulted, sprayed with acid and raped while governments dont do anything significant out of fear of not being politically correct. This is not acceptable. Those politicians are accomplicess to terror and traitors to their people. People still die and suffer and we are supposed to accept it. What when our number comes up?

  2. avatar
    Petar Shumanov

    So, its generally not true… First step:
    1. Common command – at over national level
    2. Emergency centers at strategic points – over national
    3. Special task forces command by the over national directorate
    4. Union agreed policies in case of emergency
    5. AND the very specific point…, over national task attachment, what is the problem so far, cos lack of trust… (possible solution: short-term: integrity in form of training and information campaigns. : long-term common training facilities and programs)

    Impossible is nothing, just the brain-box is the border, continent or planet is all a matter of mas-stab! And Europe and the Union should break this border to planetary society, otherwise we’re all lost to be forgotten in time and space…

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Named the ‘Oberkommando der Wehrmacht’ no doubt. You pro EU Europeans have learnt nothing from your history and are destined to repeat it, we will not save you from yourselves this time. Have fun :)

    • avatar
      Petar Shumanov

      Ivan Burrows Mister Burrows, :) fine position, but i dont think thats the situation nowadays bro… The both sides, east and west are empty…, east is empty of money, west (over the sea) is empty of intellect…(…OK, saying it so, seems familiar, but still… ;) …

      So what exactly brought you to the idea is 1938? Excuse me, if i push an open wound!

      Sincerely yours, one proud defender of Doiran 1918 :D :D :D

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      You pitiful man, Petar Shumanov: Which single politician in eu or in western european member states has more intellect than that one despised living across the sea? Merkel letting in a horde of uneducatable and unemployable barbarians into the west, toothless verhofstadt wanting to punish poland and hungary but having too short hands. Where is this Your famous western european elite? Uk and eastern europe will all do better without the garbage eu trying to impose on everyone letting in hordes of terrorists and buying them back from their inferior idelogy by using the welfare state. Message from whole of eastern europe+uk for today for eu: Please f off and go directly to demise but do not try to drag us with You into the chasm.

    • avatar
      Petar Shumanov

      Jan Kowalski Haha… touche… i moved your peanut to blame me as pitiful :) +1 …2nd, my dear peasant as you talking to me, a member of the global village, you should know i dont care about your so called UK and Eastern European opinion as i know you are not able to present their opinion fully…, so please step off the stage quietly as your funny comment deserves it. :) Thanks!

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Local retard, global retard. Still a retard.

  3. avatar
    Ivan Burrows

    ‘Europe’ can, its the EU that can’t. Hand your security over to an unelected European Politburo in Brussels and you know what the outcome will be.

    • avatar
      Petar Shumanov

      i suppose this lack of faith destroyed the bridges between us, but you know Madagascar is still with you, good choice, perspective and wise ;)

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Petar Shumanov You consider a dictatorship to be a bridge ?

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Edvinas Leonavičius Did you vote for your president Juncker or his law making commission ? Look it up, Brussels is the very definition of a dictatorship.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Geoffrey Howard (Troll) Whatever comrade, whatever. :)

  4. avatar
    David Scott

    They should spend money on what does the job, rather than paying more for something that is not needed.

    • avatar
      Petar Shumanov

      and the their job is??? to confront your spam or to build a common society? o_0 sweet :)

    • avatar
      David Scott

      I have no idea what you said Petar, even Google translate would struggle with that.

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Petar is some ruski parrot babbling incoherently a mixup of alde, verhofstadt and mackarel slogans. Nothing to see here, David.

  5. avatar
    Oliver Hauss

    Disagree with the assessment. Quite the contrary, US operations over the past few decades have chiefly degraded our security. Security is far more than just military security, and it is precisely the overreliance on military means which has produced by now numerous failed states that have turned into hotbeds and proving grounds for fundamentalists and fanaticals.

    A comprehensive security policy includes diplomatic and economic means. The very point of the EU is to secure peace not through military means but through integration.

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Western european diplomatic and economic means are worth pretty much shit. Without military in case of external intervention the tanks will go all way through from Oder river up to Portugal. Poland and majority of eastern Europe wont block the invaders from going west just like Your idol mackarel did with invaders from the south.

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      What a bloody idiot. Dont invest in defence and Turks will come from the sea and rip through Your pitiful state like a knife through a butter.

    • avatar
      Michał Borkowski

      It is 2017 and you still have not discovered maintaining military has to do more with power projection and deterrence than a real threat.

    • avatar
      Μάρκος Κουντουρούδας

      Jan Kowalski We saw how EU reacted with the refugees crisis from Turkey : Instead of punish Turkey with embargo’s, ecc. they shut-down the north borders of Greece, meaning by Isolating a member-state and leave it abandoned to any external dangers. And you Dare to speak about “common defense of EU” or “threaten” Greece and Greeks with Turkey’s offensiveness ? Cowards and Incompetents !

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      And is continuing to give money to Turkey to join it… Jan Kowalski, next time, shut up before saying bullshits and learn how EU works before paying your taxes and ignoring where your money is going. A defence? What for? Europe is peace, they said… We don’t need to stay in an union who wants to prepare us for war!

    • avatar
      Nicolette Ladoulis

      We dont want NATO anymore. Fix your own problems. Thanks.

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Where Ya from, Nicolette? If Us, Id like to ask without any a priori assumptions whether its official line of Washington now etc.

  6. avatar
    Zsolt Barczy

    First of all, nobody is threatening Europe. Secondly, sure as hell Europe has enough armed forces to take care of itself would such an impossible scenario unfold that someone would attack Europe (nobody wants, to, nobody cares, really). Such a pathetic, stupid, arrogant worldview that still thinks that anyone still cares about Europe… For your information, the real wealth and civilization is in Asia and the Middle East. Alas the Middle East is being systematically destroyed by European imperialist remnants even today, fortunately though Asia is still defending itself against this hubris and violent nonsense. So this topic about Europe “defending” itself against an imaginary, non-existent enemy is only showing the paranoid, sick nature of the souls here, and their severely distorted worldview (mostly due to poor education). Learn, learn, learn… education is important, and TRAVEL to see how insignificant Europe is on the world stage. Peace

    • avatar
      Arthur Gustin

      the problem isn’t nation forces but rather global efficiency and upkeeps against centralised armies (US, Russia, China,…) if we have to cooperate among the U.E.

    • avatar
      Zsolt Barczy

      The key word is “against”. Nobody is “against” anyone today, in 2017. All what you see is happening is the remnants of some arrogant, sick people who still think they have the right to “rule the world” (a pathetic, stupid, impossible attempt, but they are stupid enough to believe they can ever accomplish it), and strong CIVILIZED countries, nations and unions of nations defending themselves against this EVIL. That’s all. NOBODY (no civilized, educated, intelligent nations) strive to achieve global hegemony, only some primitive, barbaric ones who have a historical track record of destroying half the world in their futile endeavor. So, without these morons there would be world peace, but alas the same arrogant fools who created the mayhem of the last centuries are still walking around freely and instigating hatred, violence, division, etc in the world, and mongering wars. Now, the civilized nations have already united against this Evil and will eventually put them back into the straight jackets where they belong to, but currently you can still see local skirmishes as the result, alas, resulting in the death of millions of innocent people (who only want to retain their sovereignty). So, my point is, it is irrelevant if the European armies are united or not, efficient or not. The CENTRALIZED Russian army will never attack Europe: it never did in history, and Russia is a civilized country, unlike Europe, and would never do such a heinous thing. The opposite happened in the past: Europe attacked Russia, and we know the result. Don’t try it again, don’t even think about such things. So, in lack of a credible external threat, Europe can stay as it is, and perhaps it is time to send the Yanks home, because they don’t belong here. Europe doesn’t need their primitive, paranoid “culture” where “if you are not with us, you are against us”. How barbaric is that? I believe Europe is a lot more intelligent than that, we don’t need their warmongering against our peaceful neighbors, Just my two cents, of course… correct me if I’m wrong. :) Peace

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Russia, China and Iran peaceful. Are You an idiot or russian troll?

