Latest news with #RearmEuropePlan
Euronews
29-04-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Global military expenditure sees steepest year-on-year rise since end of Cold War
ADVERTISEMENT Global military spending reached its highest year-on-year rise since the end of the Cold War in 2024, a new study has revealed. According to data compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the world's 15 largest spenders all increased their military expenditure in 2024 compared with 2023, with growth especially rapid in Europe and the Middle East. The world's top ranked spenders — the US, China, Russia, Germany and India — spent a combined total of $1.635 trillion (€1.437 trillion), accounting for 60% of total global military spending. Meanwhile, real term military spending increased by 9.4%, taking worldwide total military expenditure to $2.718 trillion (€2,389 billion), and the global military burden — the share of global economic output devoted to military expenditure — increased to 2.5% of GDP. Spending in Europe drives global surge Since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the war has been a continual driver of increased military expenditure across the European continent. All European countries, with the exception of Malta, increased their military spending in 2024, according to the report. Germany broke records in 2024 by spending €77.89 billion ($88.5 billion) on its military, making it the biggest spender of the year in Central and Western Europe. Meanwhile, Poland's military spending grew by 31% to $38 billion (€33.4 billion) last year, or 4.2% of GDP. As for Ukraine itself, total military expenditure grew by 2.9% in 2024, hitting $64.7 billion (€56.8 billion). That equates to 43% of Russia's spending, and the largest proportional military burden of any country last year. The SIPRI's study included Russia's spend of $149 billion (€131 million) in the European total, which reached $693 billion (€609 billion). What's coming in 2025? In 2023, the Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP) recorded a record-high number of 59 state-based armed conflicts, the most since their data collection began in 1946 — a trend which looks set to continue this year. "As governments increasingly prioritise military security, often at the expense of other budget areas, the economic and social trade-offs could have significant effects on societies for years to come," said Xiao Liang, Researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme. Related Russia launches nearly 150 drones into Ukraine leaving at least one dead Fact-check: Is the US blocking German plans to send Taurus missiles to Ukraine? In March, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen proposed the Rearm Europe Plan, which she said could see member states mobilise up to €800 billion to finance a massive ramp-up in defence spending. "The latest policies adopted in Germany and many other European countries suggest that Europe has entered a period of high and increasing military spending that is likely to continue for the foreseeable future," said Lorenzo Scarazzato, Researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme
Asia Times
21-03-2025
- Automotive
- Asia Times
Is Europe rearming? The jury is still out
The EU has proposed a Rearm Europe Plan that would raise more than € 800 billion ($866 billion) for defense, while Germany has just passed legislation that ostensibly will commit €1 Trillion ($1.08 trillion) to the defense sector. While on the surface it looks like Europe is preparing for the next war, the truth of the matter is rather different: Europe is trying to cover up its deep economic problems by throwing cash into its economies by building armaments. But will this strategy work? There are problems at different levels. The first is economic. At the heart of the planning is the idea that civilian factories can be converted to produce armaments, especially heavy equipment such as tanks and armored fighting vehicles. The German company, Rheinmetall, for example, is considering buying a Volkswagen factory in Osnabrück, northern Germany, a facility that otherwise faces an economically uncertain future. A similar idea has been promoted by Italy's government, seeking to push Stellantis to start producing defense hardware in its auto factories. Last year Stellantishttps:// produced fewer than 500,000 vehicles in Italy (Fiat plus Alfa Romeo, Maserati, Lancia) compared with 751,000 in 2023. The 2024 figure was the company's lowest in Italy since 1956. John Elkann, chairman of Stellantis. The chairman of Stellantis, John Elkann, rejected the government's demand to convert some factories to defense production, saying that his company did not believe 'that the future of the car is the defense industry.' Kaja Kallas, vice president of the European Commission, addresses news media representatives at the unveiling of the White Paper for European Defense. Photo: European Commission. A key problem is that the economic argument for converting high-volume production to low-volume defense equipment makes little industrial sense. While it is true that some car companies that produce trucks and other heavy equipment have cranes and lifts that potentially are usable for armored vehicles, even tanks, these plants are organized for mass production – not for mostly hand-built output. Chrysler plant in World War II. In World War II the US halted most automobile manufacturing (except for vehicles needed for the war) and converted to defense manufacturing. The US output was staggering: 297,000 aircraft; 193,000 artillery guns; 86,000 tanks and 2 million trucks. Today the US produces only 250 fighter jets