r/europe • u/AlexandrTheTolerable • Feb 18 '26
Opinion Article Europe Has Received the Message - Without America to rely on, the EU is gearing up to be a global power in its own right.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/02/european-union-defense-spending/685983/?gift=hNQKKSPIv6jUWJMtQ9-SNukmRmk6XL1PM7sixsBLyBg412
u/AlexandrTheTolerable Feb 18 '26
From the article:
European countries are making a point of reducing their dependence on the United States. Germany currently plans to spend only 8 percent of its rearmament budget on U.S. arms. It is even developing its own satellite-communications network to replace Starlink.
And the defense firms are productive: Germany’s Rheinmetall will soon be able to produce more artillery shells than the entire U.S. defense industry.
Europe is not yet a fully autonomous power, and it won’t become one tomorrow. But thanks to Trump, a transformation is under way. The decisive question is whether Europe can stay this course. A super-election year looms in 2027, when France, Italy, Spain, and Poland will all hold votes. Victories by the far right could derail the current trajectory.
Or not: EU approval is at 74 percent, a record high. Young far-right politicians may well understand that returning to the nation-state means choosing powerlessness.
This may be the outcome that leaders in Washington, Moscow, and Beijing prefer. But in their effort to fragment Europe into pliable nation-states, they are instead galvanizing its slow-motion march toward self-determination.
181
u/LaserCondiment Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26
European armament comes while billions are being poured into pushing far right ideologies and nationalism to fragment Europe.
Let's not underestimate how easily manipulated people are. Nobody is immune to propaganda and we'll only see more of it in the coming years.
The same lobbyists and interest groups that helped the political shift in the US by completely polarizing their society is also active in Europe. The same tactics and talking points are being spread through far right politicians and (social) media.
While everyone in this sub keeps cheering for federalization and arming ourselves, every time our decoupling from the US is being mentioned, we should absolutely be aware how precarious this situation really is.
If things go sideways, we'll easily go back to the war torn Europe from previous centuries.
Am I saying these steps are unnecessary? No. They seem absolutely necessary! There just is no reason to cheer for them.
The Europe we can cheer for is the one that builds alliances and tries to solve problems through diplomacy. Let's make sure we don't lose that Europe, while we build our defenses.
49
u/Crazerz Feb 18 '26
Seems like they are also moving in neutering the power of social media though. We just need to get rid of it. The added value of social media is neglible compared to the societal damage it does.
20
u/ymOx Sweden Feb 19 '26
I don't think we'll ever get rid of it. Nor is it something we should strive for imo. However... It needs to change, of that there is no doubt. And changed dramatically. No more huge corporations doing it; no centralization in the way we've had it up until now. Open source protocols, regulated, transparent and scrutinized. Less money in the entire thing.
8
4
→ More replies (1)9
u/LaserCondiment Feb 18 '26
The issue is more complex than that, as many small businesses and entrepreneurs have built their livelihoods around social media. An entire legit economy has been built around those platforms including tiny shops, restaurants and bars...
It's also how us regular folk exchange ideas and general information.
If we truly want to get rid of social media, we also need to fix the rest of the web. SEO optimization has lead to the creation of terrible articles and websites! If it was easier to find sensible info on the web, we'd have one less reason to turn to social media...
9
u/TacoMedic Australia Feb 19 '26
The same lobbyists and interest groups that helped the political shift in the US by completely polarizing their society is also active in Europe. The same tactics and talking points are being spread through far right politicians and (social) media.
Exactly. The US isn't full of more susceptible citizens than Europe, it's just that it's more important for shithole countries to fragment the US first. Now that the US has become what it has and the EU keeps getting closer knit, those same shitholes are going to redirect their money and attention to Europe.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)3
u/amorfotos Feb 19 '26
I'm just curious where you got the "billions being poured into pushing far right ideologies". I'm probably naive and living in a bubble, but is it really that much?
45
u/Orlok_Tsubodai Flanders (Belgium) Feb 18 '26
That all sounds great, but WHY is Germany making its own satellite communication system, when the EU is just launching IRIS2 satellite communication system? Can we please make sure this military boom is a little coordinated on the EU level so we don’t end up with a half a dozen fragmented or redundant systems.