    • avatar
      Zsolt Barczy

      Jan, let me give you a factual and a moral answer. Factually yes, Russia, China and Iran belong to the oldest and most sophisticated civilizations on this planet, and (although there is no causal relationship between this fact and the next), at the same time, they are indeed the countries where you can feel the safest on this planet, for various reasons (no place here to elaborate, just take it for granted unless you _think_ you know better). Morally, zooming out and realizing what we are doing here (social media, discussing a subject), your comment revealed your blatant disrespect to people here (in this case: me) by calling me names, and similarly, you revealed your level of understanding of the world (low) by echoing a media-generated nonsensical bovine excrement: “russian (sic!) troll”. Obviously you have no idea what is going on in the REAL world out there, so for your attitude I have to reward you with a solid spot on my Block list. I hope you understand, I am a busy man, I have no more time to entertain you here. Sayoonara… :)

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      Jan Kowalski, can you tell me how may countries these 3 nations bombed in the last 70 years please?

    • avatar
      Zsolt Barczy

      Rémi Martin, you’re spot on (indeed these arrogant bullies are the problem), but Jan Kowalski won’t see your remark because I put him on my Block list, so he cannot see any of my posts (and thus comments made to my posts either)… but I can tell you that indeed the FUKUS Axis of Evil had bombed dozens of innocent countries in the past and keep doing this as long as colonialism and imperialism still exists there. It does, alas, in all ex-colonialist countries, the mentality of hubris is still there… Peace

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      i’ve understood! It’s easy to argue against such guys, they just repeat what they saw on TV, good night! ;)

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Do you mean George Soros ?

    • avatar
      Máté János

      Ivan Burrows I mean the Orwellian Big Brother but you’ve got a point because the two Uncles – Sam and and George – have a booming business partnership :-( ,,,

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Mate moron much? George would dissolve all euro armies and force europe to melt the borders and nations and make population sing kumbaya all day. Uncle sam isnt comparable b1tch – they dont have anything against europe being prepared for possible intervention by our bear on the east.

    • avatar
      Máté János

      Well you should walk back to Hobbiton to dream on and leave the real actions to those who have experienced totalitarian regimes and occupations before and had the courage to revolt…

  7. avatar
    Αναγέννηση

    The European Union desperately needs its own all professional EU Defense Force , to protect the Institutions of the European Union that are the foundation for the European Union , beginning with the European Institution of Schengen which allows for the free movement of people goods and services between the European Union. The European Union desperately needs its own all professional EU Defense Force to thwart and stop the Turkish state sponsored flood of illegal immigrants into the European Union from Turkey , designed by Turkish authorities to undermine the European Institution of Schengen that leads to the destruction of the European Union.

    • avatar
      EU Reform- Proactive

      Αναγέννηση, OMG! Again? Not learned anything in the meantime?

      “…..needs its own all professional EU Defense Force- to protect the Institutions of the European Union……..”? Attacked by what & by whom?

      Surely, EU or CoE Institutions can only be abused or infringed by its own signed up members- not by a foreign army- or?

      Ever heard of (peaceful) “diplomacy”? The laid down CoE47 or EU28 judiciary processes or NATO’s collective defense- “Article 5”…..etc.

      https://www.coe.int/en/web/human-rights-rule-of-law/home

    • avatar
      Μάρκος Κουντουρούδας

      We saw how EU reacted with the refugees crisis from Turkey : Instead of punish Turkey with embargo’s, ecc. they shut-down the northern borders of Greece, meaning choose to Isolate a member-state and leave it Abandoned to any external dangers. And you Dare to speak about “common defense of EU” or “threaten” Greece and Greeks with Turkey’s offensiveness ? Cowards and Incompetents !

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      And is continuing to give money to Turkey to join it… Next time, shut up Αναγέννηση? before saying bullshits and learn how EU works before paying your taxes and ignoring where your money is going. A defence? What for? Europe is peace, they said… We don’t need to stay in an union who wants to prepare us for war!

  8. avatar
    Craig Willy

    1) Because individual European nations are small and declining, with steadily declining military budgets.
    2) The EU, as an intergovernmental organization, simply is not and cannot be a State-like military actor, in the absence of massive federalization effort akin to the U.S. Founding. The EU will always be a military non-actor so long as the troops answer to Merkel & Orbán as opposed to whoever sits in the Berlaymont. And I doubt that will change any time soon.

    Europeans need to really change their behavior if they do not want to decline into irrelevance this century.

    • avatar
      Jan Kowalski

      Can You see the link between growing welfare burden and diminishing military/defence budgets already?

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      The EU is a repeat of the European disasters of the past, it is not the solution. Fascism, Nazism, Communism and now Europeanism, different flags but the same crazed lust for power over Europe. Thank god we are leaving :)

    • avatar
      Mitsos Daniel

      Ivan Burrows sayonara! I’ll just stand by watching Scotland leaving and NI reuniting with the rest of Ireland 🙂

    • avatar
      Jose Quintans

      Good point Jan Kowalski.
      We need to defend our external borders.

    • avatar
      Markos Tzimas

      Mitsos Daniel Τον δίκασες χαχα
      The “United” Kingdom have to change the name I think. Ivan, wish you a nice Brexit but find at first a solution to keep the country united otherwise the UK will have big problems after a short time of feeling happy (cause of Brexit)

  9. avatar
    Róbert Bogdán

    If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. We have NATO. Let the US spend the big bucks on weapons. Of course, a position of force gives other advantages too, but it’s fair. We can’t outpace them in spending, we’ll always be on inferiority compared to them, so why bother? Spend the money on something else, just not on welfare.

    • avatar
      Nicolette Ladoulis

      Then we can keep blaming NATO and the US for all our problems! Perfect!!

    • avatar
      Peré Kox

      Until the US witdraws from Nato and we are screwed.

    • avatar
      Matthew Griffing

      The US won’t withdraw from NATO. Even Trump isn’t doing that.

  10. avatar
    Guillem Martí Bou

    Because Europe is sadly crowded by a bunch of progressives that hate spend money on defense.

    It’s easy.

    • avatar
      Sylvain Duret

      I’m progressive but i love defense :) .

    • avatar
      Guillem Martí Bou

      Then you’re the brave exception ✌🏻

      Good for you!

    • avatar
      Jose Quintans

      A vossa industria da defensa semelha ter muitos seculos tamben, abonda o exemplo do glorioso drone da Marinha.

      Why Portugal is so calm?

      Think globally Mr Costa.

  11. avatar
    Kokonas George

    Stupidity has no limit …. Obviously there are lots of trillions involved.
    After all … “Government is the Entertainment division of the military-industrial complex.”

    ― Frank Zappa

  12. avatar
    Alfredo Iannuzzi

    Because there is not a common defense policy or a common foreign policy delegated to EU nor a a Command Structure with effective forces permanently assigned to it. Moreover it would be a useless duplication of NATO representing a danger to the unicity of Command required for an effective defense

    • avatar
      Craig Willy

      USA and Russia should join a reformed EU.

