Observing the Dawn of an Independent Europe Amidst Chaos
In recent days, the world has been thrust into turmoil by Donald Trump, notably with his bizarre announcement that conspiracy theorist and podcaster Dan Bongino would assume the role of deputy director of the FBI. This kind of absurdity would have dominated headlines and public discourse for months in the past. However, in today’s frenetic landscape, such news has barely registered a blip. Yet, if we take a moment to step back, we can discern a significant historical shift taking place: the emergence of an independent Europe, unfolding right before our eyes.
Take, for example, Keir Starmer’s recent announcement regarding the increase in defense spending. At first glance, it may seem unimpressive. The announcement was shrouded in the typical political gymnastics of British politics, with an imaginary spending freeze used to inflate the claim of an additional £13.4 billion for defense, when in reality, the government is only offering £5.3 billion. This is far from sufficient, and the need to misrepresent the figures speaks volumes. Moreover, this funding is being diverted from the international development budget, which is not only unethical but counterproductive, as it fosters the very global instability that will heighten defense pressures in the future.
Even more troubling, the announcement is framed as a feudal tribute to Trump, a desperate attempt to curry favor with him ahead of his visit to Washington this week. While these criticisms hold true, they represent only part of the larger picture. With a slight shift in perspective, another narrative emerges. Defense spending serves a dual political function: on one hand, it aligns with U.S. demands; on the other, it acts as a form of insurance against U.S. unpredictability. This financial support enables Ukraine to resist any U.S.-brokered peace deals that could favor Putin, thereby empowering Europe to uphold Western values, even in the absence of American support.
Starmer is employing his usual dual-track strategy: seeking collaboration with Trump while simultaneously preparing to operate independently, or even in opposition to him. This approach echoes what Emmanuel Macron has advocated for years. Throughout his presidency, Macron has urged Europe to adopt a policy of strategic autonomy, a notion that went largely unheeded until now. Europe was lulled into a false sense of security, mistakenly believing that Trump’s first term was merely a passing phase. That illusion is no longer tenable.
Macron’s vision for Europe is not distant or idealistic; rather, it is a practical necessity emerging from the ashes of failed alternatives. This week, Macron embodied the essence of strategic autonomy during his meeting with Trump, exuding both warmth and confidence while also firmly correcting him when necessary. When Trump mischaracterized EU contributions to Ukraine, Macron placed his hand on Trump’s arm and stated, “No, in fact, to be frank, we paid.” When Trump hesitated to label Putin a dictator, Macron almost laughed in response.
One of Europe’s significant military shortcomings lies not just in personnel numbers but in coordination. At present, Europe, including the UK, possesses approximately 1.47 million active-duty military personnel. However, it lacks a unified command, which undermines its status as a formidable military power. Politically, the situation is similarly fragmented. The U.S. President can make decisions unilaterally, but in Europe, consensus must be built among various voices from Spain to Slovenia. Yet, this week has demonstrated a remarkable level of coordination among European leaders.
- Antonio Costa, president of the European Council, has played a crucial role in fostering this unity, actively working to craft a coherent European response.
- Following Macron’s visit to Washington, Costa organized a debrief with EU leaders in preparation for a special Council meeting on March 6 to discuss further actions to defend Ukraine.
In Germany, the recent election results were met with numerous headlines proclaiming a shift to the right. While this assessment was not entirely inaccurate, it lacked nuance. The far-right Alternative for Germany did indeed double its vote share, and the center-right Christian Democratic Union emerged as the largest party, as anticipated. However, what was unexpected was the new Chancellor, Friedrich Merz—an ardent Atlanticist—stating that one of his primary objectives was to “strengthen Europe as quickly as possible, so that we achieve independence from the U.S.”
Furthermore, Merz’s ability to form a coalition solely with the center-right CDU and the center-left SPD (Social Democratic Party) may lead to a more stable government than many had predicted. The SPD’s Olaf Scholz, who had previously maintained a somewhat naive stance on the Ukraine conflict, has retreated from future coalition negotiations, paving the way for the more hawkish defense minister, Boris Pistorius. These developments signal seismic shifts in German politics. Historically, Germany’s debt rule has constrained increased defense spending, and its unique historical context has fostered skepticism towards military engagement. However, changes are occurring at an unprecedented pace and on a fundamental level.
In Berlin, Paris, and London, the prevailing currents are unmistakable. Starmer has long viewed defense as a key component in discussions aimed at improving the UK-EU relationship post-Brexit. Presently, Europe appears uniquely receptive to this message. All parties seem to be reading from the same script, following a unified narrative that is leading to a shared outcome.
While much can change in a period marked by chaos, the current trajectory suggests that we are witnessing Europe’s transformation from a primarily trading and regulatory entity into a powerful military force capable of advocating for its values. In the years to come, when the names of Trump’s FBI appointments have faded from public consciousness, we may reflect on this moment as one of the most significant political developments of our time.