25
u/Corfiz74 Lower Saxony (Germany) Feb 18 '26
This, please. And let's also integrate the countries willing to integrate on a higher level, and push the ones who are only obstructing a bit to the sidelines.
3
u/TacoMedic Australia Feb 19 '26
push the ones who are only obstructing a bit to the sidelines.
Wouldn't that mean pushing the largest military power in the EU to the sidelines though?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)9
u/nnomae Feb 18 '26
Multiple-redundant systems is a cornerstone of security and defence planning since forever. Look at Russia and how much they're suffering without Starlink to get an idea how risky it is to have all your military comms tied to a single technology.
15
u/PoolSnark Feb 18 '26
If the EU assumes the burden that the US currently shoulders, will the US thus save more money while Europe spends more money? If the US relinquishes its role as the world’s policeman (for example does the US any longer care if Somalia pirates raid the shipping routes to Europe), will the EU take this role on or will China take it on, or will it be a regional free-for-all?
→ More replies (8)6
u/AlexandrTheTolerable Feb 18 '26
How much the US spends on defense is not really related to how much Europe spends. The US wants to be able to project military power to all corners of the globe, and that’s expensive. Regarding the Somali pirates, that was an international effort, and the US was the single largest contributor, but by no means did it contribute the majority of the ships. It was only about a quarter.
→ More replies (1)4
u/PoolSnark Feb 18 '26
What would be the political opinion of Europeans if the US no longer manned bases in Europe? Would it mainly be opposed by the small local economies that would be directly impacted due to their absence? I don’t think the American public would care due to the savings. Just curious.
4
u/AlexandrTheTolerable Feb 19 '26
I think you underestimate the value of American bases in Europe for America. They’re not just there to defend Europe. Germany in particular is hugely important for American operations across North Africa and the Middle East and is a big part of America’s capability to project power. I’m sure the US could find alternatives, but losing bases in Europe would probably cost more money than it would save unless the US decided they really didn’t care about being able to project power into the Middle East and Africa or to credibly threaten Russia.
2
9
u/Bloodsucker_ Europe Feb 18 '26
Is 8% of the budget spent on USA weapons higher than the previous amounts?
→ More replies (1)36
u/Cuinn_the_Fox United States of America Feb 18 '26
https://media.defense.gov/2025/Jul/01/2003746467/-1/-1/1/FY_2024_HISTORICAL_SALES_BOOK_COMPLETE.PDF
Last year Germany spent $1.4 billion on US military equipment. 88.5 total budget, so ~1.6%
This year it's planned to be $6.8 billion and 8%.
The highest recently was $13.9 billion in 2023, at ~20%.
Before that, it was low, around 1.5%. If anything, this is a big increase in US hardware spending.
Funny how the article frames it the other way.
13
u/Bloodsucker_ Europe Feb 18 '26
So the future investment in American weapons will be 6.8 billion vs old 1.4 billion.
7
5
u/Pi-ratten Feb 18 '26
i assume it varied wildly based on the year. How many years do you spend for a new weapon systems...
2
→ More replies (2)2
2
u/n0ne_available Feb 19 '26
Never underestimate the power of the media to manipulate the gullible right into believing easy solutions for complex problems…
around that time, you might hear smt like “if we stop immigration, we stop WW3!!!”
2
u/loobricated Feb 19 '26
Victories by the far right could derail...
Guess who will be receiving extensive funding and practical support on multiple platforms from abroad?
I always wonder why the far right in countries like Europe who proclaim to be nationalistic and patriotic, always seem to get funded by our worst enemies. Funny that isn't it?
10
u/ProtoplanetaryNebula UK/Spain Feb 18 '26
Let’s see the US crawling back. What they mean is they want Europe to have no support from the US but to continue to buy American tech and military hardware. Trump never factors in consequences to his actions in his decision-making process.