    • avatar
      Matthew Griffing

      The US joining the EU? Laughable. The US would be stupid to give up that degree of sovereignty, and the individual EU nations would be stupid to allow a country the size of the US to enter the EU, as it would dominate. In other words, it makes no sense for either side.

  13. avatar
    Geoffrey Howard

    We have Cultural Regions in the European Union….not Countries/NationStates/Nation.

    Say NO to Nationalism and the Westphalian principle and mentally.

    #OneEurope #onepeople #ManyCultures #Onelove

    • avatar
      Peeter Lõo

      Whatever floats your boat…

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Geoffrey Howard What is your EU fanaticism if not a new fake Nationalism ?

    • avatar
      Geoffrey Howard

      Read up on Nationalism……and have a nice day.

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      Simply, you don’t unite peoples under a flag, a common currency and laws they didn’t vote for! Geoffrey Howard, you’re a little euronazi who wants to invents an imaginary people, it won’t work, they tryer the same at the East, with the homo sovieticus…

  14. avatar
    Ludvik Jirovec

    EU don’t fullfil its transatlantic NATO obligations and they come with own army now. Probably Wehrmacht?

  15. avatar
    Barbara Szela Lesniak

    Why? What a question :D Because of the policy of the irresponsible EU leaders with Angela Merkel inviting potential terrorists, people who nobody knows who they really are and where they really come from.

  16. avatar
    Thomas Beavitt

    Turkey, on its present trajectory, will soon find itself, whether by choice or circumstance, outside NATO. And a jolly good thing too. Except… well, of course, if Germany were to militarise to the extent that its undoubted economic capacity allows…

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      Germoney? Occupied since over 72 years by US, you’re jokong I hope.

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      Then leave NATO and EUSSR!

    • avatar
      George Guydosh

      But we are. It’s not a matter of choosing, it’s a matter of fact. Then think what can you do about it and do.

  17. avatar
    Huey Montana

    From a military aspect. You do not need interwoven armies beloning to one headquarters. For instance. To pretect a frontline, squads, platoons,compagnies, batalions, brigades, divisions have interlocking firezones. So in short, you observe in front of you so does the guy next to you but by a wide spectrum you also guard your buddies zone as he does yours. The military top know that but they are part of the elite as well.

  18. avatar
    Rob Eastham

    I support the EU creating a common military, but not yet. We need to make sure we learn from our mistakes, this means making sure the institutions of the EU are democratic and accountable by and for the European Peoples, not sanctioned by beaurocrats and government hacks playing power games in Brussels.

  19. avatar
    Μάρκος Κουντουρούδας

    Naives ! To have a common Defense, first you must have a common Army. To have a common Army, first you must have a common Ground. To have a common ground to defend, first you must have a United People, people with common values and principles, with solidarity, parity and respect among them. Does this “Tyrannic-EU” of today have all this ? I think Not. And a simple question to prove the argument above: Tell me what can connect a German with a Greek, since the first acts and reacts in a discriminatory (racist) way against the other … ? Or tell me what “common” can have a German and a Greek or Italian ? …None ! Germans just fooling around again all the other European people by presenting themselves like “tolerant”, “easygoing”, “humanists”, ecc. but don’t indulge yourselves, they want only to be “first among equals” (“primus inter pares”), meaning only them the “First” ! So…”common European defense” appears a nice Joke !

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      Exactly, you don’t unite peoples under a flag, a common currency and laws they didn’t vote for! There’s no common point between all the 27, why dare should they have the same destiny? Nobody can tel it me!

    • avatar
      Μάρκος Κουντουρούδας

      And to get to that point, first you have to teach Respect and Tolerance between the People of the member-states, erasing the Stereotypes, the Prejudice agenda and clearing Historic diversities, like e.p. the German compensations towards Greece for the Destruction that Germans brought to the country, and Not pass-by them with racist insults.

  20. avatar
    Giuseppe Sergi

    We have been umiliated for the 1st time in our 2700 plus history for the last 70 years. Half a billion Europeans have not only the right but also the duty to take care of their own security, alliances yes, dependance no more.

  21. avatar
    Μάρκος Κουντουρούδας

    And how you Dare to speak about “common defense of EU”, since all the World saw, how EU reacted with the refugees crisis from Turkey : Instead of punish Turkey with embargo’s, ecc. they shut-down the northern borders of Greece, meaning choose to Isolate a member-state and leave it Abandoned to any external dangers…?

  22. avatar
    Mindaugas Valentukevicius

    Because USA does it for them. As a consequences of lack of defence, coastal or land, eu gets flooded by fake refugees, blackmailed by turkey and has a part of one of the countries which wants to join them (Ukraine) annexed and shits out a bunch of ineffective sanctions to russia. Europe is losing its relevance in the world by trading with war criminals from Russia and human rights offenders from Saudi Arabia. It wanted to sell itself further by signing that dumbass free trade agreement with the US – TTIP. Overall, the greatest enemy the EU currently has is its own retarded leadership of unelected officials and banksters.

  23. avatar
    randomguy2017

    I can only support Eu under a couple necessary conditions,
    none of which are atm.

    Until then I will remain nationalistic minded, but still carrying about Europe as a whole.

    Europe DOES NOT need USA army.

    The problem is the you have a split in Western/South Europe
    and opinions on NATO vary. They are majority liberal minded.

    You have the states in East Europe bordering in Russia, which are more conservative minded,
    yet they depend on a globalist liberal instrument like NATO and US help. the US changes from neocon (yuck) to liberal (yuck).

    So what does Europe need to do?
    Western Europe needs to assure those countries
    they will help, and Western Europe needs to reduce immigration and stop losing its old culture before the changes in the last few decades.
    East Europe bordering Russia needs to be more diplomatic with both the EU
    and Russia.

    Hungary, Czech, Italy have decent policies on Russia.
    These sanctions hurt the EU more than the US.

    the rest of Europe needs to lower the neocon and soros type mindset on that big nation in the East.
    If Russia invades all of Ukraine (which would be sad and horrible) then the aggressive rherotic would make more sense.

    I refuse to believe any of the liberal or neocon nonsense
    that dominates the media in majority of countries.

    • avatar
      Jose Quintans

      Mostly agree, well said.

  24. avatar
    Jarmo Tverin

    I rather ally with americans than some suicidal european nations that are trying to drag us all down to abyss

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      It’s your choice if you want to stay submitted…

    • avatar
      Jarmo Tverin

      Trump is a better choice than junckermerkel and the rest of the commie bunch

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      Choice for what? Independant and deceide everything in the country is the best!

  25. avatar
    Zap Van Der Berg

    Oh the day any EU citizen can apply for membership of the EU army, like the legion operates in france… It will be a glorious day

    • avatar
      Jose Quintans

      Indeed

    • avatar
      Rémi Martin

      EU is peace, they said… For your Knowledge, the legion in France doesn’t have the right to operate in metropolitan France.

  26. avatar
    Zap Van Der Berg

    Jarmo the americans say they dont want to drag you into the abyss… But if its convenient for them thwyll kick you in

  27. avatar
    Jose Quintans

    Does Europe need USA?
    For the global scale challenges yes, we need the USA in the NATO.

    NATO is a great organization that we the Europeans and the Americans can be proud of. And effectively ensured peace and progress in the west for decades, it is there now, and it is ready, #WeAreNATO.

    Nevertheless there are conflicts of interest between the USA and Europe. When there are conflicts of interest between USA and Russia, are we able to recognize and defend our own interests when are not aligned with neither USA or Russia? Or are we dragged down into an escalation that harms us?

