Is Europe having an existential crisis?

Europe has mostly remained unified since World War 2 but after BREXIT, and Russian advances the relationship between the EU countries and allies has dented – is it having an existential crisis?

On Wednesday, President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen urged the Union to stop relying on the US, and form an EU-only military force.

As NATO is weaker than ever, and with the abrupt withdrawal from Afghanistan by the US, the EU no longer feels safe and sees its role shrinking.

With the UK too engaging global affairs independently, Europe sees itself out of the global picture as it can only assert pressure through economic bargaining which today’s World isn’t really bothered with.

With Britain gone, the only major player looking into global affairs for Europe is France (apart from the Union’s combined efforts).

Hours after von der Leyen made her speech, the AUKUS alliance between Australia, the United Kingdom and United States was announced, further undermining the “historic” speech made by the President of the European Commission.

Since France’s angry reaction over the sub deal took all the limelight, we forgot to pay attention to combined-Europe.

AUKUS would keep watch in the Indo-Pacific, but comparing the announcement with von der Leyen’s speech gives us insight into the fate of NATO.

There is a growing concern in Europe, of its inability to act independently in combating external threats.

Since NATO’s responses to Russia often end in stalemate, Europe feels helpless to defend itself.

European peacekeeping missions rely on international intelligence, and apart from that the aggression from Russia poses a major threat that could crash the European economy through the invasions of Eastern European countries.

The EU desperately wants a military pact among all the bordering countries, one which doesn’t have the (English-speaking) US coming in from the other side of the World to have another stalemate with Russia.

Making such a pact itself seems unmanageable if not unachievable.

The problem with an EU-only pact would be the combined armed forces.

Three things would plague the EU-only pact, one would be the neutral actors unwilling to send in troops, further creating rifts between the members pledging troops, two would be each country’s nationalists, never supporting their soldiers fighting for another European country, and three would be the pacifists saying no to any kind of violence.

Countries would be required to dish out a number of troops for the joint ops, something no neutral actor would be willing to do.

Without the unwavering support of all the participating countries such a formation looks decades away if not wholly impossible.

Non-participation would further crack the supposed alliance unless a number of countries appear with an open heart to protect not their countries but Europe all by themselves.

It would take years to debate and crack deals in order to get the countries to agree multilaterally, but there will always be that uncertainty that has always plagued Europe, even during the most peaceful years.

If troops of one country are killed in action, and the others don’t face casualties then there will be political upheaval, opposition political parties would incite the nationalists and the same loop would continue again and again.

European countries have somehow managed to tolerate each others’ economic liabilities but doing the same in battles has at least never worked before.

There will always be someone chanting against the “Unified military,” for getting troops of a specific country or ethnicity killed in battle, etc.

If Europe miraculously manages to subdue these supposed outcries and antagonism towards the forces of the other countries, then we may indeed see a Unified European Alliance that could protect Europe against not only Russian aggression but also help it in regaining its critical role in global affairs.

With Europe, it’s back to square one and the military alliance is the new “Boeing challenge.”

Europe united and finally launched itself in the airliner market to not only compete with Boeing but to make Europeans proud.

Now, it’s looking to do the same militarily, to unite. How long they stand integrated is another issue, but getting them together is the matter at hand.

Since BREXIT, there has always been a concern of a ripple effect where more countries would want to opt out after seeing Britain leave.

The EU has so far managed to keep the dissidents from abandoning, but getting all the countries on board for a military pact is something of a whole new level – even though it would serve their collective interests.

No country would want to see their nationals killed in the battles of “others.”

Such an alliance could work only if the Union somehow manages to assert a “greater Europa” thinking into the people.

Although, that too is a task of its own, and the more the decision-makers, the harder it gets.

When it comes to the security of the Indo-Pacific, even France was left out of the picture by AUKUS. Thus forcing Europe to think its military role outside its borders has forever shrunk.

Countries now only look towards Europe for economic development, trade and tech, and Europe too bargains only with its economic power, along with its markets.

Europe today, is facing an existential crisis which is why France reacted so strongly.

• Although, one would think if Australia was getting a better deal, then why would it go with diesel-powered subs?

Nuclear-powered submarines don’t need to expose themselves out of the water, along with countless other critical benefits.

For Australia, they would be a game changer against China.

However, $40bn is a huge sum, and France’s economy has been hit pretty hard, so their frustration is somewhat justified, but neither is Australia in the wrong when it comes to its security.

Hiding beneath the anger is France’s inability to cope with the decisions of the US.

France has been the United States’ oldest ally and today feels “betrayed,” but they will sooner or later agree that it was for the greater good, and hopefully the allies are able to resolve the issues together.

France is a nuclear power, and it takes great pride in its military advancements.

Not being part of the AUKUS alliance is one thing, but being kept in the dark about it was something France never imagined.

The UK will eventually play a vital role in easing the tensions between France and the US.

It can come out as a neutral player and make France focus on the real threat.

On Biden’s part, this has been another failure. His Crisis Administration was here to “rebuild the relationships with allies” but seems to be denting them.

As France is angry – or disappointed – Britain on the other hand is quite happy with its growing role at the global stage, and that too since it left the EU.

It is however, having trouble managing the economy but now feels like a free bird, making its own decisions with no years and years of delays because of the EU’s “debating clubs.”

Europe today is indeed having an existential crisis. It will always have a global stake but will that include a military role? Will Europe’s shrinking military role eventually dissipate?

P.S. The rise of “wokeism” in Europe is another major roadblock for the unification of the militaries.

The average European whether from the east or west, north or south will never tolerate its nationals losing their lives because of a decision taken by a foreign military commander, or a battle involving another country.

Nor will the pacifists ever agree to participate in wars, or have any active military role anywhere in the World (even against Russia!).