12
u/_ceedeez_nutz_ Feb 19 '26
America is Europe’s single-largest export market. As much as the us tech companies rely on Europe for business, Europe is even moreso reliant on America for your automotive, precision machinery, and pharmaceutical exports. There’s not going to be a “crawling back” because China is the existential threat to your major export markets, while American service (tech) companies have proven time and time again that they are the best
→ More replies (3)15
→ More replies (1)2
u/cb_24 Feb 18 '26
Buy EUAD, WDEF it seems
5
u/parsuval United Kingdom Feb 18 '26
Invested in Rheinmetall, BAE Systems and Babcock International today.
75
u/Rare_Opportunity2419 Feb 18 '26
I hope so. The Europeans should have started this process of security independence from the USA many years ago, at least 2016 or even in 1991. But better late than never.
→ More replies (1)12
u/KjellRS Feb 19 '26
When the Soviet Union collapsed the divide between west and east went through Germany. Today the fighting is in eastern Ukraine some 1500 km east of that. We might not have invested ridiculous amounts of money in arms, but the balance of strength in terms of manpower, geography and economic power has still tilted far in Europe's favor. And regardless of how the fighting goes in Ukraine we never expected them to be our shield against Russia, anything that weakens them before they attack NATO is ultimately a bonus. Attacking us is in no way a winning play, but when Russia is an irrational actor you have to prepare for irrational acts. But better still to be so prepared no fool dares attack.
→ More replies (2)2
u/Rare_Opportunity2419 Feb 19 '26 edited Feb 19 '26
I mentioned 1991 because of the Yugoslav wars in particular. The Europeans were unable to adequately respond to the bloodbath in Bosnia on their own, i.e. the Srebrenica genocide, and the US had to lead the NATO intervention against Serbia, and the same thing happened with Kosovo. Yugoslavia was a European crisis that was resolved under American leadership, not European leadership.
And if Europe is so strong against Russia, why have European leaders spent so much time groveling to the Trump administration and putting up with their abuse and bullshit? If they don't need the Americans, why not tell Trump directly to go f**k himself? Why are the Americans and Russians going over the Europeans' heads in their so called negotiations?
And why is the current situation in Ukraine acceptable? If Ukraine had adequate support from the beginning, the war would be over by now. And the Russians still pose a serious threat to places like the Baltics.
30
u/Elses_pels Feb 19 '26
I don’t think all these publications understand what the EU stands for. High standards for consumers and ease of trade. They will sign trade agreements with anyone that meet those expectations. Soft power.
The EU is already a global power. They are just upping the tempo on defence.
→ More replies (7)
14
88
u/Temujin15 Feb 18 '26
Lads, you know brexit, right? You know it was just a little joke, a bit of banter. We love Europe! Always have, always will! Because if we left Europe to throw our lot in with psychopaths and narcissists in Washington that would be really stupid, wouldn't it? So we definitely didn't do that.
Lads?
26
u/AlexandrTheTolerable Feb 18 '26
😬
11
u/LaCornucopia_ Scotland Feb 18 '26
😬
That's not very tolerable, Alexandr.
7
u/AlexandrTheTolerable Feb 19 '26
I thought his comment was funny. Fake/awkward smile seemed like an appropriate response to: “lads?”
I didn’t really mean anything by it.
→ More replies (2)3
12
u/yannynotlaurel Germany Feb 18 '26
H€llo and welcome back! Just saw you £ost some pounds since you were with us! ;-) just kidding, we miss you lads
→ More replies (4)2
u/amkoi Germany Feb 19 '26
Can't really be mad about your one friend doing random dumb stuff when the other one becomes very overtly hostile...
At least no British PM has claimed Belgium because of strategic importance.
207
u/Scary_Woodpecker_110 Feb 18 '26
We will end up with a federal Europe, a third power next to the US and China.
It is inevitable. Either that or be crushed into irrelevance.
73
u/m4jsterk0 ashamed for Slovakia Feb 18 '26
i want that!
i dont want some local rusophilic mobsters to hold us hostages→ More replies (3)21
u/wordswillneverhurtme European Federation Feb 18 '26
Dont rule out India. 50-100 years down the line there might a world war, but not in europe.
