For decades following the Cold War, Europe’s military spending reflected a perceived new reality of peace and stability. Governments redirected funds away from tanks, submarines, and fighter jets, instead prioritising hospitals, pensions, and other social programs.
The underlying assumption was clear: the world was entering a new era of reduced military threats, and Europe could safely focus on fostering economic growth and social welfare.
But that optimistic chapter has come to an abrupt end. The full-scale war raging in Ukraine and the rise of isolationist rhetoric in the United States have sent shockwaves through European capitals. Leaders across the continent now face a stark reality: Europe must take its military preparedness seriously once again.
Decades of Cuts Have Taken Their Toll
The post-Cold War era saw significant reductions in European defence budgets. With the Soviet Union’s collapse, many European nations felt secure enough to cut spending, assuming that NATO—and the United States in particular—would always provide a robust security umbrella. This reliance on American military dominance allowed Europe’s militaries to shrink, their equipment to age, and their research and development (R&D) efforts to stagnate.
This period of relative neglect has left Europe’s armed forces ill-equipped for the challenges they now face. Outdated equipment, undersized forces, and a lack of interoperability among national militaries have severely diminished Europe’s ability to operate independently of the U.S.
In the words of Daniel Fiott, Head of the Defence and Statecraft Program at the Brussels School of Governance, “Before Trump came to office, 2 percent was seen as the ceiling. Now it’s seen as the baseline.”
NATO’s 2% Benchmark: A Target Too Low?
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has long emphasised the importance of defence spending. In 2014, after Russia’s annexation of Crimea, NATO member states formally committed to spending 2 percent of their GDP on defence by 2024.
However, this benchmark had been under discussion for over a decade before it began to gain traction.
Even with the 2014 agreement, progress has been slow. As of today, eight NATO countries still fall short of the 2 percent target. Analysts argue that even reaching this benchmark may not be sufficient to address the current threats facing Europe.
U.S. President Donald J. Trump’s calls for NATO members to spend 5 percent of their GDP on defence have further fuelled this debate. While his demands are controversial, they underscore a fundamental point: Europe’s reliance on American military support is unsustainable, and as Trump understands, to the American taxpayers it is unnacceptable.
The Trump Factor: Shifting the Debate
Donald Trump’s presidency brought NATO’s defence spending disparities into sharp focus. His repeated critiques of European countries for failing to meet the 2 percent target resonated with a sense of frustration shared by many American policymakers. Trump’s rhetoric, which sometimes borders on hostility toward NATO allies, has raised uncomfortable questions about the alliance’s future.
In his bid for re-election, Trump’s stance on NATO grew even more aggressive. He suggested that the U.S. might not come to the aid of NATO members that fail to meet their spending commitments, stating he would encourage Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to those nations. Such comments have rattled European leaders, who now face the dual challenge of increasing their defence budgets and maintaining unity within the alliance.
Western Europe vs. Eastern Europe: A Tale of Two Approaches
While Western European nations debate how much more to spend on defence, those NATO member states closer to Russia have already taken decisive action. Poland, for instance, has increased its defence spending to an impressive 4 percent of its GDP in 2024, the highest in NATO. This move reflects the heightened sense of urgency felt by nations on NATO’s eastern flank, where the threat from Moscow is viewed as immediate and existential.
In Germany, the debate over military spending has reached a fever pitch. Robert Habeck, the country’s economic minister, recently proposed raising defence spending to 3.5 percent of GDP.
In an interview with Der Spiegel, he argued, “We need to spend almost twice as much on defense so that Putin does not dare to attack us.” Such statements mark a significant shift in a country that has long been cautious about military expansion due to its historical legacy.
The Role of Defence Research and Technology
One of the critical areas where European defence spending has fallen short is in research and technology (R&T). Despite increased budgets in recent years, EU member states have struggled to meet the NATO benchmark of dedicating 2 percent of their defence expenditure to R&T activities. Currently, just two countries account for more than 80 percent of R&T spending at the EU level, highlighting a stark imbalance.