    There are also conflicts of interest with another NATO member, Turkey.
    Turkey’s interests diverge from those of Europe, and the stronger Turkey becomes, the more assertive will be.

    If all the countries of the world were NATO members, then NATO would be rendered useless.
    Every global region shall be able to articulate its commercial and political interests, and defend them with diplomacy and military means.

    A stronger Europe would mean a complete change in the relationship USA-EU-Russia, for the better I believe.
    And what Russia will do to counter China?

    In the years and decades to come China will force us to realize we shall cooperate.
    After the collapse of the USSR, Russia didn’t have a marshal plan, and some argue that was an error, that then we lost Russia, we lost the opportunity of integrating Russia with the west, and now we pay for it.

    Now we cannot even defend our external borders or the borders of our brother European nations, neither impose order and peace in the shores of Mare Nostrum.

    Europe needs to promote and defend its interests in global scale, and projecting military power is a tool that we cannot renounce to.

    Some fear that an European Army would mean duplication of structures, but think twice, now we have 27 parallel chains of command.

    Plus an European framework for defense spending and rules for awarding contracts for research, development, and supply weapons, would mean the begining of a smarter spending, getting more power per euro spent.
    That’s the first logical step. If otherwise we increase spending first, then probably the mess would be bigger and harder to optimize.
    Once we have a smart efficient spending framework, we could think in spending more.

    Also, it is clear for me that the biggest barriers are:
    – Lack of trust for renouncing to some state-level defense powers in favor of a central authority.
    – The influence regional defense industries have over governments, and their fear of losing market share.

    The second one is a matter of money — well and status, since they might prefer to be kings in their (future grave)yard, while I guess the solution to the first one begins with aligning strategies.
    It is clear what a European defense strategy would mean, and it is not incompatible with state level defense strategies.

    Are the EU politicians willing to accept it?
    I know some are.
    Others prefer to play nice to save the face in front of their electorate — isn’t that populism as well? –. These shall be awaken before we run out of time.

    God bless Europe.

    • avatar
      Caleb DeMarco

      It was stupid to fight back against Nazi Germany? News to me.

  28. avatar
    Raivis

    @Zsolt Barczey “The CENTRALIZED Russian army will never attack Europe: it never did in history, and Russia is a civilized country, unlike Europe, and would never do such a heinous thing.“
    Are u drunk?
    They invaded Baltic states several times over history. They occupied and then destroyed all intelligence at that time.
    And what about Moldavia, Ukraine (Crimea) and Abhazia today? Jesus god, turn on brains.
    Russia is far from civilization. First and greatest civilizations was in Egypt, Iraque (Babylon), Greece, Persia, Later Rome. Then probably Japan and China.

    I think best solution in centralized EU defence pact, wich consists from european Nato members.
    Only external threat is Russia via hybridwar or cyberwar as situation in Italy, Greece and Spain shows.
    About some negative comment on refuugees –
    Actions was right from many perspectives (demographics, economy, humane). Statistics also shows that refugees is involved in less crimes than citizens, even if overal crime rises (bcause more humans), terrorisms of course is huge problem, but it is problem also in US). Even if so, i still dont want to see in my country refugees, even if this is right and humane action, because of different culture. That will rise long term issues.

  29. avatar
    Maia Alexandrova

    Defence against whom? There is no country that wants to attack Europe. This mentality belongs in the past. The world has moved on, apart from a few remaining troubled spots, but in time they will also establish peace. This is the future. No one wants to fight, kill and die any more, people just want to live. There has been too much blood spilled through the centuries to have any appetite to spill more. The exception is probably USA who have not had much casualties in any conflict in their history, so they have not yet learned the lesson about what is more important – war or peace. They are lagging behind in that, but we don’t have to be stuck to them, since we know the answer from our own bitter experience from two World Wars and many others before that. Europe is not in danger from an army any more. The danger comes from an evil ideology. This is where we need to focus. For this we don’t need an army to defend us.

    How do you fight an evil ideology? By exposing its true face and showing exactly where it is wrong and why it is wrong, so less and less people are fooled by it. At the moment there are absolutely no public debates and discussions, challenging those aggressive, evil beliefs that are at the root of an increasing number of terrorist attacks in Europe. This is because of the pathetic fear of offending religions… As long as that fear exists, we will not be able to defend ourselves against the new threat – terrorism. Neither NATO, nor any common EU army can fight against an ideology. For that battle, the only weapon you need is your mind and words. Just like there are cunning masters of radicalisation, there can be an effective anti-radicalisation force which exposes the lies and traps of the evil ideology and in this way saves any future victims. Anyone of us can be a part of it as philosophy is not exclusive only to “experts” and “professionals”.

    • avatar
      Jose Quintans

      Dear Maia, I love your ideals, although I also believe that ideological battles take many time.
      Have you ever earned a victory over a politically biased person? Did you change his/her mind?
      Not impossible though, but it is not a straight path.

      If you want peace, be ready to win the war.
      That’s why you, we, don’t feel the direct threat of war, in western Europe.

      Best regards.

    • avatar
      Tarquin Farquhar

      @Maia Alexandrova
      Cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo!

    • avatar
      Maia Alexandrova

      Tarquin Farquhar, this is a forum, not a forest. Go cuckoo somewhere else.

    • avatar
      Maia Alexandrova

      Jose Quintans, do we have a choice not to fight the ideological battles? If we choose not to, then there will be no one to stop those with harmful ideologies from applying them in practice. The police can stop only a few. This is not enough as there are too many extremists at the moment, walking free and probably planning their terrorist attacks. Besides, more are being radicalised every day through different means – internet, prisons, etc. The whole point is to destroy evil in people’s minds, before that evil has destroyed more innocent people. It is possible for those with terrorist beliefs to change, if the truth of these beliefs is challenged and they realise how blind they were, although it depends on the level of brainwashing that a person has experienced. Sometimes it is too late and only death can prevent that person from doing harm, but before that happens, we should use the chance to change them while they are still alive. For example, in the prisons there can be philosophy lessons and discussions about life and death, what makes people commit crimes, talks about the abuse they experienced as children – whatever is necessary to heal the souls of those people, so that when they get out of there, they are changed for the better. They need positive programming, learning, reading books and doing some kind of work in the prison, so they discover their own value as humans and then are able to value others’ lives more. At the moment many criminals actually become worse when they get out of prison and are often radicalised. It is a hard battle, but I think unavoidable, if we want to prevent the loss of more innocent lives in future.

    • avatar
      Tarquin Farquhar

      @Maia Alexandrova
      LOL!
      Where is your sense of humour?

    • avatar
      Maia Alexandrova

      Tarquin Farquhar, terrorism, wars and dead people is not something I laugh about.

  30. avatar
    Ģirts Līcis

    Some countries help ppl who needed. US need feed own ppl too???? Not always make weapons.

  31. avatar
    Jankovics Márk

    America needs europe to threat russia:D but on every side the devil is behind and always the innocent sucks.More justice,less propaganda and fanatic psycho groups with power through nations.

  32. avatar
    Michael Paraskevas

    Because, it is clear that you cannot trust other people to secure your borders when they have ties with the enemy.

  33. avatar
    EU Reform- Proactive

    YES it can!

    Another highly disingenuous question by the DE & the EU! Why?

    * “Europe” can comfortably take care of its own defense because 27 countries are European and are all part of the NATO Alliance.

    * NATO Article 10 states that NATO membership is open to any “European State”.