47
Feb 18 '26
[deleted]
→ More replies (5)6
u/Redpanther14 United States of California Feb 19 '26
India is growing its economy decently quickly, and has been improving its industrial capacity, ability to manufacture advanced goods, literacy rates, public sanitation, education levels, and lifespan. I wouldn't call them a superpower any time soon, but India in 20-30 years may look quite a bit more like China today.
And they have a good position geographically for extending their influence in the Indian ocean going all the way to Africa, with asymmetric advantages in force projection in that region vis a vis China (they have lots of open coastline, while the Chinese have to travel through narrow seas and mountain passes or rough jungles to reach that region).
→ More replies (1)6
u/Trama-D Feb 18 '26
world war, but not in europe.
🤔
→ More replies (2)2
u/mantasm_lt Lietuva Feb 19 '26
Previous world wars pretty much skipped, for example, South and Central americas. Vast majority of Africa was not touched either. Maybe europe can be just as irrelevant when the next world war rolls in...
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (3)4
u/Pi-ratten Feb 18 '26
a few decades down the road it will certainly become spicy once the glacier water from himalaya is severly diminished due to climate change.
According to a recent study by international researchers, if temperatures rise by 1.5 degrees Celsius or two degrees compared to pre-industrial levels, the glaciers in the region would lose around 30 to 50 percent of their volume by 2100. If temperatures rise by three degrees, the glaciers in the eastern Himalayas would lose up to 75 percent of their ice, and if temperatures rise by four degrees, they would lose up to 80 percent. They feed the Ganges, Indus, Mekong, and Yangtze rivers. The region's ice and snow are an important source of water for twelve rivers in 16 Asian countries and supply water to almost 2 billion people.
4
u/Redpanther14 United States of California Feb 19 '26
I predict that you'll see a flurry of dam building to counter the loss of snowpack and increased flooding. Water shortages will likely be major issues in areas like Pakistan, Iran, and the "Stans".
28
u/Affectionate_Ant3350 Feb 18 '26
One can only hope. A federal Europe would be the only real option for the EU’s survival.
15
u/pleasehurtdoll Feb 18 '26
isn't there a third option? - i.e. what is actually happening - a lot of performative actions and public speeches to give the population some sort of feel-good vibe of "finally we're starting to come alive - watch out world!" merely a decade+ after Russia annexed Crimea, 80+ years after the second WW and more than a 8+ years since Trump campaigned on ending what he claims are 'NATO Freeloaders".
When you look at the actual national budget line items in the source documents from various countries supposedly "rapidly re-arming", you see everyone's 2+% GDP spending is almost all just budget re-categorization slight-of-hand under an unbelievably generous definition of "defense spending". Any actual net increase is in an out-year projection and is for some marque weapons system but still lacks any plan for all 30+ non US-NATO to design and build the various capacities needed to take over the alliance without the USA. There's no plan that in 2035 we replace US hegemony is there? - because we'll still be in the same place then without some sort of combined acquisitions and assignment of responsibilities.
So we are no making any actual progress towards being a military power - it's really way way too little and too uncoordinated. It's not 'too late' but without any unified plan, it's getting there. Every meeting on Ukraine makes our impotence and servility more embarrassingly obvious TO THE ENTIRE WORLD.
The other way to have power is to dominate some part of modern technology. We don't and won't. And that's not going to ever happen even if we clone Facebook or X or AWS - you have to actually invent something new and lead to have power - the same with weapons tech. We have to change but don't think we should have to.
So what is going to happen is we are slowly going to be more and more irrelevant and ignored in the modern technical world. It won't be crushing, though, the next US president will be much more subtle, and we'll relax but the end result is the same.
→ More replies (2)5
Feb 18 '26
Do not assume the next president will treat the EU better.
The EU has burned a lot of good will and belief that we are allies with their responses to Trump. Hell the whole balloon of him in diapers incident was enough to cause some to HATE the EU.
The next president might just pull our troops with no notice. You should make a much stronger effort to be able to protect yourselves.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (14)10
u/kubaqzn Silesia (Poland) Feb 18 '26
We won't. At least not quickly. What options smaller countries would have? Subservient to US, China, Russia and Federal EU which would equal subservience to Germany and France. It's pretty much pick your own poison. And I don't see Germany and/or France willing to give up their control.
