Germany set to vote on historic increase in defence spending
Germany's Parliament, the Bundestag, is voting on whether to take the brakes off defence spending. This could pave the way for a massive uplift in military investment just as Russia makes gains in Ukraine and Washington signals that Europe can no longer rely on US protection.
"This vote in the Bundestag is absolutely crucial," says Prof Monika Schnitzer, who chairs Germany's Council of Economic Experts.
"After the Munich Security Conference, then the Trump-Zelensky row, Europe got a wake-up call. For the first time Europeans may not be able to rely on Washington. A lot of people had sleepless nights after that."
"The outlook for European defence spending hinges on developments in Germany, as the holder of the region's largest defence budget," agrees Dr Fenella McGerty, senior fellow for defence economics at the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.
Defence spending in Germany rose by 23.2% last year, helping to drive a record 11.7% rise in European defence outlay.
"The remarkable initiatives announced in Germany are key to enabling further growth," adds Dr McGerty.
"Without them, any progress made on strengthening Germany's military capability may have stalled."
Germany's incoming new Chancellor, Friedrich Merz, is in a race against time.
The new parliament convenes on 25 March and not everyone is in favour of all this money being spent, especially on defence.
Both the far-right AfD party and the far-left Linke have vowed to oppose it. The vote needs two-thirds in favour to go through, so Merz has a better chance of this happening today, under the existing (old) parliament. It then needs to be approved by Germany's upper house.
Meanwhile Europe is still coming to terms with the shock of announcements coming from the Trump administration.
At last month's Munich Security Conference I watched as delegates sat open-mouthed listening to US Vice-President JD Vance's blistering attack on Europe's policies on migration and free speech.
This was preceded days earlier by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth telling Nato members that America's 80-year-long defensive umbrella for Europe should no longer be taken for granted.
Defence strategists in Europe are already planning for the unthinkable: a semi-victorious Russia making gains in Ukraine, then rebuilding its army and threatening Nato's eastern members, such as the Baltic states, within three years or less.
This, at a time when the US commitment to Europe's defence is looking extremely shaky. President Trump is being urged by some in his circle to pull US troops out of Europe and even to withdraw from Nato altogether.
There is talk of France extending its national nuclear deterrent to cover other European nations.
Meanwhile, most European governments are under pressure to raise defence spending after years of cuts.
The British Army has now shrunk to its smallest size since the Napoleonic Wars, over 200 years ago, and experts predict it would run out of ammunition within two weeks of fighting a full-scale conventional war in Europe.
Germany has long been cautious about defence spending, not just for historical reasons dating back to 1945, but also due to the global debt crisis of 2009.
Which brings us back to today's crucial vote in the Bundestag. It is not just about defence. One part is about freeing up €500bn (£420bn) for German infrastructure – fixing things like bridges and roads, but also to pay for climate change measures, something the Green Party insisted on.
The other part is about removing the restrictions in the constitution on borrowing that could, in theory, free up unlimited billions of euros for defence spending, both for Germany's armed forces and for a pan-European defence fund. On 4 March European Commission President Ursula Von der Leyen announced plans for an €800bn defence fund called The ReArm Europe Fund.
The proposal being voted on in Berlin is that any spending on defence that amounts to more than 1% of Germany's GDP (national wealth) would no longer be subject to a limit on borrowing. Until now this debt ceiling has been fixed at 0.35 pct of GDP.
Other countries will be watching closely to see if this proposal passes. If it does not, then the EU Commission's 'ReArm Europe' project could be off to a shaky start.
The challenge today for Europe's security is a stark one. If the US no longer has its back, or at the very least cannot be relied upon to come to Europe's defence, then what does the continent need to do to fill the gap?
Let's start with the numbers. According to the Kiel Institute, which meticulously tracks these things, Europe spends just 0.1% of its wealth on helping to defend Ukraine, while the US has been spending 0.15%.
"That means," says the Kiel Institute's Giuseppe Irto, "that if Europe is to make up the shortfall then it needs to double its contribution to 0.21%."
But regardless of what happens today in Berlin this is not just about money.