    * It is the “EU” who has no own defense treaty (yet) in its collection of treaties!

    * It is the “EU” who is fishing & longing for EU military power.

    * It is the “EU” who NEVER should be militarily empowered outside NATO!

    What more is needed?

    The mischievous EU27 dreamers must be told in no uncertain terms to stay away from its own army but instead fully support NATO (29) in spirit, letter and contributions!

    What a fake question that is!
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO

  34. avatar
    George

    Because we are not yet organised. There’s no plan and no institutions in place for decision making.

    • avatar
      EU Reform- Proactive

      George, really? NATO (“EUROPE”) counts for nothing than? Very interesting!

  35. avatar
    George Guydosh

    Large entities are willingly or unwillingly involved in security matters. The order of the world has to be maintained.

  36. avatar
    Ivan Burrows

    Because its run by a bunch of unelected egomaniacs who will do anything to create their Greater German Empire, they must be stopped before they repeat European history.

    • avatar
      Christos Boras

      Look what is happening in the Aegean Sea every day. The European Borders being violated multiple times per day.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Which ‘European’ borders ? there are 51 ‘European’ Nation States each with their own borders so which one are you talking about ?

    • avatar
      Erik Verbrugge

      The border around the nations within the EU.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Erik Verbrugge The whole EU or the Schengen area ?

    • avatar
      Jokera Jokerov

      Erik, you don`t mean the borders between Switzerland and Germany or France, do you? :P

    • avatar
      Liz Lyz

      He is from China :) , the hater in charge. Every day, every where…

  37. avatar
    jthk

    Terrorism is a product of the Cold War superpower confrontation. Syria problem is part of the Arabia Spring, which Obama used to free the Middle East military force for the containment of China. So, both terrorism and Syria and EU refugee influx are problems created by the US, not really problem of Europe. As such, EU needs its own defense at least the joint force would not create a messy before leaving for Asia Pacific.

  38. avatar
    jthk

    EU does not have a global military interest but the US has. It is only for this single reason the EU has to form its own defensive force. By forming a solidary union, EU has all competitive advantages sufficient to stand for all sorts of social, economic, political and even global challenges. I do not see why EU still need to rely on the NATO led by a country on the opposite side of the Atlantic Ocean.

  39. avatar
    Christos Saroglou

    Simply because Europe has little armies of the member states who don’t stand a chance against big rivals like Russia. There is only one solution, union.

    • avatar
      Arnout Posthumus

      Russia is a useless nation when it comes to attack. It wont stand a chance vs the bigger nations. The sad thing is that it can bully its small neighbours.

    • avatar
      Diaconu George Razvan

      Arnout Posthumus the sad thing is actually it uses it time to hold onto the memories and concept of the urss and it’s not using those resources to improve life in the country or help the economy! instead of evolution they do retribution!

    • avatar
      Alessandro Pieroni

      That’s not true. Our armies may be too small to attack Russia (something we shouldn’t desire anyway), they are not too small to defend Europe from Russia. Finland managed to defend herself from Russia during the Winter War with far less troops than European nations combined.

    • avatar
      Christos Saroglou

      I mentioned Russia as an example could be any other big nation eg china. Single European nations don’t stand a chance against them and that’s the sad true, numbers are overwhelming. Also a strong army isn’t needed only for war, a strong army makes a state much more powerful in global geopolitics and single European nations armies can’t play that role anymore. European Union is the only option if Europe wants to be the world power it’s single nations used to be a hundred years ago and can’t rely to USA for its security anymore, trump made that clear.

    • avatar
      Christos Saroglou

      Alessandro Pieroni my friend single European nations don’t stand a chance against Russia numbers are overwhelming. By the way Finland was able to repeal the first Russian attack when Russia got serious on her second offensive Finland was easily beaten, not to mention that was forced during Cold War to strict neutrality because of fear of USSR. Past 70 years the only thing that stopes Russia to reach the Atlantic is the American presence on Western Europe and that’s the sad truth. I’m

    • avatar
      Christos Saroglou

      Arnout Posthumus Russia is useless in offensive? And how come the Russian flag was planted on reighstag at the end of ww2?

    • avatar
      Alessandro Pieroni

      That’s why I said “European nations combined” and not “single European nations”. I support a common European defence (I think the EU is not necessary in doing that), but at the same time we need to ensure that this common defence is not going to be used as a US proxy against Russia.

    • avatar
      Christos Saroglou

      Alessandro Pieroni yes of course, eu army must be the shield of a peaceful and collaborative Europe, something that today USA isn’t.

    • avatar
      Dee O'brien

      The Russians have pure evil nukes that could wipe Europe off the map in minutes,I don’t think antagonising them is a good idea..

  40. avatar
    Marnix Kappeyne

    Europe needs to get it’s shit together and get a great defense so we don’t have to rely on the US but I think we should keep NATO so the integrated European army and the American army can be stronger together

  41. avatar
    Oliver Hauss

    Defence is a bit more than mere military means. And the US have shown quite solidly that overreliance on military security will leave the world less safe, not more.

    • avatar
      Micheál de Staic

      Considering EU law forbits the use of the army on a population, I think it’s time to put the tin foil hat back on.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Micheál de Staic When did Brussels care about EU law lol

  42. avatar
    Ivan Burrows

    It can, its called NATO. A new EU Wehrmacht would only serve the interests of Germany.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Micheál de Staic Pull out and see how long you last before the Russians move in, if you think the halfwits in Brussels will save you then you are a fool.

    • avatar
      Alessandro Pieroni

      Spoiler alert, NATO only serves the interests of the US.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Alessandro Pieroni Who do you think has kept you safe since the last ‘European’ world war, Brussels ? lol

    • avatar
      Alessandro Pieroni

      One could argue that if it wasn’t for the consistent help provided by the US to the USSR during WW2 not only Western Europe but also Eastern Europe would have been “safe” in the first place. But let’s discuss reality, it is true that NATO prevented a Soviet occupation of Western Europe (mainly because it was already occupied by the US, but we can agree that it was still a preferable option), but the Cold War has now ended (“now” meaning almost 30 years ago), and NATO has since become just a tool to ensure Washington geopolitcal power over Europe, promoting proxy wars against Russia in Georgia and Ukraine and BOMBING Serbia (think about that for a second). We have also been involved in many conflicts we had nothing to do with, sometimes against our own interests. African immigrants are now able to flood Europe mainly because NATO decided to overthrow the the Libyan goverment that was actually stopping them.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Alessandro Pieroni You play games with history if you wish but I will stick with facts of reality & that is without the Americans, the British and the peoples of the British Empire you would be part the Russian or German empire now. Even today if you leave NATO you will become Russian property, create the United states of Europe and Germany will own you. You crazy European have learnt nothing from your history and are destined to repeat it, just don’t expect us to save you from yourselves again.

    • avatar
      Alessandro Pieroni

      What do you mean by “German empire” dude? Something like the Holy Roman Empire? Cause I would totally dig that. As for the “saving us from ourselves” (which means bombing us, I guess?), I will not debate your “Spielbergian” view of history, but just remind you, again, that both WW2 and the Cold War are over, and fighting some imaginary Wehrmacht or KGB here on fb is irrational. Cheers.