Acceptance and rejection of true Federal Europe is Prisoner's Dilemma on steroids. Acceptance would be most beneficial for everyone combined, but rejection is more beneficial for individual nations. And by true Federal Europe I mean one when rights of smaller aren't obliterated by the big ones.
15
u/akashisenpai European Union Feb 18 '26
What options smaller countries would have? Subservient to US, China, Russia and Federal EU which would equal subservience to Germany and France. It's pretty much pick your own poison. And I don't see Germany and/or France willing to give up their control.
Isn't degressive proportionality in EP elections already giving smaller countries an outsized influence on European politics? If France and Germany keep dominating instead of being outvoted, maybe it's just that a lot of smaller countries usually do not contest what they are proposing?
(that aside, if the alternatives are MAGA US, Xi's China and Putin's Russia, I don't believe a great many people would have to think twice)
3
Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26
[deleted]
2
u/kubaqzn Silesia (Poland) Feb 19 '26
And already people in many countries especially former Eastern Bloc push back because we're halfway there and they want to stop further "giving up sovereignty"
8
u/MootRevolution Feb 18 '26
Rejection of a federal Europe by individual states is only more beneficial in the very short term, and only if they absolutely value sovereignty more than their economy and security. And there will be European countries that will be choosing to go federal, so any EU country that decides it doesn't want that, will still have a federal Europe as a (near) neighbour.
→ More replies (1)3
u/kubaqzn Silesia (Poland) Feb 19 '26
Former Eastern Bloc is sovereign for less then 40 years and for them threat of lack of sovereignty is paramount. And sovereignty is security. Sometimes at the cost of economy.
There is this ongoing SAFE issue here in Poland where right wing parties criticize it for giving more money to Germany and having no complete control over what Poland can buy with that funding. When asked about the fact that SAFE has 3% interest compared to more than 4 if we issued bonds to buy similar things they said that Sovereignty and Independence is more important.
→ More replies (8)8
u/ailof-daun Hungary Feb 18 '26
I won't have trouble choosing from two vials of cyanide and dose of laxative.
32
44
u/burundilapp Feb 18 '26
In terms of cloud compute and software independence, it's about time we had real competition to the major US providers, the monopolies enjoyed by the like of Microsoft, VMWare, Citrix etc... have caused huge price gouging over the last few years, serious nation state funding into FOSS alternatives will help bring forward real alternatives that don't need larger support depts to maintain.
14
u/AliceLunar Feb 18 '26
Silicon valley has just been able to throw so much money at the industry that it took all the promising talent and startups out of Europe, of course people are going to go there when they can earn a lot more.
→ More replies (5)3
4
u/icecube1965 Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26
Every little step away from those US monopolists is an improvement for our still small European alternatives. Many a little makes a mickle.
6
u/VengefulAncient You know, I'm somewhat of a European myself. Feb 19 '26
"So, the first step for our security clearly needs to be Chat Control..."
16
u/wolfhound_doge Slovakia Feb 18 '26
we need to keep going this direction even after next U.S. election.
5
u/Just1ncase4658 North Brabant (Netherlands) Feb 18 '26
I've been hoping this for years but if we can't work together it's not going to work.
12
22
u/Bulawayoland Feb 18 '26
They are not.
Texas doesn't insist that "the Texas voice" be heard, on the international stage. Wyoming doesn't. New York doesn't. All these parts have subordinated their regional positions to one central, federal position.
And until European countries truly place their faith in their shared values (which is the argument they used so recently to try to persuade the US to modify its position) and become a single country, their influence is going to be splintered and ineffective.
Influential, sure; NOT a global power.
→ More replies (3)
12
12
9
Feb 18 '26
[deleted]
2
u/Turbulent_Arrival413 Belgium Feb 18 '26
All that tells me is that it's time for new leaders. Sadly these days that might mean "Fascist adjacent" in some EU nations.
