Will The EU Replace NATO As Europe's Defence Shield?
It looks like I will have to burn all the Biggles books I collected as a child and jettison any antique copies of 'Eagle' comic books, because there are reports that Britain and Germany are about to sign a defence co-operation agreement, ending a long stretch of history where they have been on opposing sides. Indeed, the entire literature of what George Orwell described in his essay 'Boys' Weeklies' could now be caught offside.
For instance, the work of John Buchan, once Governor General of Canada, and well known as the author of the 'Thirty Nine Steps', may be especially dislodged by an agreement that casts Germany and Britain as best geopolitical friends, as many of his books, like those of Captain W.E. John, depend on the role of the indispensable British hero seeing off his German nemesis. An innovation on the part of Buchan, was the glamorous female mastermind, Hilda von Einem, who vies with the handsome Irish intriguer Dominic Medina (please do read 'Greenmantle' and the 'Three Hostages') as the foil to Richard Hannay.
One of the significant moments of history when Britain and Germany (Prussia then) found themselves on the same side was the Battle of Waterloo, one of the great contests, where during a pounding from French guns Wellington's officers asked for orders he replied, 'there are no orders, except to stand firm to the last man'.
One of the survivors was Henry Percy, aide de camp to Wellington, who after the Battle had to row halfway across the Channel with the news of the Duke's victory, as an absence of wind had halted his sloop. On arriving in England he found that many (in the City) already knew of the victory owing, allegedly, to a network of agents assembled by Nathaniel Rothschild who is said to have made a fortune on the event and thereby spawned the phrase 'buy on the sound of cannons'. It is a useful illustration of the roles of communications (social media today) and finance in war.
Indeed, part of the reason that Germany and Britain are moving closer together on defence (France is even closer to each one militarily) is finance. Gone are the days when London and Berlin could afford to spend 9% of GDP building great battleships in the lead-up to the First World War (Margaret MacMillan's 'The War That Ended Peace' is worth a read), and now they must do with more meagre ambitions and newfound collaborations.
In this context, the recent NATO Summit was a watershed as it signalled a headline commitment to 5% defence spending across NATO countries (as a % of GDP), something that would have been unthinkable four years ago.
In Europe, there is a sense that some of the defence spending pledges amount to a 'fudge', and it is very clear that defence spending as a % of GDP does not translate into defence readiness. Of the European members of NATO, the UK, Greece, France, Poland, the Nordics and Baltics are the most defence ready, and some of them are already spending ambitiously. For example, Poland is set to reach a level of defence spending of 4% of GDP and has already struck a strategic military procurement partnership with South Korea.
On the other hand, countries like Italy and especially Spain have been castigated for their reluctance to spend. Italy has talked of including investment in a bridge from the mainland to Sicily as defence infrastructure and in the case of Spain, it has apparently tried to 'kitchen sink' other tangential forms of spending into the defence segment.
Still, the broad 5% target is a gamechanger, and is comprised of two parts – close to 3.5% on defence spending and then 1.5% on areas like cyber security and AI driven defence capabilities. Momentum will be boosted by the EU's Eur 150 bn lending facility for defence procurement, up to Eur 3bn in loans from the EIB (European Investment Bank), and the German government's significant augmentation of its defence budget. Still, this fiscal support leaves an enormous shortfall that will likely require capital from the private sector.
In this respect, we are at the cross-over of geopolitical forces. NATO as an operating construct has been thrown into doubt by Donald Trump and the actions of his defence policymakers (the latest act being to deprive Ukraine of defensive missiles). As such, Article 5 no longer seems as watertight as it did in the early 2000's (it has only been invoked once, in September 2011, by Nick Burns, then US Ambassador to NATO). The impression many in Brussels have is that Europe will be left to defend itself from Russian aggression – there is now a parlour game amongst the various European intelligence agencies to estimate when a Russian incursion might occur.
As a result, the EU will become a much bigger player in defence procurement (see the recent White Paper here), Europe's defence centric innovation economy will grow rapidly, and 'war bonds' will become a new asset for investors. Europe's main threat is most obviously Russia, in addition to cyberwar from further afield. The danger in the long-term is that it finds itself as the last bastion of democracy, amidst a range of large, autocratic countries.
To return to Germany and Britain, anyone who reads the MacMillan books can't escape the recognition that the arms race between Germany and Britain over one hundred years ago, is now being repeated by the US and China. Ultimately Europe may count itself lucky to stay out of this contest.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
10 hours ago
- Forbes
Will The EU Replace NATO As Europe's Defence Shield?