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      Alessandro Pieroni And yet you would repeat the disasters of both the WW2 and the cold war, you have learnt nothing from your history. Thank god we are leaving the lunatic asylum :)

  43. avatar
    Zap Van Der Berg

    When people say Nato serves the united states and a divided europe serves russia, i agree, but when i hear a european army benefits germany, thats not true. France, Italy and Poland together are more than Germany, and you have 23 other member states, in a european army truly proportional and diverse germans would be outnumbered 1 – 7 or 1 – 8, people should thank the germans and adore merkel and schulz the EU is the only answer! Do people want a divideD EU? An imdependent nationalistic germany? Le penn, wilders and puidgemont?! A european army might have its risk (use against rebelious member state as someone said) but there are so many ways to prevent this! And the pros so far outweigh the cons, a european united police and military guarantees the borders, safety, and regulation of all member states equally, can fight corruption eficiently, etc. Etc. Etc. LONG LIVE THE EU 2018 AND LONG LIVE THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS! I PRAY PESCO PREVAILS WITH PEACE PACIFICALLY AND PROPERLY

    • avatar
      Ivan Burrows

      You do know you have just described the Wehrmacht 1939-1945 don’t you ? Have you picked out the colour of your EU uniform yet ? I bet its black with a Totenkopf on the cap isn’t it.

  44. avatar
    Craig Willy

    Europeans are too wimpish and divided to organize their own defense. They’ll continue live at Uncle Sam’s expense (at least until he dies of obesity).

    • avatar
      Micheál de Staic

      It not that were whippish but rather we prefer for fund schools and hospitals than parking tanks in the middle of the desert.

    • avatar
      Craig Willy

      Micheál I partially agree.

  45. avatar
    Charles Steel

    A unelected corporation with an army can’t see any formidable problems in the future as they try to accomplish the Karlegi plan

    • avatar
      Micheál de Staic

      Hence you heard of the Council of Europe? If so tell me how sits on it because they have the final say.

    • avatar
      Charles Steel

      Micheál de Staic it already starting to form the EU army so what final say

  46. avatar
    Konrad Kowalski

    A mixed EU Army is the idea of Satan. The idea of the EU Army shows that the EU wants to be a tyranny. NATO is more real force and proven internationally

    1. In the 500-year Lithuanian-Polish Union there were separate armies and commanders, even.
    2. Service under a foreign banner is against the Polish constitution and is punished (in time of peace) by a three-year prison sentence.
    3. The Polish army has different traditions than all European armies.

    – In Poland there were strict military codes (formally written down in the 16th century). Plunder of civilians and rapes on women were punished by death (and the worst punishment: loss of honor)

    – The Polish army has never used landmines
    – A Polish soldier always had the right to refuse to carry out an immoral order

    4. What is the opposition of soldiers to an immoral order when there are other soldiers?
    5. Army without a banner, symbols on the cap and tradition is a band, not an army (like russians army in Crimea in 2014)
    6. I know that Armies of other countries have very many crimes and their traditions are different (eg German). We remember what the international (French, Dutch and Belgian and Ukrainians) Vaffen SS troops were doing under German’s command

    P.S.
    1. I can not imagine that a Polish soldier will be under the orders of a foreign officer
    2. The EU army is scandalous, it is the goal of laughter and very deep indignation. !!! In 1830, the Polish Army rebelled when the Russians were to suppress the revolution in the Netherlands (the Polish Army was to be a “spear”). Polish 30-thousandth Army caused the November Uprising and saved the Dutch and Belgians revolution (and other German countries too) and a very grim and tragic fate. Frankfurt has the Polish emblem and the Polish flag. Do you think that this is the case?

    The EU ( Germany and France) proposes something worse than the Russian tzar in the 19th century https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historia_wojska_polskiego

    • avatar
      Sari Bruno

      I totally disagree with you.

    • avatar
      Konrad Kowalski

      Sari Bruno You have the right to disagree, but do you have any arguments?

      Poles know history and know well what the army did in Europe during religious wars and during the 30-year war and during World War II or African colonies.

      The Polish Army did not participate in the slaughter of the population, but many times saved European countries against tyranny.
      Will you give one positive argument from history?
      The army must be subject to the national government and national law. The government must take responsibility for the actions of actions of military troops.
      Judges in European tribunals are elected by the strongest groups of politicians and they are loyal

    • avatar
      Peré Kox

      You do know that Polis Nato troops are under the command of a American general right?

    • avatar
      Konrad Kowalski

      Peré Kox In NATO, Polish troops are uniform military units that are under direct orders of Polish officers and Polish flag.
      The Polish Army is subject to the Polish government (like the armies of other countries)

    • avatar
      Peré Kox

      And if go that far into the theoriticle the a EU does not mean have to mean full intergration. It could juist be a seperate force. With the memberstates maintaining their own army’s. Which would mean Poland would still maintain it’s own army. Illigale orders are illigal orders and all soldiers should always be refused in each case. For he banner woul create a new European one. Because a army means single forgain policy. And a lot would have to happen to make that possible including increased democracy.

    • avatar
      Konrad Kowalski

      Peré Kox You have not read it carefully. Read again, please.
      The history of Western Europe is a series of wars of everyone with all, religious wars and lawlessness. The closer to our times, the more brutal and ruthless politics.
      Western Europe is barbaric politically with slaughters, lack of religious tolerance and LACK OF POLITICAL TOLERANCE.
      Germany is a separate topic for the lack of a political “fuse” for 1100 years. They and the Russians are very similar, because the Moscow State adopted the German ideology at the end of the fifteenth century and mixed with the Tartar customs.

      Western Europe does not know what democracy is and no censorship to this day. In Western Europe, there is a lack of knowledge and lack of knowledge of facts

      P.S. The announcement of European total integration with strength and aggression is an extreme example of nationalism and absolutism ( but even nasism )

    • avatar
      Konrad Kowalski

      Peré Kox You have not read it carefully. Read again, please.
      The history of Western Europe is a series of wars of everyone with all, religious wars and lawlessness. The closer to our times, the more brutal and ruthless politics.
      Western Europe is barbaric politically with slaughters, lack of religious tolerance and LACK OF POLITICAL TOLERANCE.
      Germany is a separate topic for the lack of a political “fuse” for 1100 years. They and the Russians are very similar, because the Moscow State adopted the German ideology at the end of the fifteenth century and mixed with the Tartar customs.

      Western Europe does not know what democracy is and use censorship to this day. In Western Europe, there is a lack of knowledge and lack of knowledge of facts

      P.S. The announcement of European total integration with strength and aggression is an extreme example of nationalism and absolutism ( but even nasism )

    • avatar
      jthk

      Cannot agree with Konrad Kowalski. How can a democratic EU’s defence force is “the idea of Satan” but a American controlled NATO fighting for American First and waging war throughout the Balkan and Middle is more a real force for European interest and proven internationally???? Proven what? internal dominance of the American ? When coercive force is not under the command of EU, it risks being manipulated for other nation’s interest. What is democracy? It is people’s power not military superpower’s power. Democracy is not a banner using to invade and bully small countries or for competition of hegemony. Democracy is Europe people determine European destination. How Europe people can determine our own destination is to determine when to use our force for what purpose that suit our own interest. When the UN and EU are unions for collective security so as to prevent the recurrence of the third devastating war, European people ought to uphold these principle, particularly democracy is a product of Athene and Europe. Why Europe has surrendered its original desire searching for fact of the Enlightenment, instead poisoned itself by ideologies that politicians manipulated for political support? This is definitely not the idea of the Enlightenment philosophers.

  47. avatar
    Moreno Mariani

    I think that there are too many opposite interests, a really unified and united Europe is not well seen by Usa and other powers… but I hope that one day we will be able to consider ourselves a country.