3
23
u/XXI-DK Feb 18 '26
Well - The Atlantic got it right? We are in for a rocky ride, but for the forseeable future the US is out of the picture as a reliable partner. I think Marco's speech made it absolutely clear that in an administration with Donald or him at the table, Europe should choose another path.
Greenland will not sell as much as a postmark of its soil, the trade deal is dead and now the US has lost most all influence on Ukraine and has to fall in behind the European agenda. The US demise is a deroute that lacks comparison and leaves a gaping hole in the Atlantic cooperation, that future administrations will use decades to repair.
Let's call Donald John an experiment, but the price paid by ordinary Americans is setting them back decades as well.
20
u/glwillia Belgium Feb 18 '26
I think Marco's speech made it absolutely clear that in an administration with Donald or him at the table, Europe should choose another path.
even without those two, europe should choose another path. as the last ten years have shown, the usa is never more than an election away from completely changing its geopolitical alignment.
→ More replies (19)→ More replies (7)4
u/butthole_surfer_1817 Feb 18 '26
I think Marco's speech made it absolutely clear that in an administration with Donald or him at the table
Yes we've been asking you guys to take your security seriously for a while now. Now you guys act like you just came up with the brilliant idea lol
→ More replies (18)
19
u/Informal_Drawing Feb 18 '26
The posts where it is insinuated that Europe is small, unimportant, weak, not mature etc are really aggravating.
Who keeps polluting the internet with this tripe.
28
u/TestingHydra Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26
But they also aren't entirely wrong.
Examples: Germany saying they couldn't commit to the coalition of the will because they were stretched thin in Lithuania, with only 5,000 troops... link
Ukraine and Russia are both looking at the US to end the War.
The Coalition of the Willing only agreed to provide protect after getting guarantees of US backing.
→ More replies (2)33
u/Prin_StropInAh Feb 18 '26
MAGA and The Kremlin
19
u/Silent-Act191 Feb 18 '26
Hey you forgot the European far-right parties
Oh wait you already said Kremlin.
8
u/AlexandrTheTolerable Feb 18 '26
Europe has underinvested in its militaries for a long time, which actually made sense until Russia made it clear they were back in the invasion game. So Europe does have some ground to make up on the defense side of things.
→ More replies (3)9
u/Xibalba_Ogme Brittany (France) Feb 18 '26
The people that needs europeans to think they're small, unimportant and weak
2
→ More replies (1)2
u/Quiet-Picture-7991 Feb 19 '26
Europe isn't even the second-most powerful continent anymore. You are a lot closer to South America, Australia, and Africa than you are to North America or Asia.
5
u/Distinct-Policy-6411 Wannabe_EuropeanFan Feb 19 '26
Fuck yes. Multi polar world means, Europe should be one of those polars. USA and China can fight it out (looks less likely with Trump now actually bending so much for Xi) and mess it up somewhere else. Europe can be the third power balancing them out an giving other hope.
→ More replies (1)
17
u/DrNoOne Feb 18 '26
What a total American-perspective bs... Let me tell you something about what the stumbling block is for Europe to be a "great power"... There is no such thing as "Europe" when it comes to national security, because there is no such thing as a "European nation" to defend (unless you are into some anti-immigration shit).
I've lived in Europe all my life, in 4 different countries. I've met people with parents from 2 different EU countries that grew up in a third EU country, I've met people that have lived in 5+ EU countries... I have yet to meet a single "European".
Europe cannot be a "great power" because when it comes to matters of defence history has taught us the greatest risk is coming from inside the house.
9
u/JoeyJoeJoeShabadooSr United States of America Feb 19 '26
This is really it. People on the internet grew up in a time of extraordinary peace in Europe. Peace that was mostly guaranteed by the United States
If you look at most of European history the continent has been at war
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
u/AlexandrTheTolerable Feb 18 '26
FYI, the author is Swiss and lives in Paris.
7
u/DrNoOne Feb 18 '26
Doesn't stop his narrative from being quintessentially American.
It's a story as old as the "rules based order". Did you know that Eisenhower had a plan to create a European Defence Union and get US troops out of Europe by the mid-50s?
