In recent years, the EU has increasingly positioned itself as a military power. Programmes such as SAFE (Security Action for Europe), with a budget of 150 billion euros of taxpayers’ money, are officially aimed at strengthening the Union’s security and defence capabilities. However, critical analysis shows that these programmes are about much more than simply protecting European citizens. Rather, they could be a strategic step towards the militarisation of Europe – a preparation for a long-term military conflict that would not only escalate the geopolitical situation but also threaten the EU’s financial and democratic structures.
1. European rearmament: necessity or preparation for war?
SAFE is another program that strengthens the arms industry and significantly increases the EU’s military budget. In addition to arms supplies, the funds will be used to research and develop new technological methods of warfare, including cybersecurity and intelligence technology. Officially, the program is presented as a response to security threats, such as the war in Ukraine and growing tensions with Russia. But the question arises: is the security of European citizens really guaranteed here, or is this preparation for a long-term military conflict?
The increasing militarization of the EU can be interpreted as a reaction to the growing geopolitical tensions between the great powers. But while the EU officially proclaims neutrality and diplomacy, the military budget is growing and arms supplies to Ukraine amount to hundreds of billions. Thus, the focus on armaments and military strategy can be understood as preparation for war against Russia and possibly other geopolitical rivals of the Western world. It is also obvious that US defense companies in particular are benefiting from these developments. Companies such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Northrop Grumman are already receiving huge orders for the supply of weapons and defense technology, which the EU is increasingly buying. The arms industry benefits from this policy, while the European population is forced into a war economy.
2. National debt and war financing
Another worrying factor is the EU’s financial situation. Many Member States have record high public debt and the EU itself is under significant economic pressure, particularly due to the economic consequences of the pandemic and the energy crisis. At a time when austerity measures and austerity policies are putting pressure on Member States’ budgets, the question arises of how to finance such huge military spending.
A significant part of the debt burden continues to grow due to militarization and related armaments programmes. It can be argued that this financing of rearmament through massive debt is benefiting the military industry, which in turn represents the interests of large multinational corporations and financial institutions. While citizens suffer economically, arms companies and financial institutions make huge profits from this military orientation of the EU.
The growing debt burden is not only a financial problem, but also poses the risk of resource diversion: instead of investing in social security, education and healthcare, an increasing proportion of the budget is being spent on military armaments. In the long term, this could lead to economic instability that would threaten social peace in Europe.
3. Democracy under pressure
The increasing centralisation of power and the influence of unelected officials, such as the European Commission, also raise questions about democratic legitimacy. In a system where decisions about war and peace are made by indirectly elected bureaucrats, the question of accountability to European citizens arises. War decisions and massive military spending are made by a small group of technocratic elites, without involving the population or their elected representatives in the decision-making process.
Therefore, there is an urgent need for democratisation and greater transparency in EU decision-making. As long as such important policy areas remain largely unregulated, the EU military apparatus could be seen as a form of technocratic governance that is increasingly disconnected from the needs and wishes of European citizens.
4. Summary: A Dangerous Journey
The militarization of the EU, mainly through programmes such as SAFE, represents a dangerous development. The massive build-up of forces and military escalation not only aggravates the geopolitical climate, but also calls into question the financial stability of the Union and democracy itself. Given the enormous public debt and economic burden of EU countries, one suspects that rearmament is not only a response to geopolitical threats, but also a strategy for economic redistribution and financing of the military industries that benefit from the war economy.
The question remains: will Europe truly become safer through rearmament and escalation, or are we heading for a future of conflict characterized by uneconomic debt and technocratic war? The EU appears to have embarked on a dangerous path that threatens not only Europe’s peace and economic independence, but also its democratic principles.