    • avatar
      jthk

      Cannot agree again, why Europeans need a moderator outside Europe? The US is a country, which is, its government is representing US interest. This does not suggest that US government is not good but a democracy is rule for the people, rule of the people, which is, what is the definition of American people? If European believe in democracy, all should admit that the EU Council is made up of elected national leaders of individual states, which is exactly a replication of democracy of each member state. If European people believe their popularly elected political leaders are representing their own interest and representing themselves to sit the council, they have to agree this is the best and viable solution of the time. It does not contribute to anything if we only criticize EU is not good enough, not democratic enough, not representative enough… but fail to offer ideas for solution. Of course, political leaders are not supermen, it is absolutely normal to ignore things. It is the people and their representatives need to voice out what they need. The IT is offering us ample opportunities for expression of individual. We have to take up duties and responsibilities, if we need protection of whatever the nation or the EU.

  48. avatar
    Vasil Petleshkov

    ЗАЩОТО ЕВРОПА НАЗНАЧАВА НА ГОЛЕМИ ПОСТОВЕ САМО КОРУМПИРАНИ ВОЕННИ, КОИТО РАБОТЯТ САМО ЗА КОРУМПИРАНИТЕ ИНТЕРЕСИ НА ОПРЕДЕЛЕНА ГРУПА ЕВРО ДЪРЖАВИ… ЕВРО АРМИЯТА НА НАТО ЩЕ ДОКАЖЕ СВОЕТО ДОВЕРИЕ НА ЕВРОПА САМО ТОГАВА, КОГАТО ЕВРО АРМИЯТА НА НАТО ОТНОВО ВЪРНЕ ЦЯЛАТА ТЕРИТОРИЯ НА ДЪРЖАВАТА УКРАЙНА…

    • avatar
      Arthur Gustin

      Ahahahhahahah, have you check the current level of corruption in Russia ?

  49. avatar
    Arthur Gustin

    We can and are able, it’s just way to costly and people will cringe if we bring them the bill…

  50. avatar
    Yannick Cornet

    Can you find more relevant and interesting questions? I’m tired of this one. No to a militarised Europe. We should not up the ante, but rather demilitarise the other crazies of this world before they decide to press their oh-so-big buttons.

  51. avatar
    Vassiliki Xifteri

    Europe has many countries. Do you mean E.U? E.U was supposed to be economic alliance so that each country live in prosperity and we do not go to WWIII. The best way to not need defence is to build good educational system so that people realize we share one planet and we need to respect it.

  52. avatar
    Diana Goldenstorm

    Because it is so immensely expensive? Now paying nato for the good he does or doesn’t do is much cheaper than to have to finance our own defense. Surely we should spend the additional money for our euopean citizens welfare.

  53. avatar
    Pascal Collotte

    Assuring a real European defense is, I believe, essential should we expect to be taken seriously, and the sooner the better. Unfortunately even if we are ready to spend 3% of the EU GDP to defense (minimum to be credible in view of the lack of investment across EU in the last 30 years), the fact is that we need as well a credible decision making structure, which requires that EU nations agree to give away their defense management to a supra-national power (still to be defines and voted for), is not the same as having a common decision. At the time of acting there cannot be a vote among the 27 on whether we go or not. The war in the Balkans has shown how bad this can turn out to be!
    We (EU nations) also need to agree + respect a common policy to use and develop our EU defense industry products instead of buying American, otherwise there will be a complete dependence on US (or other) defense suppliers and heterogeneity in the military equipment’s used across EU.
    Are our state governments ready to do so?

  54. avatar
    jthk

    It is an insult to call Germany “the captive of Russia”. Russia appears to be treating Europe more equal and with more respect than Trump. I do not see why all European people have to pay for American to become great again as Trump always been crying? A unipolar world with the US waging a World Trade War and talking the relaxation on the use of nuclear weapon for pre-emptive strike is more dangerous than the balance of terror in the Cold War. American threat is actually the major reason both Iran and North Korea want so urgently to develop nuclear weapon. This is the only way small nation can hope to resist a superpower.

  55. avatar
    jthk

    Why Trump can talk peace with North Korea but not with Iran? Why Balkan and Middle East cannot have peace talk but the Korea Peninsula can can be made? This is the choice of Trump but not that of Europe, Balkan nor the Middle East people. People want peace not war. When we start talking about waging war, there will be war. A self-actualization process. This is one of the main reasons on the outbreak of two devastating world war. When military power is the only power US is still holding, all disputes would be using military power to “solve”. Wage in this era when large and small countries can have nuclear weapon. Even Japan claims to have the power to produce nuclear weapon without a few months, war would only lead to the destruction of the human species and the planet earth.

  56. avatar
    jthk

    What Trump is speaking is not a full picture. NATO does not serve only to protect Europe, it is a tool made possible for the US to become a global superpower during and after the Cold War. Without NATO, the US cannot survive the many wars in the Middle East and the Balkan. At the most, the US can become a regional force rather than a global one. In this sense, Trump has to pay for Europe to allow the America to become great again and to station in Europe to threaten its enemy Russia and to control petroleum in the Middle East and to suppress the emergence of a strong and united state of Europe, not to shout against Angela Merek and insult Germany and order other national leaders of Europe to pay. Trump does not even have the basic manner and respect. I do not see how he can represent a superpower going around the world. EU statesmen have to think who are they serving. EU people have to think clearly what interest they want their country or EU to serve. Even more important, what are the destinations of being Europeans.

  57. avatar
    Ivan

    We can, via NATO so there is no need for a German owned EU army.

    You have been there, done that and killed 60 million people in the process.

    Do you really want to do that again ?

    • avatar
      Jacky

      Oh please, Ivan, what a stupid and primitiv comment, typical brexiterian way of simplistic manipulation !

    • avatar
      Paulius

      This guy always goes full retard. Never hesitates

    • avatar
      Paulius

      But I agree, why is there a need for EU army when there is NATO?

    • avatar
      Martyna

      Ivan Burrows I understand that according to you when Britain ruled 1/4 of the globe there were no victims at all. About communism in Jalta ( where they decided which part of Europe will be free and which under the Soviets) there were only 3 main players and one of them was Churchill ( in my country at history lessons we were told that this is the moment when Britain cheated us second time). By the way you think EU is a mess? Sorry for saying it but mess between Israel and Palestinian, between India and Pakistan is mainly because of your country politics so before you throw the stone look at your country history.

    • avatar
      Ivan

      Martyna Wudecka Where did I say there were no victims during the British Empire ? If you start your criticism with a mischaracterisation I feel no impulse to read the rest of your post. Try again..

      While it’s true ‘some’ people did suffer under the British Empire the world would be a far more unpleasant place now and by comparison it was far better than the alternatives at the time which is why even today there are 53 countries in the commonwealth with a combined population of 2.3 billion people. Not bad for a small country off the coast of Continental Europe, don’t you think. 8|

      https://listverse.com/2016/08/01/top-10-things-the-british-empire-got-right/

    • avatar
      jthk

      NATO has been kidnapped by US and waging war everywhere. Why should EU be paying to support US hegemony? As you have already said “via NATO”. This is against the autonomy of EU citizens. Why should free people need to maintain its own security via something headed by the US which has already claimed and acting everything for the US to become great again. Isn’t the single military hegemony, the world’s largest economy not great enough? How great the US needs to be? Should the whole world be subservient to the US and obeying command of a crazy old man?

  58. avatar
    Harry

    1. The perceived threat to Europe for decades was Russia/Soviet Union. NATO was created to counter that. European countries always depended on US nuclear deterrence thus saving billions on maintaining large standing armies. 2. As long as NATO exists then a European Army would be a mess since many European countries would belong to both organizations with overlapping jurisdictions and missions.