annually. In a five year conflict such as World War II, that would amount to a total production of 1,250 jets, nothing like World War II production. Today Europe produces no more than 50 battle tanks each year. While that number is very low, it would take years to convert an auto factory to tank production, so the actual output of tanks in Europe can't grow by much over the next five years. Moreover, a plant conversion to military hardware means a substantial redesign of an automobile factory. Fewer employees would also be needed, although Germany's labor unions would have a lot to say about employment levels, compensation and social benefits. Clearly the World War II model, which required a national mobilization to fight the war, is not in the cards in the US or Europe – or even in Russia or China. It is also important to point out that Europe's defense industry is fragmented; its supply chains are uncertain and, in many cases, grossly expensive; and participating companies are not known for efficiency or cost effectiveness. Many of these companies have been boosted because of arms transfers to Ukraine, where they get paid top price. If the Ukraine war ends, then where will the additional projected production go, if anywhere? A consequence of more military hardware is that more troops will be needed and more support required. How this will be accounted for is, at present, not known. Without conscription it will not be easy to grow Europe's force structure. Europe, it is said, is facing a crisis in military recruitment. Both the German and Italian cases are supposed to help solve economic and employment problems and somehow revive the German and Italian economies. But as a practical matter the idea looks more like a subsidy program to keep plants operating, albeit at significantly reduced output. Both countries will need to decide if they can really afford the subsidies or whether the subsidies will help fix the recession in Germany or the poor economic climate in Italy. As the Stellantis CEO suggested, the way to fix car sales is not by manufacturing guns. One wonders if any serious study has evaluated whether it makes economic sense to convert existing factories to war production in peacetime or even if huge subsidies are going to cure the economic malaise in Germany and elsewhere. The political issue While the ramp-up in defense spending, as proposed in Germany and by the EU, will enrich defense companies that can take advantage of the new money, there isn't any consensus on the strategic objective of the spending. In fact there is a distinct political divide between the EU and some EU member countries. This is a key reason why Italy objected to the EU Rearm Europe plan, defeating the proposed spending proposal promoted by Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission. Italian Defense Minister Guido Crosetto In an usual move, Italy's Defense Minister Guido Crosetto sent an open letter published in Corriere della Sera, Italy's most read newspaper. Crosetto asserted that European defense 'cannot replace NATO nor offer the same level of protection.' He explained that the EU cannot dictate a common defense policy for Europe without all the EU members agreeing. 'The EU Treaty itself provides … the possibility of a common defense policy, but only following a unanimous decision of the European Council – a circumstance that, from 1992 to today, has never occurred nor is it under discussion today in any government or member state.' The EU leadership has been pushing for a defense role outside of NATO, over time intending to replace NATO. Italy's pushback on these ambitions, at least for the moment, has stopped the EU's Rearm Europe plan. Uncertainties The entire plan to boost defense spending lacks any understandable strategic rationale. What sort of forces are needed for European defense? Which sectors require the most investment? Likewise there is no actual plan for consolidating European defense production in any meaningful way, although everyone is talking about doing so (as they have for the past 50 years). It is also uncertain whether the Bundestag or any other parliament in Europe will be able to fund what is being promised. The main feature of Germany's legislation is to make it easier to raise defense spending without running up against a constitutional ban on budget deficits bigger than 0.35% of gross domestic product. Reports say that the newly passed legislation includes a constitutional amendment waiving the budget deficit limit for defense spending. That is a potentially big step, but with an economy mired in recession, and with little real increment in employment coming from the new spending, it will be difficult to sustain political support in Germany or elsewhere for heavy outlays for defense. Moreover, if the Ukraine war is settled, Germany will seek to recover its lost business in Russia. Likewise there is the tantalizing possibility that Germany will again try and buy cheaper gas from Russia, even refurbishing natural gas pipelines – even Nordstream. A shift in mindset by German industrialists could well scuttle the move to boost defense output. State subsidy programs, even ones costing €1 Trillion, need to be based on a coherent defense strategy, which Europe does not have, and on an understanding of the economic ramifications, which may well fail to deliver anything like what seems to be promised. The jury is still out on Rearm Europe. Stephen Bryen is a special correspondent to Asia Times and former US deputy undersecretary of defense for policy. This article, which originally appeared on his Substack newsletter Weapons and Strategy, is republished with permission.
