Weapons and war: the Commission shows worrying superficiality regarding seriousness of the issue

Brussels – Between playing with toy soldiers and waging war for real, there is a huge difference, which Brussels does not seem to have grasped. The European Commission does not seem to have grasped the basic concept that war is neither a game nor a joke. Yet in times when communication should be central, the propaganda that portrays Europe as good and Russia as bad is accompanied by a way of speaking that is astonishing in its superficiality and paucity. 

There is a defence roadmap that does not exist, at least not in the press release. By definition, a roadmap is a detailed calendar of deadlines and dates, with defined and sequential timeframes. However, the leaflet given to journalists only mentions 2027 as the date for military mobility, a structural problem  to which the EU executive promises to respond with announced but undetailed plans. What sense does it make to produce a communiqué with no information? It would make more sense to simply say “read the communication for details.” And yet… 

This alone would suffice to highlight the inadequacy of a Commission concerned only with appearances, starting with its President, Ursula von der Leyen. Her statement at the beginning of the press release, her statement at the end of the press release: even war becomes an opportunity for this Commission to parade on the catwalk, showing all the limitations of a lady who has chosen to personalise everything, from the least important to the most serious issues, because a rearming Europe is a serious matter that is not being taken seriously.

“To act quickly where a joint approach is most effective, the Defence Roadmap proposes four initial European flagship initiatives: the European Defence Drones Initiative, the Eastern Flank Watch, the European Air Shield and the Defence Space Shield.” This is what the press release states. Dates, deadlines, and time horizons for each of these four flagship initiatives are not specified. And they are, to be precise, flagship initiatives —therefore priorities —of a roadmap that appears approximate. Moreover, a whole new role is envisaged for the European Defence Agency (EDA), with the organisation serving as coordinator for the member states’ working groups. Still, the agency is not mentioned even once. The same consideration applies as above: why produce a useless press release when you can invite people to read the communication directly? Because it serves to convey the “von der Leyen thought” and highlight her, that’s all. 

The Commission doesn’t seem to understand that those who run this Union are generating new armies of Euro-dissatisfied citizens. The way of communicating on defence is just the latest chapter in a saga made up of a flawed defence plan, by insane fees for social photo shoots, capable of generating only annoyance, dislike, and doubts about the actual ability of those called upon to lead Europe. The service of spokesmen and communication, however large in terms of staff, is, with data in hand and information missing, more like a primary school of children grappling with the fundamentals of writing and a supervisor in the role of grammar teacher. If this is the European Union producing results, it is better to abandon the war, as it appears to be lost from the outset. If you use a serious topic, like armaments, to make yourself look good, at least have the decency to remain silent and find other ways to show off. 

In the end, the information is not kept hidden; it is there. But not in the press release, a useless written product and therefore a useless waste of time, for those who produce it and for those who view it. On a subject like weapons and war, the Commission shows all its limitations and superficiality of approach to the subject, of writing, of communication, of relations with the press, and of working method.