#StrategicAutonomy

[ptitolier]

Europe: A Power in Search of Itself

Is the European Union redefining itself, or is it simply getting lost in an arms race beyond its control?

We are at a turning point: Europe is shifting toward a more military, more strategic political project… yet paradoxically, it remains just as dependent as before. €800 billion has been allocated to rearmament without real democratic debate, and a significant portion of this budget will go directly to American industries.

Few media outlets address this head-on: is this massive militarization pushing Europe toward a security-driven identity at the expense of its democratic and social principles?

- The Paradox of Sovereignty

Europe wants to protect itself, but how can we talk about sovereignty when our weapons come from across the Atlantic? As Jürgen Habermas pointed out, the EU was built on technocratic governance, often disconnected from democratic debate. This decision is a clear illustration of that: European citizens had no say in it.

- War as a Political Project?

Carl Schmitt reminds us that states define themselves by designating an enemy. Today, Russia plays that role for the EU, justifying massive militarization. But can a political entity define itself solely through opposition to an external threat?

History shows that great powers emerge through inclusive strategic choices, not just through fear and military escalation. By reinforcing an opaque security model, Europe risks drifting away from its founding ideals.

- Europe in a Permanent State of Exception?

In State of Exception, Giorgio Agamben explains how crises are used to extend emergency policies. One might think that Europe is building an independent defense force, but in reality, it is institutionalizing fear as a development strategy.

Does this militarization truly protect us, or does it lock us into an escalating cycle of tensions?

Far from being a step toward independence, this massive arms buildup rests on three illusions:

- The illusion of sovereignty → By funding our dependence on the U.S., we are not gaining autonomy.

- The illusion of democratic legitimacy → No public consultation, no meaningful debate.

- The illusion of peace through strength → More weapons have never guaranteed long-term stability.

So, does Europe genuinely aspire to be an independent power, or is it content to serve as NATO’s strategic outpost on the continent?

I explore this transformation in my latest article on Medium:

[subscribe1]

"Unlocking the Future of Warfare: UK's Hypersonic Missile Development"

[publicsituation]

RT @ecfr: Would #Trump risk Chicago to protect Berlin? Unlikely, so it's no wonder the #EU is pursuing #strategicautonomy - more from Nick Witney @ECFRPower https://t.co/561uuHVtx6

[ptitolier]

Europe at a Crossroads: Between Dependence and Strategic Independence

Europe has spent decades relying on soft power, diplomacy, and transatlantic alliances to ensure peace and stability. But today, that balance is cracking.

The recent meeting between Macron and Trump at the White House was more than just a political encounter—it was a wake-up call.

- Trump’s rhetoric on NATO shows that US support is not guaranteed.

- The war in Ukraine has exposed Europe’s military vulnerability.

- Strategic autonomy remains an unfulfilled promise, not a reality.

For decades, Europe played the role of mediator, positioning itself between global superpowers. But can it continue to do so without real strategic influence?

The EU now faces an impossible choice:

- Continue as a diplomatic power, risking irrelevance.

- Invest in a stronger military, without becoming a secondhand replica of the US or Russia.

- OR find a new, third way—a vision where power is built through resilience, stability, and influence, rather than domination.

The problem? Right now, Europe lacks:

- A unified military strategy beyond NATO.

- A coherent foreign policy without internal divisions.

- The economic leverage to compete with the US or China.

So, what’s the path forward? Can the EU shape its own destiny, or is it doomed to remain a strategic satellite?

In my latest analysis, I explore these questions in depth. Read the full breakdown here:

"Want more in-depth analysis on Europe's strategic challenges? Follow my latest articles on Medium, where I break down current events with a sharp, critical perspective. Join the conversation and explore what the future holds for Europe’s global influence."

Macron challenges Trump on NATO: What does it mean for Europe?

During their latest meeting, Trump exaggerated, Macron corrected him. But behind this diplomatic exchange lies a deeper issue: Europe’s fragile strategic autonomy.

Maria Stenroos’s article on Yle ("Macron keskeytti ja korjasi Trumpia, joka liioitteli tahallaan", Feb 25, 2025) highlights Europe’s struggle to maintain influence between a volatile US and an aggressive Russia.

Can the EU shape its own future, or will it remain a strategic satellite?

[ptitolier]

The Tightrope of Peace: Between Strategy and Naïveté

"Peace is not the absence of conflict, but the ability to manage it by other means." — Johan Galtung

Europe has long treated peace as an assumed reality, something guaranteed by treaties, diplomacy, and economic interdependence. But in a world where power dynamics shift rapidly, can peace be sustained without a solid strategic foundation?

2025 has already shattered many illusions:

- Trump and Putin are negotiating a peace in Ukraine—without Europe at the table. If the continent is excluded from discussions on its own security, can it still be considered a major geopolitical player?

The U.S. is eyeing Greenland, a move that could create a second front of crisis, forcing NATO to confront an unprecedented dilemma: What happens when its strongest member becomes unpredictable?

- Europe, caught between these forces, faces a choice: remain a passive spectator or take concrete steps to secure its long-term stability.

Building Peace: A Question of Strategy, Not Hope

Peace has never been a natural state of the world. It is not simply the absence of war, but the result of deliberate action. Every lasting peace—Westphalia (1648), Versailles (1919), Yalta (1945)—was achieved not through idealism, but through a balance of power, deterrence, and cooperation.

Yet today, Europe risks confusing pacifism with passivity.

It has neglected its military and energy sovereignty.

It has assumed treaties and institutions alone would maintain stability.

It has relied on alliances that may no longer serve its best interests.

But peace is not something we inherit—it is something we build.

Five Key Actions for a Sustainable Peace

If war is often triggered by imbalance, then peace depends on Europe’s ability to prevent those imbalances. This does not mean militarization, but rather creating conditions where war is no longer in anyone’s interest.

- Strengthening Strategic Autonomy – A unified European defense, standardized infrastructure, and a robust cybersecurity strategy

- Expanding Independent Diplomatic Alliances – Engaging with non-aligned powers (India, Japan, Brazil) and reducing dependency on Washington and Beijing

- Achieving Economic Sovereignty – Securing critical resources, reducing energy dependence, and investing in European defense and technology industries.

- Deploying Proactive Diplomacy – Encouraging early conflict mediation and fostering cultural and scientific cooperation to build long-term stability.

- Strengthening International Law – Reinforcing the credibility of institutions like the UN and the EU in global conflict resolution.

These are not alternatives to military defense but preemptive measures to prevent crises before they escalate into wars.

The Real Question: Can Europe Be a Credible Force for Peace?

"The tightrope walker doesn’t fall because they move, but because they stop."

Europe is at a crossroads. It can take responsibility for its own security—not to wage war, but to prevent it—or it can continue relying on external powers, hoping they will protect its interests.

So, what does peace really mean in the 21st century?

Can a continent that depends on others for defense truly shape its own future?

Is NATO still a safeguard for stability, or is it becoming an outdated framework for European security

Should Europe build a new peace strategy, rooted in strategic sovereignty rather than passive diplomacy?

Full article: How Europe Can Build Peace Without Falling

---

[publicsituation]

RT @ecfr: The final #EuropeanCouncil meeting until October ended this morning, with little clarity on #Brexit. Nick Witney argues for more #UK involvement in #EU #defence matters #strategicautonomy @ECFRPower https://t.co/561uuHVtx6 https://t.co/UtaoE8BOAV