Euronews
21-03-2025
- Business
- Euronews
Brussels confirms 'Rearm Europe' rebrand after backlash from Italy and Spain
ADVERTISEMENT The European Commission has confirmed it would phase out the term "Rearm Europe" to describe its multi-billion initiative to rearm Europe after backlash from the leaders of Italy and Spain, who argue the name is excessively charged and risks alienating citizens. From now on, the plan to ramp up defence capabilities and production across the bloc will be known as "Readiness 2030," a reference to the date by which Russia could have the necessary capabilities to launch an attack against an EU or NATO member state. Meanwhile, the specific programme to raise and distribute €150 billion in low-interest loans to facilitate the purchase of advanced weapons and ammunition will be called "SAFE." In parallel, the Commission has also proposed the targeted relaxation of fiscal rules to mobilise up to €650 billion, for a total of €800 billion. "We are sensitive to the fact that the name as such may trigger some sensitivity in some member states so this is something that, of course, we listen to," Paula Pinho, the Commission's chief spokesperson, said on Friday afternoon. "If this makes it more difficult to convey the message to all citizens in the EU of the need to take these measures, then we are all ready not only to listen but also to reflect it in the way we communicate about it." The new name, "Readiness 2030," should "be seen in the context of encapsulating a broader scope," Pinho explained. The rebranding has taken place in a remarkably short time. When Ursula von der Leyen unveiled the €800-billion project on 4 March , she only used the term "Rearm Europe" to describe it. "We are in an era of rearmament. And Europe is ready to massively boost its defence spending," the Commission president said. But earlier this week, when the Commission presented the legal texts underpinning the plan, the term changed to "Rearm Europe Plan/Readiness 2030." Prior to the presentation, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni had openly expressed her discomfort with the word. "I believe that 'Rearm Europe' is a misleading name for citizens because we are called to strengthen our defence capabilities but today this doesn't mean trivially buying armaments," Meloni told the Senate on Tuesday. For Meloni, the focus should be wider and cover "operability, essential services, energy infrastructures, supply chains: all things that are not simply done with weapons." "There is no defence without this approach," Meloni said. Her Spanish counterpart, Pedro Sánchez, left no doubt as to his distaste for the term during a summit of EU leaders in Brussels, where defence topped the agenda. Like Meloni, the Spaniard pushed for a larger definition to include areas like cybersecurity, anti-terrorism, quantum computing, artificial intelligence and satellite connections. "I don't like the term 'rearming.' I think it's an incomplete approach. Defence can be explained under a much broader umbrella, which is security," Sánchez said on Thursday, adding the threats faced by southern Europe are "somewhat different" than in the East. ADVERTISEMENT "I think we need to educate people about the fact that when we talk about security and defence, we're fundamentally talking about technology, often dual-use goods, because the drones that can be used are in the event of a conflict, as it's happening in eastern Ukraine, can also be used to fight wildfires." At the end of the summit, von der Leyen appeared receptive to the criticism and hinted at an imminent rebranding that could drop the "Rearm Europe" monicker altogether. "It's a much wider scope, the approach that we're taking," she said, speaking about electronic warfare, cyber security and telecommunications. "Therefore, the name 'Readiness 2030'." ADVERTISEMENT The complaints voiced by Italy and Spain have raised eyebrows, given the two countries are among NATO's laggards, failing to meet the 2% target of defence spending.
