Europe is at a pivotal moment in its defence policy, driven by increasing geopolitical uncertainty, evolving transatlantic relations, and the urgent need for military and industrial adaptation. With the possibility of US disengagement, heightened scrutiny of defence spending, and accelerating institutional reforms, policymakers must reassess Europe’s strategic autonomy.
RESEARCH CORNER MARCH 2025
Our Research Corner in the five-minute EU defence policy newsletter Sierra Echo examines these critical developments. This article goes beyond the headlines, breaking down key insights from last few weeks’ analyses, expert assessments, and institutional reports. It explores the potential impact of US withdrawal, the challenges of European defence investment, and the reforms needed to strengthen EU defence governance. Stay informed with the analysis that matters for Europe’s security and strategic autonomy.
USA’s ABANDONMENT OF EUROPE
As the prospect of US disengagement from Europe looms, analysts have explored the potential consequences and strategic imperatives for European defence. Key studies highlight the need for significant investment in military capabilities, policy shifts, and institutional adaptation to ensure Europe’s security autonomy.
In Defending Europe without the US: first estimates of what is needed, published on February 21 by Bruegel, Alexandr Burilkov and Guntram B. Wolff provide an initial assessment of Europe’s military requirements in the event of a full US withdrawal. They estimate that Europe would need 300,000 additional troops, 1,400 tanks, 2,000 infantry fighting vehicles, and 700 artillery pieces, alongside an annual €250 billion increase in defence spending. Despite the scale of these investments, they argue that Europe has the economic capacity to replace US military support entirely.
Giuseppe Spatafora’s The Trump card: What could US abandonment of Europe look like? published on February 17 by the European Union Institute for Security Studies (EUISS), examines potential scenarios for US retrenchment. He outlines two main trajectories: a gradual strategic shift away from Europe in favour of other global theatres, or a fragmented, bilateral approach to defence cooperation with individual European nations. In both cases, Spatafora calls for the EU to develop a strong deterrent force to counterbalance US disengagement and ensure strategic autonomy.
Daniel Fiott’s Unity is Not Enough: How will Europe Navigate the Trumpian Era of Geopolitical Competition?, a policy brief published on February 23 for the Centre for Security, Diplomacy and Strategy (CSDS), explores Europe’s strategic options in response to a potential second Trump presidency. He identifies key dilemmas, including whether to maintain a low profile, engage in transactional diplomacy, or push for greater strategic autonomy. Fiott warns that unity alone will not suffice—Europe must invest in its security, technological independence, and industrial strategy to maintain geopolitical resilience.
RETHINKING EUROPEAN DEFENCE SPENDING
As security threats grow, Europe faces increasing pressure to boost defence investments while maintaining industrial autonomy. Analysts and policymakers explore ways to enhance spending efficiency, strengthen the European defence industry, and balance national and EU-level funding.
In Europe Defence Lobbyist Talks Military Spending, Political Roadblocks, an episode of Bloomberg Talks aired February 18, ASD Secretary General Jan Pie discusses the urgency of increased defence spending. He highlights the adaptability of European industry, citing companies like Rheinmetall, SAAB, and MBDA as examples of rapid scaling in production and investment. However, he warns against over-reliance on US military products, urging EU leaders to prioritise domestic defence capabilities to ensure long-term strategic autonomy.
Fabian Zuleeg and Philipp Lausberg, in their European Policy Centre (EPC) paper Thinking outside the Multiannual Financial Framework: Financing Europe’s security priorities, published February 14, advocate for innovative funding mechanisms beyond traditional EU budgets. They propose a European Security Funding Facility (ESeFF), pooling financial resources from EU and non-EU states (UK, Norway) to leverage private and national investment. Such an approach, they argue, would create a more flexible and sustainable financial model for European defence.
REFORMING EU DEFENCE GOVERNANCE
To navigate emerging threats and industrial challenges, Europe must restructure its defence governance. Proposals range from institutional reforms to strategic policy shifts aimed at consolidating military production, streamlining decision-making, and balancing security and sustainability.
Samuel B. H. Faure, in EU Defence Industrial Policy: Towards a New European Military-Industrial Regime?, published by the Libera Università Internazionale degli Studi Sociali (LUISS) on January 23, argues for a shift from intergovernmental governance to a more integrated EU defence industry.
He proposes creating an eleventh formal configuration of the EU Council, where Defence Ministers would adopt qualified majority voting, alongside a €100 billion investment plan to consolidate European defence production and reduce inefficiencies. Without such reforms, he warns, Europe risks fragmentation and continued dependence on external powers.
In a Progress Report for the Council of the EU, on the implementation of the Joint Communication – A New Outlook on the Climate and Security Nexus, the European Commission outlines, on February 18, key steps to integrate climate resilience into EU defence policy.
Several initiatives have been launched, including the CSDP Climate Security Package, which introduces environmental advisers and sustainability assessments into EU missions. Additionally, the Consultation Forum for Sustainable Energy in the Defence and Security Sector has evaluated the implications of the EU’s Fit-for-55 energy transition for defence, promoting energy efficiency and resilience.
The establishment of a Climate and Defence Support Mechanism (CDSM) and an EU-led Competence Centre on Climate, Security, and Defence further signal the EU’s ambition to integrate climate resilience into security planning. With defence operations facing growing environmental constraints, the EU seeks to balance security imperatives with its Green Deal objectives, ensuring its military capabilities remain both effective and sustainable.