Brussels urged to boost European defense industry against threat from Russia international

The EU fears that the war on the border with Ukraine will not stop and intends to prepare its states for any contingency. The EU’s High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, issued a resounding message this Tuesday in his presentation of the European strategy to strengthen the defense industry against the Russian threat: “When we present the EU’s strategic compass (a) few weeks after the Russian invasion, I said that Europe was in danger, now it is even more in danger.” Being ready means more ammunition and more weapons and, as a result, more capacity to make them, more research and more investment in the defense industry, which until recently was viewed with suspicion.

In this context of growing concern about Russian assertiveness, the European Commission presented this Tuesday the so-called European Defense Strategy advanced by EL Pace, with Ukraine as one of the main focuses. With this country, Europe intends to promote the joint procurement of munitions produced in Europe and for this it has imposed a duty on capitals: in 2030, at least 50% of purchases for its armies are to be produced in the Community Bloc. And 40% of what they buy must be material developed between several EU countries, as is now the Eurofighter fighter jet.

The Commission’s political leaders, who presented the Brussels plans this Tuesday, have tried to convey a sense of urgency. Margrethe Vestager, vice-president of the union executive, explained, “We have to take responsibility for our own safety.” This is a clear reference to the fact that European countries should stop trusting that the United States is the umbrella that will protect them from an aggressive power like Russia and become independent from the “electoral dynamics” on the other side of the Atlantic, especially now that Republican Donald Trump has threatened to return to the White House. “The period of the peace dividend has passed,” insisted the head of the internal market, Thierry Breton, citing an expression from the late eighties – at the end of the Cold War – which advocated a reduction in defense spending. Was.

The objective adopted by Brussels is to “invest more and better”. The first part of this slogan is very clear from the moment that the 23 EU countries (including Sweden, which will formally join in a few days) that are also NATO members committed to increasing their annual budgets. Is. Defense up to an amount equal to 2% of GDP. According to data provided by the Commission, member states spent 58 billion euros on military equipment in 2023 and, if the alliance’s objectives are met, the figure of 143 billion will be reached. The second part of the commitment adopted by Brussels, inspired by vaccines during the pandemic, translates into better coordinating spending through joint procurement, in order to generate synergy instead of 27 expenditure items for the country and a Can be made like a block. The potential of these numbers is best seen when compared to the $84 billion that Russia spends annually on arms, or the $250 billion that the United States spends.

Joint purchasing is one of the tools that the Commission has put on the table. This is not the first time that he has done this. The EU has long set a target for collective procurement to reach 35% of defense spending. Right now that target is far away, 18%.

In view of this, the states’ objective of purchasing 50% of war material from European industry by 2030 and 60% after five years seems very ambitious. However at the same time, it also appears to be the best way to boost production in the region. A senior executive of one of the largest European arms and ammunition companies said in a meeting with journalists a month ago that companies are signing purchase and sale contracts with those governments to invest in increasing their manufacturing capacity. What needs to be done is to guarantee them. cost effectiveness. The same manager was also very skeptical about the European Commission being in charge of procurement, stating that it is an important issue of “countries’ sovereignty”.

stimulate production capacity

Breton and Borrell have given the same warning when asked about the budgetary shortfall of the presented strategy (1.5 billion). “This is not in any way about assuming the prerogatives of states or changing treaties,” justified the French. “Let’s not confuse things,” Borrell asked, “the buyer will remain the state. What we are trying to do is stimulate production capacity. “The aim is to take care of the defense industry, which is an important thing. ” The statements of both represent, at the same time, an implicit rejection of the proposal of their boss, the Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, who a few weeks earlier, at the Munich Security Conference, had put forward this proposal to the next legislature. There is a Defense Commissioner. What they have come to defend is that there should be someone responsible for policy for the defense industry, Britten is playing a role in this legislature.

The lack of money is something that has been discussed in the days leading up to the strategy presentation. For example, France, Poland and Estonia sent a letter to the European Commission this Monday demanding “adequate financing” for the sector. “The most important part of the strategy will be its implementation plan, which should be prepared without any delay. This must be supported by adequate financing, and to this end we ask the Commission to present concrete financing options, especially for the period until the next European budget,” the text says.

To alleviate this lack of money to some extent, the strategy also proposes an exemption from VAT, the introduction of projects of general interest for defence, or an adaptation of the credit policy of the European Investment Bank (EIB) to “the political priorities of the EU”. Does it. , The possibility of using some $270 billion of Russian assets frozen in the Union to supply war material to Ukraine is also on the table. “Until now there was talk of using this money for the reconstruction of Ukraine; Perhaps now is the time to think about using it to avoid its destruction,” said the High Representative, well aware of the resistance faced by many Member States and the legal difficulties of the proposal.

Follow all international information Facebook And xor in our weekly newspaper,

,