Scatenare la cooperazione di difesa tra Stati Uniti e UE – Invece di respingere gli sforzi di difesa europei come ha fatto in passato, Washington deve abbracciare pienamente i passi che l’Unione Europea sta ora adottando

If world war happens again, who do you guys think will win?

>The United States has also played an active role in stymieing the EU’s defense capabilities throughout the years, repeatedly warning about the EU implementing protectionist measures, and defense primes worrying about lost contracts.

I just love the framing of this by the author that Europe’s weak strategic footings are due to American opposition to European protectionism as opposed to domestic forces. The authors forgot that during the Cold War, European countries like West Germany maintained massive militaries. European defense contractors were putting out gears that competed with the American-made ones like the Leopoard 2, Tornado, Mirage, etc. What changed since the Cold War was that European countries cashed in on the peace dividend and let their defense industries go. That’s not the US’s fault.

>War has returned to Europe, and yet, Europeans are still woefully unprepared to meet the challenge of protecting the continent without a heavy reliance on the United States.

We should also all remember why war returned to the continent: Because we had weak-willed and incompetent leaders in Europe that sold the continent to the Russians. It was Merkel that rewarded Russian aggression with energy deals and appeasement, allowing them to start the 2022 invasion. Macron and the French intelligence establishment failed us by failing to predict the invasion while the US successfully did. A decade of idiotic energy policies meant that the continent missed its chance to become energy independent like the US, opening us up to energy blackmail by Russia. Let us also not forget that it was France and Germany that opposed Ukraine’s entry into NATO in 2008 or their opposition to a US missile defense shield in Poland, also in 2008. The author’s answer then is to increase those people’s roles in our defense? I say, hell no!

>Then, the United States needs to work within its own political sphere, including closely with the defense industry, to figure out what more autonomy for the EU might mean for future defense contracts.

So the author is suggesting that the US restrain its own defense industries so that European countries can rebuild theirs? This is as delusional as saying Germany should sanction VW and BMW so the US auto companies can regain marketshare. Maybe France should pull back Airbus so Boeing can sell some more planes because, you know, aeronautics is a strategic industry or whatever.

>Going forward, this dialogue should be elevated and should take place at least twice a year. At the next meeting, the two sides should come to the table with the goal of creating a vision for EU defense over the next five to ten years, with concrete ways the United States can strengthen, rather than stymie, that vision. The goal should be to find avenues of cooperation and a clear set of areas where the EU must become an autonomous actor. Part of this dialogue should be the United States pushing for the empowerment of the European defense commissioner, and then supporting their efforts once this person is in place.

The EU is not a defensive alliance, it is an economic union. Article 42 has been demonstrated to be weak and ineffective. There’s no reason for the US to accept the EU as any kind of a serious partner in security because EU itself hasn’t taken its own security seriously. If European security is to be achieved and US-Europe defense cooperation is to be enhanced, then it should be through NATO.

>Another challenge, of course, will be resisting the longstanding tendency to “just buy American” because it’s easier and more available, and creating economies of scale to a point where joint European procurement makes sense. On the US side, the difficulties will be navigating the political minefield of major defense contractors that are worried about losing out on market share, members of Congress who have a personal interest in these contracts, and, ultimately, pushing back against the ossified thinking that has thus far defined this touchy subject. This is certainly a long-term project, but with the support of the United States, Europe could finally be on the right track.

There’s no reason for the US to hurt its own industries to help European ones. This entire essay is filled with self-serving arguments.

There’s a growing conflict of interests between the EU and the USA in regards to NATO.

As it stands, the USA is looking at the Indo-Pacific and Chinese agression, with a possible intervention in the Middle-East. The EU doesn’t really have reach in the Indo-Pacific, apart from France with a few small territories and a growing partnership with India.

This, with the current trend of American isolationism and their assesment that Globalism is coming to an end in a couple decades at most, means that the USA doesn’t see the European “partnership” as interesting anymore, and will be pulling out of Europe to work on it’s own interests in keeping it’s superpower status against a possibly hostile China.

On the other hand, the EU is holding on to NATO for dear life, akin to a kid holding on to his father’s hand instead of walking on his own two feet. We must come to the realization that it is up to Europe to defend Europe, and that won’t be possible without sacrifices.

Of course, the USA is the world’s biggest arms exporter, and is the biggest foreign source of materiel in Europe. And while we can argue all day about their pressure, bribing tactics, or simply competitiveness in regards to price and quantity, the fact is that it is up to European countries to buy European, and not American, or Israeli, or South Korean.

This article is misguided. It is not up to the USA to make efforts to leave room to grow for the European MIC and it’s shared defense efforts, but to the EU to build the necessary framework, and to the individual countries to make the right procurement decisions.

The reason the US pays for Europe’s defense is because the US doesn’t want the EU to have teeth.

If the EU has its own military that would make it a rival to the US.

If the EU has its own military that would make it less reliant on NATO.

I just don’t see a future where the EU and US would “cooperate” on defense.