Collaborative efforts, such as the European Defence Agency’s (EDA) ad hoc frameworks and funding initiatives like the European Defence Fund (EDF), offer hope for bridging this gap. By pooling resources and expertise, EU member states can accelerate the development of cutting-edge technologies and improve their military capabilities. However, achieving these goals will require sustained political commitment and significant investment.
The European Commission in particular must come to understand that headlines alone are not enough to deter a potential aggressor.
Toward a New Era of European Defence
The challenges facing Europe are multifaceted. On one hand, leaders must address the immediate threats posed by Russia and the instability in Ukraine. On the other hand, they must navigate the complexities of a changing transatlantic relationship, particularly with Trump back in the White House.
Increasing defence spending is only part of the solution. European nations must also prioritise modernisation, interoperability, and strategic autonomy.
The latter, in particular, has become a buzzword in European policy circles. Strategic autonomy refers to the EU’s ability to act independently in defence and security matters, reducing its reliance on external powers like the U.S.
Achieving strategic autonomy will require a cultural shift within Europe. For decades, the continent’s security strategy has been predicated on the assumption of American support. Breaking free from this dependency will not be easy, but it is essential for Europe to assert itself on the global stage.
The Cost of Inaction
Failure to invest adequately in defence carries significant risks. A weakened Europe could well embolden adversaries like Russia, undermining the stability of the entire region. It could also strain the transatlantic alliance, as the U.S. grows increasingly frustrated with what it perceives as European free-riding.
Moreover, inaction could have profound economic consequences. The defence industry is a significant driver of innovation, creating jobs and spurring technological advancements that benefit other sectors. By neglecting defense R&D, Europe risks falling behind in the global innovation race.
Soldiers, Sailors, and Airmen are needed, not even more Pen-Pushers
Figures released by Britain’s Ministry of Defence show that in April 2024 there were 63,702 civilians working in the department, an increase of 6 per cent from 2020 when there were 60,256. As this figure rises it comes ever closer to that of 72,510 – the total number of officers and soldiers in the British Army at the time of the study.
It far eclipses the combined total of 57,260 of sailors and airmen serving in the Royal Navy and Royal Air Force at that time. The numbers in all three services continue to fall, as do the numbers of military aircraft and warships.
Despite pleas from service chiefs the Royal Navy’s highly capable and much needed landing platform docks HMS Albion and HMS Bulwark are being decommissioned. Neither has been to sea for some years, largely due to a shortage of crew. A similar situation exists with Britain’s neglected submarine fleet. Britain currently has no realistic means of projecting force overseas.
At the time of writing it is reported that HMS Bulwark has been sold to Brazil.
The cost of hand-wringing over “Diversity”
The UK’s Defence Diversity and Inclusion Strategy 2018–2030 aims to foster a more inclusive and representative armed forces. While comprehensive financial data for the entire strategy’s implementation is not publicly available, specific expenditures have been reported:
- Diversity Personnel Salaries: Between 2019 and 2023, the British Army allocated approximately £2.57 million to salaries for dedicated diversity and inclusion roles.
- Royal Navy Expenditure: In the same period, the Royal Navy spent around £2.4 million on salaries for diversity and inclusion personnel.
- Overall Armed Forces Spending: In 2023, the combined spending on diversity and inclusion personnel across the armed forces nearly reached £2 million, doubling from £900,000 in 2019.
These figures represent but a small fraction of the Ministry of Defence’s total budget. For instance, in the 2023–2024 financial year, the Army’s recruitment campaigns, which integrate diversity and inclusion efforts, had a budget of approximately £9.16 million.
It’s important to note that these expenditures are perceived, in the modern mindset, as part of broader initiatives to enhance the effectiveness and cohesion of the UK’s defence forces through increased diversity and inclusion.
The era of post-Cold War optimism is over
Europe can no longer afford to underfund its militaries and rely on the U.S. for security guarantees. The war in Ukraine and shifting geopolitical dynamics have underscored the need for a robust and independent European defence capability.
While meeting higher defence spending targets will be challenging, the cost of inaction is far greater. By investing in modernisation, collaboration, and strategic autonomy, Europe can ensure its security and assert itself as a credible global actor. The stakes are high, but so too is the potential for a stronger, more united Europe.
