The aggression and humiliation that Europeans are suffering at the hands of the Trump Administration leave no room for doubt or speculation. A dual attack is underway: on European security — now seen as nothing more than a burden by Washington, which has no problem to decide together with Putin about the future of our continent, starting with Ukraine; and on democracy — also regarded as an obstacle to the project of a new autocratic and populist international order.
For Europe, the darkest hour has returned; and this time, there are no saviours to call for help. Europe can only count on itself and must decide whether to remain passive and allow itself to be destroyed or to react.
At this moment, the greatest drama in and for Europe is that no one has the power to decide how to react. The European institutions do not: the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, despite her attempt to represent the EU, has a very limited margin of action, constrained by the mandate given to her by the 27 member states, which are always divided and in conflict with each other. It is the member states that remain the sole primary source of law and power in Europe, as governments never tire of emphasising; but in turn, national governments alone do not have the capacity to react, as each is too weak when faced with threats and dangers.
Given this situation, the only way to send an effective political signal to Trump and Putin is to go beyond the legal and political framework that currently governs the EU. For years, Europe has debated the need to become capable of acting as one; the path forward has been clearly outlined, starting with the Conference on the Future of Europe. There is no more time left.
It is up to the most responsible governments to find the courage to lead the way. In light of the opening of negotiations between the U.S. and Russia for the partition of Ukraine, what alternatives remain? The future of Ukraine is at stake, and with it, the future of Europe itself. If Europeans cannot provide Ukraine with support and the certainty of a future within the Union, the European Union itself will be overwhelmed. It is imperative to move beyond the framework of 27, which progresses too slowly and insufficiently, and begin constructing, among the willing, not just sectoral projects (which experience has shown to be inadequate) but a coherent, unified strategy to ensure both internal and external security.
This is also the recommendation found in the Niinistö and Draghi reports, which emphasise the need to prioritise the development of comprehensive and coherent strategies. Right now, citizens want a common defence, as confirmed by surveys with overwhelmingly high percentages; and many European states are already directly threatened by Russia. Yet, the projects that have been launched over the decades have neither worked in the past nor are taking off now. The only current alternative seems to be the individual rearmament of countries, aiming to increase integration and interoperability but only on a voluntary basis and without challenging national decision-making primacy. Moreover, under these conditions, the rush to rearm will inevitably result in a significant portion of new defence investments being spent on purchasing arms and technology from third countries, primarily the U.S.
The failures and limitations of the sectoral approaches attempted so far make it clear that building autonomous security and defence requires strong political will for integration, which is essential to address two crucial issues: developing a collective strategy based on a shared analysis of priority threats and interests to be protected; and mobilising significant financial resources. Whatever model is chosen to build a European armed force (and there are no shortages of proposals, starting with the 28th Army proposal put forward by SPD Bundestag members in 2020), it must be acknowledged that, in parallel, the formation of a unified political leadership is necessary—one capable of representing the common interest and making political decisions accordingly.
The European institutions lack both the competence and the resources to immediately develop such an ambitious project; governments, however, are sovereign and can decide to proceed. There are two possible paths.
One option is to push the legal framework of existing treaties (such as Permanent Structured Cooperation) to create new decision-making bodies within the EU capable of making majority decisions on joint defence investments and military deployments, involving the Commission and Parliament in this embryonic supranational European government within the EU.
Alternatively, willing governments can choose to establish this new cooperation outside of the Treaties, with the goal of creating a common governing body. In this case, they can still find ways to involve the Commission, using the 2012 European Stability Mechanism as a precedent; subsequently, they could open negotiations to incorporate the new structure into the Union, implementing the necessary institutional reforms.
Both options, particularly the second, depend solely on the political will of the governments most aware of the value of European unity and the stakes involved in Ukraine. These steps can be taken immediately. There is no other way at this moment to ensure our security and the future of our freedom and democracy.
In a world of great autocratic imperial powers, the only way to save democracy and freedom is to counterbalance them with the political weight of a great democratic and federal state. It is, first and foremost, up to European governments to build it—by taking the first steps now, starting with the urgent need to ensure security for their citizens and partners. Failing to do so means condemning them to a future of political and moral misery.
*Theodoros TSIKAS is Political Scientist – International Relations Expert, Vice-President of the Greek Union for the Federation of Europe –EEnOE / UEF Greece
Theodoros Tsikas
Mr. Theodoros TSIKAS is a Political Scientist - International Relations Expert, Vice-President of the Greek Union for the Federation of Europe – EEnOE/ UEF Greec