  59. avatar
    jthk

    The US is spending an exceptionally high percentage of 3.5% its GDP on military budget and it is the largest economy. American total military expenditure is more than the collective expenditure of the 7 top countries. Other countries spend only about 1 to 2%. In this post-Cold War period, when the US is the single military superpower, why the world has not turned out to be more peaceful? When the greed of the US Wall Street has brought so many hardship to so many people all over the world since the 2008 Financial Crisis, when many of the US allies are still struggling to recover from the crisis, I do not see why the US has any reason to ask for more military expenditure. Even though some European states are recovering from the crisis, money ought to go to the people rather than to the NATO?

    • avatar
      jthk

      Against those that put national interest above that of others.

  60. avatar
    jthk

    It is quite clear that Trump wants to start a new round of military conflict in Syria and Iran but lack money. Probably this is the reason why Trump is forcing allies to pay more for NATO. Is Europe ready for a second round of refugee influx? Is EU ready for further EXITs? Is Europe ready to fight a war in Syria, which has the support of Iran and Russia and we cannot eliminate the involvement of China for it is the third military power after the US and Russia. Is Europe preparing to fight a third devastating world war? Europe has been following American led throughout the 6 past decades. It is time Europe has to think independently and carefully for itself. War or peace.

  61. avatar
    Paul

    Because it refuses to aquately pay for it & would prefer to accomodate russian commercial intetests in oil/gas rather than treat them as what they are.. a threat to western security.

    • avatar
      jthk

      What are the difference between Russia commercial interest and US interests? Would US capitalism better than Russian capitalism? With the experience of Chinese multinational enterprise ZTE, Europe ought to learn the lesson, which is, never buy crucial and strategic commodities from one single country. If Europe cannot produce oil, Europe has to buy oil from all over the world under the free market principle.

    • avatar
      jthk

      It seems that the US has refused to pay some international organization such as the UNESCO, the UN Human Rights Commission before quitting membership.

    • avatar
      jthk

      Very true indeed. The problem is the US has lost all its comparative advantages in agricultural and manufacturing industry, while its military industry and newly founded shale oil industry. The US is trying to fight for its hegemony with military power and oil manipulation. Currently, Trump is forcing NATO member states to pay higher military budget and forcing the whole world to cease importing Iran oil. It is very obvious that the US wants to fight a war with Iran at the same time force EU to import US oil. If EU leaders submit to these two commands of Trump, the Iran Nuclear Deal would be cancelled. This is putting EU’s military and energy security under US control. It is not EU citizens who are to help an American president to “make the American great again”. We are not in the Cold War, we are in a global era which is, we are all in the same boat and sharing the same fate. It is time we need to think over whether we want to use human science and technology for war or peace. War of this era when weapon of mass destruction (WMD) has proliferated and asymmetric warfare encourages the use of WMD, particularly when the US is considering to relax the use of WMD.

  62. avatar
    eusebio manuel vestias vestias

    The defese of Europe can only survive in a federal UE and a federal budget is what is lacking in the UE

    • avatar
      jthk

      During the Cold War superpower confrontation, states are required to take side for collective protection. At the same time, states competing for hegemony need to bribe allies for support generously. When the USSR had disappeared, when the US is a declining power and a single military hegemon, it is going to use its remaining power to sustain its hegemony, which is, to fight a war. This explains the increasing aggression from the US. Appeasement would only encourage further aggression and insecurity. EU needs to prepare itself before it is too late. Instead of increasing NATO military budget, EU better increase its own military capacity for self-protection. Past experiences tell us that EU has been able to overcome various crises with further integration.

  63. avatar
    eusebio manuel vestias vestias

    The defese of Europe can only survive in a federal EU and a federal budget is what is lacking in the EU

  64. avatar
    jthk

    When the US was a rising super power competing for hegemony with the Soviet Union, it was confident, generous, and particularly willing to use its newly acquired military and economic power to win allies. In this way, the US was able to set the rules without resistance, particularly when Europe was desperately need support for post-war reconstruction. It was true that Europe’s survival had been depending highly on US protection. When the US is now a declining power, the big enemy Soviet Union has become history, when information technology and physical communication of people and goods are growing intensive, when knowledge becomes the source of power and knowledge is so easily accessible, it is unavoidable that old order should be revised, old super power has to accept the reality of coexistence and mutual cooperation. This is a global era and the end of hegemony. Pretending not seeing the reality and struggling to revive the old era, trade war, stir up regional tension and disputes, arm race would only waste resources and energy, more importantly, speed up its own decline. EU does not only need to take up its own defense, EU has to free itself from old ideology and participate actively to shape up this new global order before it is too late.

  65. avatar
    Gustav

    I think it’s because America is there for us, and because the threat is percieved as low.

  66. avatar
    Aris

    Because of longtime peace in Europe. The European political elites falsely believe that wars are over. That we can solve all the problems through dialogue.
    Finally, all the European states depend on the USA (NATO) for their independence “I will buy American weapons, I will send troops to Afghanistan to support the American Army and automatically the USA will be the Guarantor of my independence”.

  67. avatar
    Alfredo

    Because there is no common foreign policy and each Nation looks to its interest. To have a common defence we need to have a common foreign affairs first

  68. avatar
    Florin

    Well… We fixed all European problems… Let’s have an army now… Who would command this force? How? To what end? Could we really not use that money to some real end?

  69. avatar
    Ana

    Defence from who? Europe countrys always fight each other but now there is peace. There are no real threats to Europe outside Europe, just the ones from the inside.

  70. avatar
    Tim

    We can easily, and support our own defence industry instead of the invaders. We need to our own strong EU military now!

  71. avatar
    Olivier

    That s a good question… Because we have very different view about international relations

  72. avatar
    Bernard

    Because it’s too busy imposing political correctness and left-wing dogma on its population.

  73. avatar
    Tal

    Why would Europe need an army they are too busy importing any potential threat into their country’s by the millions.
    Europe it’s worst own enemy.

  74. avatar
    Pedro

    Up to now, it has been blocked by the UK. From now on, after Brexit, the EU can proceed and join the armed forces of all Member States. It is not difficult. They are already organized in the framework of Nato.

  75. avatar
    Carlos

    … because we do not have a real common culture to put together youngsters into a same quarter or barracks. Different values, religions, moral and ethic behaviors from new generations of young people and politicians who are ‘social and ethnic ghetto built’ create no harmonized conditions to spread a multi-European origin army.

  76. avatar
    John-romi

    We need police against corruption not army to go to war.

  77. avatar
    Yiannos

    Due to political stupidity and Britain was putting a veto to the EU army due to obeying there American masters

  78. avatar
    Gary

    The world would be shaking in its boots with Italians leading it😂

  79. avatar
    Galina

    Because NATO is controling Europe. Who controls NATO? This I’ll leave up to you to answer.

  80. avatar
    Enric

    A new army to help the USA in It,s wars? The EU should promote peace with Russia because the other neighbours, except Turkey, is strong enough to atac us. Our real problem is the 5th column

  81. avatar
    Gregory

    DEFENSE? What’d you got, a team of monkeys writing these headlines?

  82. avatar
    Paul

    Because it would be subject to the lowest common denominator. ..lots of candidates !
    The “EU” has done NOTHING to counter aggression on its doorstep over last 25 years whether it was the Balkans. .. Middle east/N.Africa ..Crimea.. Ukraine…even NATO is frankly powerless w/o American leadership.

Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Privacy Policy unless you have disabled them. You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.