by Fabrizio Verde, Naples / Italy
Recently, a clash took place in the European Parliament that clearly reflects the gravity of the moment for an EU that risks ultimate ruin due to a ruling class that has chosen to sacrifice the European people on the altar of Washington’s strategic and geopolitical interests in Ukraine.
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, speaking to outline the priorities of Hungary’s rotating EU presidency, said about Ukraine: “In Hungary, there’s a saying: ‘If you want to win, you need the courage to admit when you’re losing.’ And we are indeed losing in Ukraine, yet you act as if this isn’t the case. If we want to win, we must change the failing strategy. I propose that we reflect. There must be diplomatic activity and direct or indirect communication. If the conflict drags on, there will be more and more deaths—thousands of them. This strategy will not bring peace; you must stand up for a ceasefire.”
Words of peace and common sense, but they encountered an entrenched Ursula von der Leyen, fixed on an outdated war stance against Russia, despite the repercussions for all of Europe and the Russian troops’ advances on the battlefield. Here was her reply: “The world has witnessed Russian atrocities in Ukraine. But there are still those who blame the war, not on the invader, but the invaded. Not on Putin’s lust for power, but on the Ukrainian people’s desire for freedom. I wonder: would we have blamed the Hungarians for the Soviet invasion in 1956? Or the Czechs for the oppression in 1968? Or the Lithuanians for the crackdown in 1991? We may have different histories and languages in Europe, but there is no language in which peace is synonymous with surrender.”
The geopolitics of European Defense
In reality, true geopolitics of European defense does not exist, except on paper. Every initiative that seems to promote Europe’s military independence, such as the European Defense Fund or the Ukraine Assistance Fund, is in fact subordinated to U.S. strategic interests, which dominate NATO and, by extension, the EU’s military decisions. The apparent strengthening of European common defense is nothing more than a way to lighten the U.S.’s economic burdens, while maintaining full control over strategic decisions. In this scenario, European resources and policies are directed towards bolstering military capabilities—not in line with the interests of the European peoples but aligned with U.S. objectives. This framework not only betrays the idea of an autonomous European defense but also puts the EU’s internal stability at risk, sacrificing welfare and social cohesion in favor of a costly and forced militarization.
Europe, closely tied to the United States through NATO, appears to lack the will or capacity to pursue an independent foreign and defense policy. Every attempt at emancipation is stifled by the need to conform to U.S. directives, leaving European governments in a position of subordination that undermines national and collective interests of the citizens. In this context, the war in Ukraine has become the perfect catalyst to accelerate this process, resulting in European peoples supporting policies that do not serve their interests of peace, stability, and prosperity but rather Washington’s geopolitical agenda.
European Defense Fund
The European Defense Fund, launched in 2017 and expanded in the 2021-2027 budget, is presented as a strategic response to growing security threats. But in reality, it seems more like a way to ease the U.S.’s commitment to NATO’s costs in the Old Continent. With a budget of around 7 billion euros, the EDF aims to promote cooperation between member states in the research and development of new military technologies.
EDF grants cover up to 100% of research costs and up to 20% for development, encouraging the creation of joint projects between European defense industries. However, this financial commitment raises questions: What are the implications for national budgets and for a European welfare system already dismantled by dominant neoliberalism?
Ukraine Assistance Fund
Under the pretext of the so-called “Russian invasion,” the European Union established the Ukraine Assistance Fund, intending to provide military support and economic assistance to the Kyiv regime. To date, the EU has allocated over 50 billion euros, with the goal of prolonging Ukraine’s slow agony, while Russian troops advance on the battlefield. However, the cost of post-war reconstruction could exceed 600 billion euros, putting further pressure on member states’ budgets.
The funding for the UAF comes from various sources, including voluntary contributions from member states and the EU budget. This situation has forced many European countries to reconsider their spending priorities, with potential cuts to public services and social spending.
The social costs of militarization
The increasing focus on defense has had a significant cost for European welfare. Governments, in the rush to finance military support for Ukraine, are considering reductions in social and healthcare spending. A telling example is France: the center-right government led by Michel Barnier introduced a severe austerity budget aimed at addressing the significant national debt and budget deficit. The plan aims to generate savings of 60 billion euros by 2025, two-thirds of which will come from spending cuts and one-third from tax increases. French debt has been exacerbated by rising military spending, which is projected to increase from 47 billion euros in 2024 to 50.5 billion euros in 2025. While the government enacts austerity measures to control overall spending, the commitment to military expenses competes with funding for essential public services.
In countries like Germany, pressure to increase the defense budget is growing, fueled by a political class in favor of higher military spending. However, Germany is currently in recession, defined as the new “sick man of Europe.” Its economy is bearing the brunt of sanctions against Russia, high energy costs, and new military expenses. This situation has raised concerns among citizens, who fear that cuts to social services could erode their quality of life and social security.
War and European interests
Fostering war against Russia, rather than seeking a diplomatic solution, represents a risky approach for Europe. Continuing the conflict could not only further destabilize Eastern Europe but also increase internal tensions within the Union. Europe’s growing militarization makes it increasingly subservient to U.S. strategic interests, fueling the debate about European defense autonomy.
Germany is emblematic in this case: historically a pacifist country, it is now facing rapid militarization that could push it away from the fundamental principles of diplomacy and international cooperation. This transition raises questions about how Europe can pursue a security policy truly aligned with its values and interests.
The militarization of Europe and increased military support for Ukraine’s dying regime is not a response to an external aggression, as is being propagandized on unified networks, but rather reflects an imperial logic that ignores the true interests of peace and stability for European citizens.
Europe should therefore abandon the idea that the solution to conflicts lies in the unhealthy notion of using force. A foreign policy based on dialogue, diplomacy, and international cooperation is essential for addressing global challenges. A pacifist approach would not only guarantee greater stability within the Union but also help build more constructive relationships with Russia and other global actors, in a phase of transition towards multipolarity.
Instead, European elites are following a dangerously senseless course, choosing to side with the war narrative imposed by the United States at a time when Europe has a historic opportunity to assert itself as an autonomous power in an increasingly multipolar world. Instead of seizing the chance to chart an independent path based on diplomacy, cooperation, and dialogue, European leaders are bowing to U.S. interests, contributing to military escalation and the deterioration of relations with key actors like Russia. This choice not only fuels conflict but perpetuates a dynamic of dependence that robs Europe of the chance to develop its own global strategy, capable of truly responding to its citizens’ interests.
The mission of this European Union thus seems clear: to keep Europe under the iron heel of the United States, preventing it from becoming an autonomous and respected actor on the international stage. This strategic subordination not only compromises the continent’s security and stability but also sacrifices opportunities for economic and social development in the name of a war that does not belong to the European people. Instead of pursuing a policy of peace, dialogue, and stability, the EU is blindly following a bellicose strategy that risks leading Europe towards irreversible decline.