europemagazine
Criticism of the EU's defense capabilities is notorious and loud. There are areas in which the EU states are doing better than the USA. But there is a fundamental problem.
They have been seen more often in Lithuania since 2017: Bundeswehr tanks taking part in military exercises in the border area with Russia and Belarus. A strong signal not only across the border, but also to NATO allies. This is intended to signal a readiness for defense.
Up to 5,000 German soldiers are to be stationed here in the future, and the brigade is currently being set up. This also means that a lot of equipment and material will have to be relocated. Both will probably be lacking in Germany in the short term, according to the Inspector of the Army, Alfons Mais. The equipment for Lithuania will have to be “sweated out” from the stocks, and the material will be missing at home for the next three to five years.
Build up reserves quickly
It is a problem that almost all of Europe's armies are currently experiencing. For years, too few reserves were built up, and now they have to hastily re-equip. The arms industry's order books are fuller than ever, and new factories are being built everywhere. Rheinmetall alone is setting up new production lines at several locations.
In addition, EU states have almost doubled their imports since 2022 after Russia invaded Ukraine. This is according to reports from the peace research institute SIPRI. This is because building new structures takes several years, but the ammunition is needed now.
Where the EU performs well
Buying on a large scale, regardless of where the military equipment comes from, is the order of the day, says Mihai Chihaia. The military expert has analyzed Europe's defense capabilities for the think tank European Policy Center. His conclusion: At present, the continent can hardly defend itself on its own.
In a direct comparison with the protecting power of the USA, Europe does not fare so badly, as research by the Europe Magazine Washington is investing almost three times more in defense, at $916 billion. However, the EU states are almost on par with each other in terms of the number of active soldiers, as well as the number of artillery guns.
The number of battle tanks is slightly higher in the USA, but Europe has three times as many naval units. The only area where the Americans are clearly ahead is the air force.
A question of networking
This shows that the capacities are there. However, they are poorly networked. While the US Army uses only a few different weapon systems, the Europeans use more than 150, almost six times as many. The national armies have their own individual solutions, and many of them are not compatible with each other in the event of a crisis.
Military expert Chihaia attributes this to exercises that reveal weak points. Europe has too few bridges or freight wagons to transport military and material. And the ammunition is also not compatible. There is a lack of interoperability, as it is called in military jargon.
Europe’s weapons systems are not compatible
This is currently being felt in Ukraine. Europe is supplying ammunition there, but it varies slightly from country to country. At the front, this means that the weapons systems are not compatible with each other. Military experts say that Europe's support for Ukraine is a magnifying glass for Europe's problems.
A new military strategy, which the EU Commission presented in June, is intended to remedy the situation. Brussels wants to intervene more strongly in the market, for example in the coordinated procurement and production of military equipment. In the event of a crisis, the European arms industry could also be given concrete guidelines. However, the necessary structures must first be negotiated and set up over a long period of time.
Without NATO it cannot work
Defending Europe will therefore remain a key task for NATO in the future – this is the conclusion reached by Brussels military researcher Chihaia. A functioning European army, however, is hardly imaginable. It would be unclear who would have command there, says the expert. Not to mention the problems with the material.
Strengthening our own defense capabilities is a mammoth task and requires political patience. At the moment, there is a willingness to rearm, but this must continue. “We are really talking about long-term goals here,” said Chihaia. “And that means five, ten, maybe even twenty or forty years in which we must make an effort.”