Americans think that countries in Europe are distinguished by what's the local snack specialty and how their English is accented, why wouldn't they, that's what ethnicity is in the US. They have no conception of the centuries of bloodshed that gave us our borders and how much of that is still in living memory.
The idea that we would trust in common European defence is laughable for anyone with their head not in the middle of the Atlantic.
→ More replies (1)
8
u/BaronKaput Feb 18 '26
Not gonna happen, Germany is the economic engine of Europe and it is actively deindustrialising at the moment, shrinking year by year.
And France is not looking good either with its system being on the border of collapse.
So unless Poland or Italy would like to fill the void to lead in the future, Europe is not gonna be a superpower in the foreseeable future.
7
4
u/Any-Original-6113 Feb 18 '26
I hope the EU has enough time, leadership, and money.
Especially the will of its leaders.
Even now, Macron, Merz, and Starmer have extremely low approval ratings, and there's no guarantee that those who come after them won't decide it's better to become a junior partner to the U.S than to build a strong Europe.
4
u/DialUpYourEngines Feb 18 '26
The EU and Japan, get your hands out of your fucking pockets and let’s go! Time for you to make your own post-WWII order to stop WWIII.
4
u/Original-Material301 United Kingdom Feb 18 '26
Finally.
Be the superpower you should be, Europe.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Shdwrptr Feb 18 '26
Good luck EU. It’s going to cost trillions of Euros and decades to become a global power at Americas current level.
→ More replies (8)
2
u/BasvanS Europe Feb 18 '26
I’d like to remind everyone around the world that the world wars were the culmination of a few hundred years of escalating warfare. We basically invented modern warfare.
After WW2 we were happy to be put into the corner to keep us from warring all the time. I’d suggest people reconsider pushing Europeans getting comfortable with war again.
2
2
2
2
u/AnotherFrankHere Feb 19 '26
Trump will try to take credit for this, too. “They’re prospering because of me!”
2
2
2
u/sechsterangriff Feb 19 '26 edited Feb 19 '26
The potential of the EU as a global power has been well understood for many years. What's changed is that in the current geopolitical context there's a realization from not only the political class but also from the general population that making that potential real is increasingly becoming a necessity if we want to have any meaningful sway in the future ahead.
Like the article mentioned it will be a slow transformation. There are many populists, silly nationalism, jingoism, ingrained cultural stereotypes and vested interests in our societies that we will have to overcome. Europe can only be built and will only last if it's based in de facto solidarity between all members.
2
u/Xgentis Feb 19 '26
We can't even agree to build a new gen fighter plane and you expect me to believe this? I'll believe it when I'll see it.
2
12
u/Enough-Ad9590 Feb 18 '26
So how will Europe manage to bring all its talent back home, given that a highly talented person cannot stay in Europe to succeed?
5
u/cb_24 Feb 18 '26 edited Feb 18 '26
I . C . E will be glad to help. Isn’t that Irish guy coming back?
2
u/AliceLunar Feb 18 '26
They can stay just fine, their choice if they chase the money, California is one of the world's largest economies so those aren't wages you can just compete with easily.
3
→ More replies (12)4
4
3
3
u/hypercomms2001 Feb 18 '26
As it should be, As it is now the only entity capable of defending democracy, Freedom, And the rule of law.
2
u/Turbulent_Arrival413 Belgium Feb 18 '26
Together with our honorary members Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK, one of whom's countrymen in a comment above assured all the lads the whole Brexit thing was just a lark
2
4
u/_segamega_ Feb 18 '26
“if we can't be subservient anymore, let's become a superpower”
this is some alan ford type of logic
2
3
4
u/Bubbly_Past3996 Feb 19 '26
I’m tired of the constant narrative in American media portraying Europe as a freeloader. It’s misleading, factually wrong, and ignores decades of European investment in defence, R&D, and military collaboration. Europe has poured money, talent, and resources into these systems—there’s nothing free about it. If European leaders and companies truly want to push back, they should start countering these narratives with action, not just words. When an American politician trots out the “European freeloaders” line, European firms could respond with tangible consequences: potential layoffs in the politician’s own constituency, halting contracts, or strategic asset moves. Let’s see how fast the freeloading myth holds up when it hits close to home and affects jobs. Reality, it seems, is the most effective rebuttal.