Many of the most sought-after weapons in Ukraine's armoury have come from the US, like Patriot air defence and long-range artillery systems like Himars. The Kiel Institute puts the proportion of Ukraine's rocket artillery at 86% coming from the US, with 82% of its howitzer ammunition also being US-sourced.
Then there is the whole question of US intelligence aid for Kyiv, much of it derived from satellites and geospatial imagery. If Washington were to permanently switch that off, then Ukrainian forces risk being partially blinded.
If America's nuclear arsenal is taken out of the equation then there is a massive disparity between Russia's 5,000-plus warheads and the combined total of Britain and France's nukes which amount to less than a tenth of that. But that still theoretically leaves enough to act as a nuclear deterrent.
When it comes to "conventional", ie. non-nuclear arms, Western defence chiefs are fond of saying that Nato's combined forces are superior to Russia's.
Maybe, but if there is one glaring lesson to come out of the Ukraine war it is that "mass" matters. Russia's army may be of poor quality but President Putin has been able to throw such huge numbers of men, drones, shells and missiles at Ukraine's front lines that the Russians are inexorably advancing, albeit slowly and at huge cost.
This should not come as a surprise. Moscow put its economy on to a war footing some time ago. It appointed an economist as its defence minister and retooled many of its factories to churn out vast quantities of munitions, especially explosive-tipped drones.
While many European nations have dragged their feet over raising defence spending much above the Nato-mandated 2% of GDP, Russia's is closer to 7%. Around 40% of Russia's national budget is spent on defence.
So Europe has a fair bit of catching up to do if it is to even come close to shoring up its defence and security.
"If the vote passes then it will be significant for Germany and for Europe," says Ed Arnold, senior research fellow for European security at the Royal United Services Institute think tank.
"It will set a precedent and allow others to follow... However, three years on from the invasion of Ukraine the case of Germany is a reminder that more money for defence is necessary but not sufficient.
"Europe needs defence and security leaders who are able to navigate a rapidly deteriorating Euro-Atlantic security environment. Cultural, rather than financial reform, would be most valuable to Europe right now."
Can Europe deter Russia in Ukraine without US military?
Katya Adler: Fractured Europe seeks credible answers on Ukraine
Can Europe fill the gap now the US has paused military support for Ukraine?
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Epoch Times
a few seconds ago
- Epoch Times
European Leaders Will Join Zelenskyy at White House Meeting With Trump
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy will be accompanied by European and NATO leaders during his meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Aug. 17. Zelenskyy's previous meeting with Trump at the White House in February was cut short after the sit-down turned into a heated exchange, leading to the Ukrainian president's early exit from the talks. European leaders may be looking to prevent a repeat of that meeting.
The Hill
29 minutes ago
- The Hill
Samples before space suits: America must be smart about its mission to Mars
On day one of this administration, the president included his ambitions for Mars in his inaugural address, and again several weeks later to a joint session of Congress: 'We are going to conquer the vast frontiers of science, and we are going to lead humanity into space and plant the American flag on the planet Mars, and even far beyond.' President Trump's vision for Mars is correct, and now there is a plan for the next steps in how he achieves it. The U.S. has led the world in the exploration of Mars since Vikings I and II landed in 1976. We now stand on the precipice of two ultimate achievements: the return of samples from Mars to Earth, and sending the first humans — Americans — to the Martian surface. The fiscal 2026 presidential budget request proposed 'to terminate the Mars Sample Return Program given that current architecture options remain unaffordable.' But, it adds: 'It is anticipated that future missions to Mars will return samples for study on Earth.' We need those samples robotically returned for study on Earth. Delaying Mars Sample Return or waiting for astronauts to pick them up will make the human exploration of Mars significantly more expensive and dangerous — and for the first time ever, almost certainly cede decades of U.S. space exploration leadership to China. A lower-cost robotic Mars Sample Return would more than pay for itself from savings realized by simplified human missions. Martian soil has substances known to be toxic, as well as uncharacterized biological potential. Without Mars Sample Return, human mission designs must account for the full range of possibilities and the most demanding scenarios. Laboratory tests are needed to make direct measurements