In recent months, the United States has subjected Europe to repeated jolts of electric therapy. It began with the demand that Denmark sell, or simply handover, Greenland to the US. At the iconic Munich Security Conference in mid-February, there was a sense of shocked disbelief US Vice President J.D. Vance charged that free speech and democracy were under attack in Europe – but not from Russia or China – but the mainstream political parties who were attacking the European right-wing parties like the Alternative for Germany (AfD).
At the end of the month, announcing that he planned to impose 25% tariffs on the European Union, President Donald Trump declared that the EU was actually “formed in order to screw the United States… and they’ve done a good job of it, but now I am president.”
The US and Europe have a long standing security partnership which is based on the NATO military alliance. Oriented against the erstwhile Soviet Union, it is now focused on the threat from Russia. Moscow in turn believes that it is threatened by NATO expansion, something which led to the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the first major war in Europe since 1945.
After backing Ukraine for more than two years with military and financial aid, the new Trump administration has seemingly switched sides. It has reached out to Russia, ignoring Europe, and says that it aims to restore peace in Ukraine. As part of this shock therapy it cut off military supplies and intelligence to Ukraine to force it to accept the US proposed temporary ceasefire and a deal to mine its critical minerals.
The abandonment of Ukraine, albeit temporary, has concentrated minds in Europe over its own future security. On paper, the US remains committed to Article V of NATO agreement under which an attack on one member triggers a response from the whole organisation, but Trump turned the issue on its head saying that he was not sure NATO members would defend the US if the need arose.
Also read: Fasting for Flattery: Lex Fridman’s Fawning Podcast with Narendra Modi
The problem is the enormous dependence of Europe on the US for its security. Take fighter aircraft – the US has 2951, while the rest of NATO has 2064. Even these are divided among 1,108 US-origin fighters and just 902 of European origin. Note that the US-origin fighters of NATO, especially the 150 F-35s will only be able to fly with US support. Even the other aircraft – fighters, surveillance craft, helicopters and drones – depend on US secure data communication systems and GPS. As of now, in NATO, European countries are dependent on the US for communications support, electronic warfare support and ammunition resupply in a conflict. Indeed, all their aerial intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance fleet cannot operate without US support.
Taken together, Europe has a huge air force, massive navy and a large army, but the problem is to cope with the immediate situation with its fragmented forces. At present, according to The Wall Street Journal, the British military, Europe’s biggest military spender, has only some 150 deployable tanks and a dozen serviceable long range artillery guns. France has less than 90 heavy artillery pieces, Denmark has no heavy artillery, submarines or air defence systems, Germany has enough ammunition for only two days of battle.
This dependence extends to the arms that the European forces are equipped with. Almost two-thirds of the arms imported by the European members of NATO in the past five years were made in the US. According to SIPRI, imports doubled in the 2020-2024 period compared to the previous five years, no doubt as an outcome of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This indicates the challenge that Europe confronts with the growing estrangement from the US.
Europe has the potential to become a global power in all its manifestations. It has the assets, technological and financial, to build on its economic power and become a formidable military power. But given its nature – an alliance of 27 countries, large and small – it needs to think, plan and act holistically and establish a Defence Industrial Technology base akin to that of the US. It is not as though the Europeans have not gotten the message. It is that they had willingly suspended disbelief.
In 2023, the European Union launched an Act in Support of Ammunition Production (ASAP) and the European Defence Industry Reinforcement through common Procurement Act (EDIRPA) to accelerate military production and procurement in Europe. Under the ASAP, the EU enhanced its capacity to produce ammunition and missiles to fill its own gaps and supply Ukraine. Under the EDIRPA, a €300 million budget offered partial reimbursement to member states to jointly purchase capabilities through consortiums of member states. Now, along with more money flowing in, the EU is proposing the buying of arms collectively on behalf of EU member states to overcome the challenge of the natural fragmentation that exists in its markets and production facilities.
In mid February, NATO countries, minus the US, conducted an exercise to test their ability to deploy rapidly across eastern Europe. A special 10,000-strong force had been created in July 2024 composed of various member countries aimed at promoting self-sufficiency of the alliance. Since then, according to a report, the US has told allies that it does not plan to participate in military exercises in Europe in the future.
Speaking shortly after the Munich conference and the German elections last month, the incoming chancellor Friedrich Merz wondered whether NATO would remain in its “current form” by June in view of the Trump administration’s moves on Ukraine, Russia and European defence. German parties have now approved a €500 billion plan to spend on arms and infrastructure which will require a two-thirds majority in the outgoing parliament to overturn rules that dictated fiscal conservatism.
On March 4, meeting in Brussels, the EU leaders endorsed a plan to inject billions of euros into their defence budgets. They agreed to a scheme that would ease budget restrictions on defence spending and make some $700 billion available for defence spending. The European Commission also tabled a proposal to offer loans to member states worth $160 billion to buy new military equipment which would be purchased only from EU producers.
Also read: Trump and Modi’s ‘Rule by Headlines’ Does Not Come Cost-Free
As of now, formally, the US is very much in NATO and remains committed to upholding Article V. But enough has been said and done in recent months for the Europeans to get going to plan, fund and organise their own defence capacities.
There are lessons here for India which has been growing closer to the US in the field of defence. Unlike Europe, India is not a military ally of the US, yet the insecurities that have been unleashed underscore the message that military friendship with Uncle Sam is a somewhat risky process. Indeed, the European debate on dependence on the US is even talking of the possibility of American “kill switches” on the equipment that they supply. New Delhi has been generally careful in acquisitions from the US. Perhaps it now needs to take that extra bit of precaution in this fraught geo-political environment.
Manoj Joshi is a distinguished fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in New Delhi.
This piece was first published on The India Cable – a premium newsletter from The Wire & Galileo Ideas – and has been updated and republished here. To subscribe to The India Cable, click here.