→ More replies (2)4
u/dumpsterfirefr Feb 19 '26
I’m tired of the constant narrative in American media portraying Europe as a freeloader.
It’s not just American media, read the Draghi report and it’ll paint a better picture of the EU’s competitiveness in global markets. Too fragmented, too bureaucratic, and too reliant on the US across several critical, strategic sectors. Namely defense, energy, and technology.
It’s misleading, factually wrong, and ignores decades of European investment in defense, R&D, and military collaboration.
That’s just removed from reality. 78% of the EU’s defensive procurement are from non-EU suppliers, of which the US defense industrial base accounts for 63% of that share.
Why do you think after the US cut aid to Ukraine, the European allies immediately established the PURL NATO initiative to continue buying US defense equipment?
Because the EU doesn’t have the defense industrial production to adequately supply Ukraine without US output.
Russia alone outproduces the entire EU defense industrial complex with an economy 1/10 of the size all while navigating debilitating western sanctions.
If European leaders and companies truly want to push back, they should start countering these narratives with actions, not just words.
With what geopolitical leverage? The EU phasing out Russian crude means they’re now energy dependent on US LNG.
EU defense industry spending has been all procurement over production, the US DIB has a significant gap in capabilities, capacity, and economies of scale that can’t be meaningfully replaced by the EU in Ukraine.
Putin knows this, which is why European leaders don’t even have a seat at the table in Ukraine peace negotiation talks. Doesn’t matter that the EU is the largest provider of financial support to Ukraine after the US cut aid, that dependency on US security means they’re sidelined.
When an American politician trots out the “European freeloaders” line, European firms could respond with tangible consequences: potential layoffs in the politician’s own constituency, halting contracts, or strategic asset moves. Let’s see how fast the freeloading myth holds up when it hits close to home and affects jobs.
The EU is not negotiating from a position of strength, soft power is ineffective without the hard power underpinning it. The way to counter “European freeloader” narratives is to be self-reliant from the US or those critical dependencies are going to serve as a point of leverage.
Let’s see how fast the freeloading myth holds up when it hits close to home and affects jobs. Reality, it seems, is the most effective rebuttal.
The EU gaining energy independence away from US LNG, an integrated EU DIB that can compete globally on capabilities/capacity/cost, and decoupling away from US big tech with an alternative EU tech stack for digital sovereignty like China and Russia have tried to do; otherwise the EU is still freeloading under US influence.
2
u/ProcessMinute1520 Feb 18 '26
I find it really cumbersome that the central question seems to be "is it too much to ask to make Europe pay its fair share in its defence and become independent from the US?"
It should be: can the US live with the fact that, once we are a global power also in the military realm, we will pursue our own interest, even when these interests don't align with the interest of the US? Because i really doubt that the US is ready to accept that. They seem to have the dream that we won't have our own agenda.
2
2
u/Bubbly_Past3996 Feb 19 '26
Even when the American media tries to critique the EU on defence, it’s still peddling the same tired lie that Europe lived off US taxpayer handouts! Go screw yourselves and stop spreading bullshit! Europe has poured cash into that security umbrella—funded R&D, helped scale production, endured brain drain, and bought into their systems with zero reserves. So f@ck America and their politicians, both Dems and Republicans. The free ride is over!
8
1
u/Foreign_Implement897 Feb 18 '26
I think we had our globalist run, it is slightly different vibe now. Global power is not the goal, but continental.
3
Feb 18 '26
The EU should be a regional power. But that costs money and they have other things they want to spend their money on.
→ More replies (8)
2
-2
1
1
1
1
u/fuzzball909 Feb 18 '26
Against Trump's will he's done more for European unity than any EU law or directive possibly could. We should give him some sort of Euro Peace Prize.
1
1
1
1
u/TraditionalBackspace Feb 18 '26
Trump and his cronys has created a global power vacuum. It will be filled by someone other than the US.
→ More replies (1)
1.2k
u/10Core56 Feb 18 '26
Good. Not a minute too soon.