The USS New Jersey, an Iowa-class battleship serving the United States Navy, firing 16-inch shells ... More into the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) from the waters off the coast of South Vietnam, 30th September 1968. These were the first shells fired by the USS New Jersey in the Vietnam War. (Photo by) It looks like I will have to burn all the Biggles books I collected as a child and jettison any antique copies of 'Eagle' comic books, because there are reports that Britain and Germany are about to sign a defence co-operation agreement, ending a long stretch of history where they have been on opposing sides. Indeed, the entire literature of what George Orwell described in his essay 'Boys' Weeklies' could now be caught offside. For instance, the work of John Buchan, once Governor General of Canada, and well known as the author of the 'Thirty Nine Steps', may be especially dislodged by an agreement that casts Germany and Britain as best geopolitical friends, as many of his books, like those of Captain W.E. John, depend on the role of the indispensable British hero seeing off his German nemesis. An innovation on the part of Buchan, was the glamorous female mastermind, Hilda von Einem, who vies with the handsome Irish intriguer Dominic Medina (please do read 'Greenmantle' and the 'Three Hostages') as the foil to Richard Hannay. One of the significant moments of history when Britain and Germany (Prussia then) found themselves on the same side was the Battle of Waterloo, one of the great contests, where during a pounding from French guns Wellington's officers asked for orders he replied, 'there are no orders, except to stand firm to the last man'. One of the survivors was Henry Percy, aide de camp to Wellington, who after the Battle had to row halfway across the Channel with the news of the Duke's victory, as an absence of wind had halted his sloop. On arriving in England he found that many (in the City) already knew of the victory owing, allegedly, to a network of agents assembled by Nathaniel Rothschild who is said to have made a fortune on the event and thereby spawned the phrase 'buy on the sound of cannons'. It is a useful illustration of the roles of communications (social media today) and finance in war. Indeed, part of the reason that Germany and Britain are moving closer together on defence (France is even closer to each one militarily) is finance. Gone are the days when London and Berlin could afford to spend 9% of GDP building great battleships in the lead-up to the First World War (Margaret MacMillan's 'The War That Ended Peace' is worth a read), and now they must do with more meagre ambitions and newfound collaborations. In this context, the recent NATO Summit was a watershed as it signalled a headline commitment to 5% defence spending across NATO countries (as a % of GDP), something that would have been unthinkable four years ago. In Europe, there is a sense that some of the defence spending pledges amount to a 'fudge', and it is very clear that defence spending as a % of GDP does not translate into defence readiness. Of the European members of NATO, the UK, Greece, France, Poland, the Nordics and Baltics are the most defence ready, and some of them are already spending ambitiously. For example, Poland is set to reach a level of defence spending of 4% of GDP and has already struck a strategic military procurement partnership with South Korea. On the other hand, countries like Italy and especially Spain have been castigated for their reluctance to spend. Italy has talked of including investment in a bridge from the mainland to Sicily as defence infrastructure and in the case of Spain, it has apparently tried to 'kitchen sink' other tangential forms of spending into the defence segment. Still, the broad 5% target is a gamechanger, and is comprised of two parts – close to 3.5% on defence spending and then 1.5% on areas like cyber security and AI driven defence capabilities. Momentum will be boosted by the EU's Eur 150 bn lending facility for defence procurement, up to Eur 3bn in loans from the EIB (European Investment Bank), and the German government's significant augmentation of its defence budget. Still, this fiscal support leaves an enormous shortfall that will likely require capital from the private sector. In this respect, we are at the cross-over of geopolitical forces. NATO as an operating construct has been thrown into doubt by Donald Trump and the actions of his defence policymakers (the latest act being to deprive Ukraine of defensive missiles). As such, Article 5 no longer seems as watertight as it did in the early 2000's (it has only been invoked once, in September 2011, by Nick Burns, then US Ambassador to NATO). The impression many in Brussels have is that Europe will be left to defend itself from Russian aggression – there is now a parlour game amongst the various European intelligence agencies to estimate when a Russian incursion might occur. As a result, the EU will become a much bigger player in defence procurement (see the recent White Paper here), Europe's defence centric innovation economy will grow rapidly, and 'war bonds' will become a new asset for investors. Europe's main threat is most obviously Russia, in addition to cyberwar from further afield. The danger in the long-term is that it finds itself as the last bastion of democracy, amidst a range of large, autocratic countries. To return to Germany and Britain, anyone who reads the MacMillan books can't escape the recognition that the arms race between Germany and Britain over one hundred years ago, is now being repeated by the US and China. Ultimately Europe may count itself lucky to stay out of this contest.
