Throughout history, Europe has been a major point of interest and conflict. Many nations rose and fell as the centuries passed by and technology advanced until the second world war. This event led to untold levels of devastation and the collapse of European empires. After this devastating conflict, many European nations agreed that this should never happen again, leading to the creation of the European Union. This union was designed to interlink nations together so that war would never become worth it, and cooperation was the best way forward. This has so far worked, and no EU nation has been in any wars since. Following the Cold War, many European countries dropped their military spending to focus on other things, primarily relying on the US for security. This continued until Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which woke up many European nations to the fact that they needed to be able to defend themselves. This raises the question, is an EU army a good idea?
The idea of an EU army is not new; it has been thought of and advocated before, especially by France. However, other things often took higher priority over this, so the idea never made much progress until today. But now that the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, has made various threats toward European nations, it has become clear that a European army could be essential. Relying on another country across an ocean for your defense is never a good long-term defense strategy; change in leadership and foreign policy will always be an issue for security. Military independence is always a good idea, and an EU military force would provide a way for Europe to fully focus on its own interests and would mean that the EU could become its own force and voice in the world.
Some may say that this would be an unnecessary change that would cost massive amounts of money, and even in the unlikely scenario that Europe was completely abandoned by all its allies, it would still have France and Poland to protect it from outside threats. However, this reliance still has the same problem: relying on the fact that a nation will still be a power or still want to protect you in a year’s time is not a smart long-term plan. A united European army will allow for a consistent and strong defense that can weather changing times and help the EU become permanent.
Some people may also say that a united European army could trap nations and would lead to less independence among them. This is not sure for a number of reasons, the first being that an EU army would not likely mean the disillusion of independent nation armies but rather something that each member state would contribute to. On top of that, more unity would most likely be better for the EU in the long run. Perhaps the main point that is used against the idea of an EU military is that it would not have much use because of NATO. However, NATO is largely influenced by the US and does not allow for its use beyond interests that are relevant to major nations. Ultimately NATO is a US-led organization and in many ways that means it will prioritize US interests. NATO is also not something that is often used practically and in many ways is something that its members use as a protection, fully activated if all hope for a diplomatic solution is lost. A European army could have much more practical use and would be able to intervene in other interests important to Europe.
I believe that a United European army is a good thing for many reasons. It would help provide better safety for smaller nations, ensure the relevance of the EU, and help create long-lasting prosperity in Europe. Though it will not be easy to create a united European army to protect Europe and its security, it is a necessary step to take.
“Nationalism is war, and war is the past. But it is not only the past. It could be our future. You are the guarantors of peace and of our security,” – Francois Mitterrand in his address to the European Parliament in 1995.