of the Mars samples to determine concentrations and forms of toxic materials to understand threats and develop solutions. This will be needed to design spacesuits and protect astronauts from the fine martian dust. It allows risk mitigation to shift from large and expensive requirements to quantifiable ones with reduced uncertainties. While no martian life has been detected yet, our exploration has shown that much of Mars would previously have been habitable, and parts of Mars may currently still be habitable. In advance of humans to Mars, we need to robotically return samples in a highly controlled manner to satisfy planetary protection back-contamination requirements to ensure that Mars does not have organisms that might impact human health or have adverse effects on Earth's biosphere. Mars Sample Return will accelerate U.S. leadership in space. Mars is several hundred times farther from Earth than the Moon. Using current propulsion technologies, a Mars round trip will take up to three years, with minimal abort opportunities, as compared to Apollo's round trip of days. Even then, there were three uncrewed and four crewed missions before Apollo 11, the first Moon landing. Completing Mars Sample Return supports technology demos needed for human missions, such as advancing from the current precision landing (7-10 km) to pinpoint landing (~100 m) to put astronauts in proximity to safe sites and pre-positioned supplies. Mars Sample Return also achieves a profound international first: the first samples — with potential for evidence of life — returned from Mars. These samples might once and for all answer the fundamental question of 'Are we alone in the universe,' and that is a question we most certainly want the United States to answer first. Lockheed Martin, my former employer, has been studying Mars Sample Return missions for more than 50 years, and is confident it can deliver an end-to-end architecture for under $3 billion — less than half of previous estimates — by leveraging heritage components, reducing design complexity, and streamlining the program structure. They have built and flown four highly successful Mars landers and four highly successful Mars orbiters, as well as pioneered all three of NASA's previous sample return missions (returning material from a comet, the solar wind and an asteroid), and have established credibility and mission success across a wide variety of additional deep space missions, from Venus to Saturn. NASA's Mars 2020 rover, Perseverance or 'Percy,' at Jezero Crater has been caching an unparalleled set of samples that will shed more light on the history of Mars than all previous Mars missions combined. China has announced it plans to launch a sample return mission to Mars in 2028, with an Earth return likely in 2031. If we forgo the timely return of Percy's superior set of samples, it will be China that leaps ahead. Mars soil and dust are uniquely different, and potentially dangerous — returning samples should precede astronauts going to Mars, while also maintaining our nation's pre-eminence in Mars exploration as NASA lays the groundwork for the next giant leap. Ben Clark has been a member of the science teams of every NASA mission to explore the surface of Mars, and designed the instrument on Viking that made the first analysis of martian soil. He was chief scientist for deep space exploration at Lockheed Martin. Currently, he helps analyze chemical compositions of the diverse samples the Perseverance rover has been acquiring during its multi-year trek on Mars.
Boston Globe
29 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
European leaders to join Ukraine's Zelensky for White House meeting with Trump
Advertisement 'It's a power struggle and a position of strength that might work with Trump,' he said in a phone interview. The European leaders' presence at Zelenskyy's side, demonstrating Europe's support for Ukraine, could potentially help ease concerns in Kyiv and in other European capitals that Ukraine risks being railroaded into a peace deal that Trump says he wants to broker with Russia. It wasn't immediately clear whether all or just some of them would be taking part in the actual meeting with Trump. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced on X that she will take part in the talks, 'at the request of President Zelenskyy.' The secretary-general of the NATO military alliance, Mark Rutte, will also take part in the meeting, his press service said. Advertisement The office of President Emmanuel Macron announced that the French leader will travel on Monday to Washington 'at the side of President Zelenskyy' although it didn't immediately specify that he'll be in the meeting. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz will also be part of the European group, but the statement from his office likewise didn't specify that he will be in the talks with Trump. The grouped trip underscored European leaders' determination to ensure that Europe has a voice in Trump's attempted peace-making, after the U.S. president's summit on Friday with Putin — to which Zelenskyy wasn't invited.