Euronews
06-03-2025
- Politics
- Euronews
Macron to discuss nuclear deterrence with European allies, says Russia a threat to France and Europe
French President Emmanuel Macron has said he will discuss extending the French nuclear deterrent to European allies to protect the continent in the face of threats from Russia. Macron, in a televised evening address to the nation on Wednesday, described Russia as a 'threat to France and Europe' and said he had decided 'to open the strategic debate on the protection of our allies on the European continent by our (nuclear) deterrent.' He said the use of France's nuclear weapons would remain only in the hands of the French president. France is the only nuclear power in the European Union. After setting the context of the current political situation between the United States and Europe, Macron said, 'The United States of America, our ally, has changed its position on this war, supporting Ukraine less and leaving doubt about what comes next.' Macron then emphasised the need for continued support for Kyiv and stronger European military capabilities. He stated, "Russia has become, today and for a long time, a threat to France and to Europe." He questioned whether Putin's Russia would stop after Ukraine, especially as it continues to rearm itself more than ever and cast doubt on his ability to convince US President Donald Trump. "Russia, under President Putin, is violating our borders to assassinate opponents, manipulating elections in Romania and Moldova, organising cyberattacks against our hospitals to disrupt their operations, attempting to manipulate our opinions with lies spread on social media, and, at its core, testing our limits," Macron said. Macron casts doubt on "US as a reliable ally" During his speech, Macron warned that Europe must prepare for the possibility that the US may not always be a reliable security partner. He said, "I want to believe that the US will stand by our side, but we have to be ready for that not to be the case," urging Europe to become more independent from its long-standing ally. 'It must be said, we are entering a new era,' he said. In signs of what was to come, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen on Tuesday proposed a Rearm Europe Plan she said could see member states mobilise up to €800 billion to finance a massive ramp-up in defence spending, hours after Washington suspended all military aid to Ukraine, putting pressure on the bloc to increase its own assistance. On Thursday, European leaders will gather in Brussels for an extraordinary summit dedicated to defence and Ukraine. Meanwhile, as the EU bloc ramps up efforts to increase defence in the fast-changing geopolitical climate, some EU leaders continue to engage in diplomacy with Washington under Trump. Macron spoke on the phone successively with Trump and Zelenskyy and reiterated "France's determination to work with all the parties to achieve a solid and lasting peace in Ukraine,' his office said, without giving details of the discussion with Trump. While UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he has been speaking with Trump to affirm the US support for Ukraine. Macron and Starmer are leading the call for a post-conflict peacekeeping force in Ukraine to prevent Russia from invading again if Moscow and Kyiv reach a truce to put a stop to Russia's invasion, launched in February 2022.
Euronews
05-03-2025
- Politics
- Euronews
Hungarian FM discussed ‘urgency' of ending Ukraine war in meeting with US secretary of state
Hungary's Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto on Tuesday met with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio to discuss what the US State Department called the "urgency of ending the war in Ukraine." According to a statement from the US State Department, "The Secretary underlined the urgency of ending the war in Ukraine and ensuring lasting peace and stability in the region." The meeting came amid uncertainty on US-Ukraine relations after things took a turn for the worse following last week's standoff meeting between Donald Trump and Ukraine's president, Voldomyr Zelenskyy, at the Oval Office. On Monday, the White House announced a pause in all military aid to Kyiv as Trump puts pressure on Zelenskyy to sign a rare earth mineral deal with the US and for 'peace talks' with Russia. Hungary, unlike the majority of European countries, has been a staunch critic of EU efforts to defend Ukraine against Russia's invasion. Its prime minister, Viktor Orban, has frequently criticised, and threatened to veto EU sanctions against Russia over its aggression but has ultimately always voted for them. Szijarjarto's meeting with Rubio on Tuesday also comes as the Hungarian government threatened to oppose an EU bloc-wide accord or joint statement on Ukraine ahead of Thursday's extraordinary summit dedicated to Ukraine and EU defence. On Sunday, European leaders—the UK and France—at a summit in London floated the idea of a "coalition of the willing" among member states that could send troops on the ground to Ukraine as a guarantee after a potential peace deal. Leaders of the UK, Canada, France, and EU countries at the summit also agreed to keep military aid flowing into Ukraine and to ensure any peace talks and agreements guarantee Ukraine's sovereignty. In reaction to the summit, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán slammed the EU leaders, saying they wanted "to continue with the war instead of opting for peace." Since Russia began its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, EU member states have significantly increased their defence budgets. In her proposal for a Rearm Europe Plan on Tuesday, EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said that member states might raise as much as €800 billion to fund a significant defence increase.