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Yahoo
The US left's glaring attention deficit
First of all, happy July 4 to American Swampians — and to British readers too. As a Brit living in the US, I feel it is a day to be Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
American Press
20 hours ago
- American Press
Local veteran: Louisiana played pivotal role in Revolutionary War
Alfred Cochran, a member of the Mayor's Armed Forces Commission and a Vietnam War veteran, said the then-Spanish Governor of Louisiana, Bernardo de Gálvez, led military campaigns that captured British forts during the American Revolution, diverting British resources and contributing to the ultimate American victory. (Crystal Stevenson / American Press) During the American Revolution, Louisiana — which was then under Spanish rule — played a significant role in supporting the colonists against British troops. Vietnam War veteran Alfred Cochran, 83, who is also a member of the Mayor's Armed Forces Commission, said the state's role is often overlooked — and it's time that changed. 'Louisiana, and particularly the Battle of Baton Rouge, played a big part in the colonists winning the American Revolution,' he said. Cochran, who recently became a member of the Sons of the American Revolution, said he discovered he had two ancestors involved in the war under the leadership of Bernardo de Galvez while researching his ancestry per the membership requirement. His ancestors were Pierre Antoine Fruge and Fruge's son-in-law, Francois Nicholas Marcantel. Both were of St. Landry Parish and are related to Cochran on his mother's side of the family. 'I always wanted to be a member of the Sons of the American Revolution and the Daughters of the American Revolution helped me find not one but two ancestors and both were part of the Bernardo de Galvez expedition,' he said. Cochran said Galvez — who was then the Spanish governor of Louisiana — lead troops through Baton Rouge, New Orleans, Mobile, Ala., and then Pensacola, Fla., on a southern expedition. 'He took everything the British owned from the southern coast and made the British fight on two fronts, diverting their efforts from the colonists fighting on the East Coast,' Cochran said. The Spanish were able to circumvent the British navy using the Mississippi River to supply the colonial rebels — and Galvez's troops were who kept that line open. 'To help the colonists, they had to get support from both Havana and Mexico,' he said. 'That's how the Spanish were resupplied. There was no way the Spanish could get resupplied themselves without Havana and Mexico.' Cochran said Baton Rouge 'was a real, fortified position right on the Mississippi River.' 'They had to take it to keep shipping open,' he said. 'The whole Atlantic Coast was blockaded and they couldn't get supplies in so they used small paddle boats. They'd bring them all the way to the East Coast on the Mississippi.' Cochran said Marcantel 'wasn't even old enough to pick up a musket' when he joined the war's efforts. He's estimated to have been about 17 at the war's start. 'They were part of the Acadians who were thrown out of Canada by the British so they were very happy to take revenge out on the British when asked,' Cochran said. 'They were living in Opelousas. They had traveled all the way from Canada down to New Orleans, came up the Mississippi and made their way to Opelousas, St. Landry Parish, and became farmers. Galvez came through, recruiting people and they said, 'Oh, yes, we're ready.' They volunteered right off.' Galvez ultimately recruited more than 1,200 men comprised of 170 veteran soldiers, 330 recruits from Mexico and the Canary Islands, 60 militiaman and local citizens, 80 freed slaves, 600 from among Louisiana's German and Acadian immigrants and 160 Native Americans, according to Cochran's research from HistoryNet. The troops marched more than 100 miles through the dense forests and swamps northwest of New Orleans to the recently constructed six-cannon British Fort Bute on the eastern shore of Mississippi, a few miles south of Baton Rouge. Using muskets and cannons, Galvez's troops helped captured Fort Bute on Sept. 7, 1779, signaling the opening of Spanish intervention in the American Revolutionary War. The battle was estimated to have taken place over nine days. 'It was a very short battle,' Cochran said. 'The battles during the American Revolution were not like battles we know today. There were so few people involved — a few hundred would be a big battle at that time. When we got to World War I, World War II and Vietnam we had some serious battles with so many more people involved.' When the Battle of Fort Bute was won, Galvez released his men back to their families. Marcantel went back home to his wife, but his father-in-law marched on with Galvez and continued to fight with him through Pensacola. Following Fort Bute, Galvez and his remaining men launched an artillery barrage on Fort New Richmond in Baton Rouge using cannons he had hauled upriver on flatbeds in a garden on the opposite side of the fort. 'They attacked Baton Rouge and they were raining cannon fire like hail in a south Louisiana thunderstorm and Lt. Col. Alexander Dickson, who was in command of this Baton Rouge fort, couldn't take it any longer and he raised the white flag and surrendered,' Cochran said. 'It must have been a fearsome fight that they put up.' The British were overwhelmed by the wreckage this caused to the fort and proposed a truce — the terms of which included the surrender of both Baton Rouge and Fort Panmure at Natchez, Miss. The fort's capture effectively ended British military control of the lower Mississippi River. 'Galvez was of military mind and determined to win. He was not going to quit at anything,' Cochran said. According to records, Pierre Antoine Fruge stayed with Galvez all the way to the Siege of Pensacola in 1781, which lasted a couple of months. There is no record of him or of Marcantel ever being injured. Cochran said he came across the information while researching his members for the Sons of the American Revolution. 'The more I discovered about Galvez, the more I wanted to learn about this southern expedition,' he said. The majority of his research has come from and other history books. Cochran said his family has a 'very strong' military background. He has these two ancestors who fought in the American Revolution, three grandfathers who fought in the Civil War and he is a Vietnam War veteran. 'We're just all patriotic,' he said. 'In college when they were looking for people to go to Vietnam, I said, 'Yeah, send me.' I wasn't drafted, I volunteered. I was a member of the McNeese advanced ROTC and I graduated with a civil engineering degree and then they commissioned me in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. I went in as a second lieutenant and I was discharged as a captain.' Cochran said the victories in Louisiana helped secure the southern flank of the American colonies and contributed to the ultimate success of the American Revolution. 'Louisiana was involved in the American Revolution and I think more people need to know that.'
