Brussels – The need for a common European defense remains, but the question is how to finance it, especially on the industrial front, if investments are made in the United States. The European Parliament resumes its work, and after the summer recess, it starts again with one of the hottest files on the twelve-star agenda: the program to achieve a defense capability by 2030 – the old plan to rearm Europe rebranded to soothe a still-skeptical European Parliament unsure about the next steps. To avoid trade clashes with Washington, the agreement the two sides signed at the end of July requires major purchases from the US defense market, at a time when Europe should be thinking of its own interests.
“We have to invest in European companies and buy European companies, with clear and predictable orders,” Liberal MEP (Re) Lucia Yar urges during the debate in the Committee on Security and Defense. When it comes to capacity, she insists, this is what it is all about, not least to “reduce dependence on foreign suppliers,” precisely what the EU is exposing itself to with the tariff agreement.
Yar raises the non-marginal issue that European states will have to confront. It is a question not only of industry, but also of sovereignty and strategic independence, on which the 27 member states are staking an essential slice of their future. Christophe Gomart (EPP), the rapporteur of the text on preparing for 2030, is also aware of this, turning the spotlight on the cyber dimension of defense: “We must develop a European cloud,” he stresses. Currently, he laments, some 90 percent of data is stored on online archives controlled by US companies.
The EU therefore questions itself, and for the European Commission, it does not look good. The commitments made to the Trump administration contradict those for a Europe of defense, and this will have to be remedied, perhaps with resources in the next multi-annual budget, another issue raised during the committee debate. The question of financial support, however, is a matter for the member states: the capitals will have to decide how much to contribute. Even though the real issue is that funds end up in the US market and not in the single market.
English version by the Translation Service of Withub
